*  *
                                                                                                 -•*
                                                                                                  ft
-**

-------
440182022
         United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
Effluent Guidelines Division
WH-552
Washington DC 20460
September 1982
         Water and Waste Management
         Development
         Document for
         Effluent Limitations
         Guidelines and
         Standards for the

         Textile Mills
         Point Source Category

-------
            DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT

                     for

EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS

                   for the

     TEXTILE MILLS POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
               Anne M. Gorsuch
                Administrator
                          \
              Jeffery D. Denit
   Director, Effluent Guidelines Division

             Robert W. Dellinger
Actirtg Chief, Wood Products and Fibers Branch

             Richard E. Williams
               Project Officer
               September, 1982
        Effluent Guidelines Division
               Office of Water
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
           Washington, D.C.  20460

-------

-------
                            ABSTRACT
This document presents the findings of an extensive study of  the
textile   industry   for   the  purpose  of  developing  effluent
limitations for existing point sources, standards of  performance
for  new sources, and pretreatment standards for existing and new
sources to implement Sections 301, 304, 306, and 307 of the Clean
Water  Act.   The  study  covers  approximately   6,000   textile
manufacturing   facilities   in  SIC  Major  Group  22  of  which
approximately 2,000 are specifically affected by the findings.

Effluent limitation guidelines are set forth for  the  degree  of
effluent reduction attainable through the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT), and the
best  available  technology economically achievable (BAT) and the
best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT)  which  must
be achieved by existing point sources by July 1,  1984.  Standards
of  performance  for  new  sources (NSPS) set forth the degree of
effluent reduction that is achievable through the application  of
the  best  available  demonstrated control technology, processes,
operating methods, or other alternatives.  Pretreatment standards
for existing and new sources (PSES and PSNS) set forth the degree
of effluent reduction that must be achieved in order  to  prevent
the discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with, or
are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs.

BPT  regulations  for  new subcategories are established based on
biological treatment.  The  regulations  for  BAT  are  equal  to
existing  BPT for toxic and nonconventional pollutants.  NSPS are
based  on  biological  treatment  as  demonstrated  by  the  best
performing  mills  in the industry.  The regulations for PSES and
PSNS shall be the General Pretreatment Regulations at 40 CFR Part
403, 43 FR 27736 (June 26, 1978) and at 46 FR  9462  (January 28,
1981).

Supporting  data,  rationale,  and methods for development of the
effluent limitation guidelines and  standards  are  contained  in
this document.
                               in

-------

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION

I    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

     SUBCATEGORIZATION
     EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
          BPT
          BAT
          NSPS
          PSES and PSNS

II   INTRODUCTION

     PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
     PRIOR EPA REGULATIONS
     OVERVIEW OF THE INDUSTRY
     SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY
     DATA AND INFORMATION GATHERING PROGRAM
          Previous Data Collection Activities
          308 Data Request
          Mill Visits
          Raw Materials Review
          Screening and Verification Sampling
          Processing of Data and Information

III  DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY

     GENERAL DESCRIPTION
          Profile of Major Group 22
          Industry Survey (308 Data Request)
     UNIT MANUFACTURING (INDUSTRIAL) PROCESSES
          Raw Materials
          Major Dry or Low Water Use Processes
          Other Fabric Manufacturing
          Major Wet Processes
     FINAL PRODUCTS
          Wool Stock and Top (Wool Scouring subcategory)
          Finished Wool Goods (Wool Finishing subcategory)
          Greige Goods and Adhesive Products (Low Water Use
            Processing subcategory)
          Finished Woven Goods (Woven Fabric Finishing
            subcategory)
          Finished Knit Goods (Knit Fabric Finishing
            subcategory)
          Finished Carpet (Carpet Finishing subcategory)
          Finished Stock and Yarn (Stock and Yarn Finishing
            subcategory)
 9
11
11
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
15

17

17
17
21
30
30
32
33
37
52
52
54

54

54

57
57

57

-------
          Nonwovens (Nonwoven Manufacturing subcategory)
          Felted Fabric (Felted Fabric Processing subcategory)

IV   INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION

     INTRODUCTION
     RESULTS
     BASIS OF FINAL SUBCATEGORIZATION SCHEME
          Rationale for Selection of Final Subcategorization
            Scheme
          Additional Analyses
     IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA

     SUBCATEGORY DESCRIPTIONS
     Wool Scouring Subcategory
     Wool Finishing Subcategory
     Low Water Use Processing Subcategory
     Woven Fabric Finishing Subcategory
     Knit Fabric Finishing Subcategory
     Carpet Finishing Subcategory
     Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory
     Nonwoven manufacturing Subcategory
     Felted Fabric Processing Subcategory

V    WASTE CHARACTERISTICS

     INTRODUCTION
     DISCUSSION OF UNTREATED WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
          Wool Scouring Subcategory
          Wool Finishing Subcategory
          Low Water Use Processing Subcategory
          Woven Fabric Finishing Subcategory
          Knit Fabric Finishing Subcategory
          Carpet Finishing Subcategory
          Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory
          Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcategory
          Felted Fabric Processing Subcategory

     WATER USE
     TOXIC POLLUTANTS
          Industry Survey Information
          Field Sampling Program
          Field Sampling Results
          Field Sampling Results
          Field Sampling Results
            Effluents
          Field Sampling Results - Individual Subcategories
Water Supply
Untreated Wastewater
Biologically Treated
          Other Sources of Information
                                57
                                62
 65
 66
 66

 66
 69
 74

 74
 74
 75
 75
 76
 77
 78
 78
 79
 79

 81

 81
 82
 82
 83
 85
 86
 90
 92
 94
 95
 95

 96
 99
 99
101
106
106
119

125
155
                               VI

-------
     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
          Characterization of Mill Water  Supply
          Characterization of Untreated Wastewaters
157
158
158
VI   SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS

     WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
          Conventional Pollutants
          Toxic Pollutants
          Nonconventional Pollutants
          Summary of Previous Regulations

     SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
          Toxic Pollutants
          Nonconventional Pollutants
          Conventional Pollutants

VII  CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY

     IN-PLANT CONTROLS AND PROCESS CHANGES
          Summary of In-Plant Controls Data
          Water Reuse
          Water Use Reduction
          Chemical Substitution
          Material Reclamation
          Process Changes and New Process Technology
     EFFLUENT TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
197

197
197
197
199
199

199
199
224
226

231

231
232
232
234
235
237
237
238
VIII EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH  THE APPLICATION
     OF BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
     AVAILABLE

     GENERAL
     REGULATED POLLUTANTS
     IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
      TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
     BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
     RATIONAL FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST  PRACTICABLE
      CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
     METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT LIMITATIONS
          Water Jet Weaving Subdivision
          Nonwoven Manufacturing and Felted Fabric
           Processing
     COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
     NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
          Energy
          Solid Waste
385
385
385

386
386

386
388
388
388

392
392
392
392
                               VII

-------
          Air and Noise

IX   EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
     APPLICATION OF BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
     ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
     GUIDELINES

     GENERAL
     PRIOR REGULATIONS
     REGULATED POLLUTANTS
     IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
      ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
     BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
     RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST AVAILABLE
      TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
     NON WATER QUALITY IMPACTS

X    NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

     GENERAL
     PRIOR REGULATION
     REGULATED POLLUTANTS
     IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS
     NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
     RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF NSPS
     METHODOLOGY USED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS

          Data Base
          Calculation of Subcategory Long Term Average
     EFFLUENT VARIABILITY ANALYSIS
          Effluent Limitations Guidelines
          Data Base
          Variability Factors
          Daily Variability Factors

          30-Day Variability Factor

     COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION  BENEFITS
     NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS

XI   PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES

     GENERAL
     PRIOR REGULATION
     REGULATED POLLUTANTS
     IDENTIFICATION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
      EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
     RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF PRETREATMENT
      STANDARDS FOR EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES
392

393
393
393
394
394

394
394

400

401

401
401
402
402
402
402
405

405
406
406
413
413
413
413

414

416
416

419

419
419
420
420

420
                               viii

-------
     COST OF APPLICATION
     NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS

XII  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

XIII REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

 XIV GLOSSARY

      APPENDIX A - COSTS OF TREATMENT  AND CONTROL SYSTEMS
421
421

423

425

445

451
                                IX

-------
SECTION I

1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
                         LIST OF TABLES

                               TITLE
BPT Effluent Limitations
BAT Effluent Limitations
BAT Allowances
New Source Performance Standards
                                                      PAGE

-------
                               TITLE
SECTION III
III-l      Geographical Distribution
          Textile Mill Products Major Industrial Group

III-2      General Statistics
          Textile Mill Products Major Industrial Group

III-3      Water Use and Wastewater Discharge Statistics
          Textile Mill Products Major Industrial Group

III-4      Survey Status Summary-Mills on Master List

III-5      Geographical Distribution-Mills on Master List

III-6      Production Size-Mills on Master List

III-7      Wastewater Discharge-Mills on Master List

III-8      Discharge Type-Mills on Master List
PAGE



  19


  20


  22


  23

  25

  26

  27

  28
                               XI

-------
                               TITLE
SECTION IV

IV-1

IV-2


IV-3
Median Untreated Wastewater Characteristics

Comparison of Raw Wastewater Characteristics
of Selected Subcategories and Industry Segments

Comparison of Raw Wastewater Characteristics
of Selected Subcategory Segments
PAGE



  68

  71


  73
                               xii

-------
                               TITLE
PAGE
SECTION V

V-l       Water Discharge Rate-Summary of
          Historical Data

V-2       Water Discharge-Summary of Historical Data

V-3       Water Discharge-Estimated Subcategory Totals

V-4       Industry Responses to Toxic Pollutants List
          Summary of All Mills

V-5       Summary of Mill Characteristics and Sample
          Collection Field Sampling Program

V-6       Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Water Supply

V-7       Toxic Pollutants Detected in Textile Mill
          Untreated Wastewaters

V-8       Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Untreated Wastewater and
          Biologically Treated Effluent

V-9a      Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutants
          Sampling Program-Wool Scouring SUbcategory

V-9b      Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Wool Finishing Subcategory

V-9c      Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Low Water Use Processing
          (General Processing) Subcategory

V-9d      Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Low Water Use Processing
          (Water-Jet Weaving) Subcategory

V-9e      Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Woven Fabric Finishing
          (Simple Processing) Subcategory

V-9f      Summary of Analytical  Results Toxic Pollutant
          Sampling Program-Woven Finishing
          (Complex Processing) Subcategory
  97


  98

 100

 102


 107


 113


 115


 120



 126


 129


 131



 132



 133



 135
                              XI11

-------
V-9g




V-9h




V-9i




V9-J



V-9k


V-91


V-9m


V-9n


V-10




V-ll

V-12




V-13




V-14


V-15
                     TITLE                                  PAGE

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                137
Sampling Program-Woven Fabric Finishing
(Desizing) Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                140
Sampling Program-Knit Fabric Finishing
(Simple Processing) Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                142
Sampling Program-Knit Fabric Finishing
(Complex Processing) Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                144
Sampling Program-Knit Fabric Finishing
(Hosiery Products) Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                145
Sampling Program-Carpet Finishing Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                147
Sampling Program-Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                150
Sampling Program-Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Toxic Pollutant                151
Sampling Program-Felted Fabric Procesing Subcategory

Summary of Analytical Results Traditionally                  159
Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional
Pollutants Field Sampling Program-Water Supply

Raw Waste Characteristics                                    160

Untreated Wastewater Concentrations Traditionally            184
Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutants
Historical Data-Median Values

Mass Discharge Rates for Untreated Wastewater                185
Traditionally Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional
Pollutants Historical Data-Median Values

Summary of Analytical Results-Raw Waste Concentrations       187
Traditionally Monitored Pollutants-Field Sampling Program

Untreated Wastewater Concentrations Traditionally            190
Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutants
                               xiv

-------
V-16


V-17



V-18



V-19
                     TITLE                                  PAGE

Field Sampling Data-Median'Values

Raw Waste Mass Discharge Traditionally Monitored             191
Pollutants Filed Sampling Program

Mass Discharge Rates for Untreated Wastewater                194
Traditionally Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional
Pollutants Field Sampling Data-Median Values

Typical Untreated Wastewater Concentrations Traditionally    195
Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutants
Summary of Historical and Field Sampling Data

Typical Mass Discharge Rates for Untreated Wastewater        196
Traditionally Monitored Conventional and Nonconventional
Pollutants Summary of Historical and Field Sampling
Data-Median Values
                               xv

-------
SECTION VI
VI-1

VI-2
VI-3
VI-4
VI-5

VI-6
                               TITLE
Summary of Pollutants Controlled by Previous Effluent
Limitations Guidelines
Pollutants Initially Excluded from Regulation
Pollutants Initially Excluded From Regulation
Summary of Toxic Pollutants Potential Concern
Summary of Data Assessment-Pollutants of Potential
Concern
Toxic Pollutants Excluded
PAGE

200

202
204
205
206

211
                                xvi

-------
                               TITLE
PAGE
SECTION VII
VII-1     Mills Reporting In-plant Control Measures-Results           233
          of Industry Survey

VI1-2     Wastewater Treatment Status-Wet Processing                  239
          Mills Surveyed

VII-3     Existing Treatment Technologies-Direct and Zero             241
          Discharge Mills

VII-4     Existing Pretreatment Technologies-Indirect Dischargers     242

VII-5     Wastewater Screening By Textile Industry-Results            244
          of Industry Survey

VII-6     Wastewater Neutralization By Textile Industry-Results       246
          of Industry Survey

VII-7     Wastewater Equalization By Textile Industry-Results of      247
          Industry Survey

VI1-8     Performance of Aerated Lagoons in the Treatment             249
          of Traditionally Monitored Pollutants

VI1-9     Performance of Aerated Lagoons in the Treatment             251
          of Toxic Pollutants Woven Fabric Finishing Mills  (Simple)

VII-10    Performance of Aerated Lagoons in the Treatment for         252
          Toxic Pollutants Woven Fabric Finishing Mills  (Complex)

VII-11    Performance of Aerated Lagoons in the Treatment             253
          of Toxic Pollutants Knit Fabric Finishing Mills (Simple)

VI1-12    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment            258
          of Traditionally Monitored Pollutants

VI1-13    Performance of Activited Sludge in the Treatment of         262
          Toxic Pollutants Wool Scouring Mills

VII-14    Performance of Activated SLudge in the Treatment of         263
          Toxic Pollutants Wool Finishing Mills

VI1-15    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         265
          Toxic Pollutants Low Water use Processing Mills (General)

VI1-16    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         266
                              xvn

-------
                               TITLE
PAGE
          Toxic Pollutants Woven Fabric Finishing Mills  (Simple)

VI1-17    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         267
          Toxic Pollutants Woven Fabric Finishing Mills  (Complex)

VI1-18    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         268
          Toxic Pollutants Woven Fabric Finishing Mills  (Desizing)

VII-19    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         272
          Toxic Pollutants Knit Fabric Finishing Mills  (Simple)

VI1-20    Performance of Activated SLudge in the Treatment of         273
          Toxic Pollutants Knit Fabric Finishing Mills  (Complex)

VII-21    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         274
          Toxic Pollutants Knit Fabric Finishing Mills  (Hosiery)

VII-22    Performance of Activited Sludge in the Treatment of         275
          Toxic Pollutants Carpet Finishing Mills

VII-23    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         276
          Toxic Pollutants Stock and Yarn Finishing Mills

VII-24    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Treatment of         278
          Toxic Pollutants Felted Fabric Finishing Mills

VI1-25    Performance of Activated Sludge in the Removal             279
          of Color

VII-26    Use of Stabilization Lagoons By Textile  Industry-           283
          Results of Industry SUrvey

VII-27    Performance of Stabilization Lagoons  in  the Treatment       285
          of Traditionally Monitored Pollutants

VII-28    Performance of Chemical Coagulation in the Treatment        288
          of Traditionally Monitored Pollutants

VI1-29    Case  1 - Laboratory Study of Chemical Coagulation  on        289
          Dyehouse Effluent

VI1-30    Case  2 - Laboratory Study of Chemical Coagulation  on        289
          a Printing Waste System

VII-31    Case  3 - Full Scale Coagulation at a  Knit Fabric            291
          Finishing Mill
                               XVlll

-------
                               TITLE                                  PAGE

VII-32    Full Scale Chemical Coagulation at a Woven Fabric           293
          Finishing (Desizing) Mill

VII-33    Full Scale Chemical Coagulation at a Stock and Yarn         294
          Finishing Mill

VII-34    Summary of Results-EPA/Industry Field Studies Chemical      296
          Coagulation at Wool Finishing Mills Traditionally
          Monitored Pollutants

VI1-35    Summary of Results-EPA/Industry Field Studies Chemical      297
          Coagulation at Wool Finishing Mills Toxic Pollutants

VII-36    Summary of Results-EPA/Industry Field Studies Chemical      298
          Coagulation Traditionally Monitored Pollutants

VII-37    Summary of Results-EPA/Industry Field Studies Chemical      299
          Coagulation Toxic Pollutants

VII-38    Effectiveness of Lime and Sulfide in the Precipitation of   301
          Toxic Metals From the Untreated Wastewater of a Knit
          Fabric Finishing Mill

VI1-39    Case 2 - Ozonation of Tufted Carpet Dye Wastewater          303
          Summary of Results

VII-40    Summary of Results Ozonation of Textile Effluents           305
          Traditionally Monitored Pollutants (Wool Scouring Mills)

VII-41    Summary of Results Ozonation of Textile Effluents           306
          Toxic Pollutants (Wool Scouring Mills)
VII-42    Summary of Results Ozonation of Textile Effluents
          Traditionally Monitored Pollutants (Other Mills)

VII-43    Summary of Results Ozonation of Textile Effluents
          Toxic Pollutants (Other Mills)

VII-44    Effluent Concentrations from Textile Mills Using
          Filtration as a Final Treatment Step

VII-45    Case 1  - Biosystem and Multimedia Filter Summary of
          Analytical Results Conventional, Noncbnventional, and
          Toxic Pollutants
307


308


311


312
VII-46    Case 2 - Biosystem and Reator/Clarifier-Dual Media Filter   314
                               xix

-------
VII-47
                     TITLE

Summary of Analytical Results Conventional, Nonconven-
tional, and Toxic Pollutants

Case 3 - Biosystem and Dual Media Filter Summary of
Analytical Results Conventional, Nonconventional, and
Toxic Pollutants
                                                                      PAGE
315
VII-48    Case 4 - Multimedia Filter Summary of Analytical Results    317
          Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic Pollutants

VII-49    Case 5 - Reactor/Clarifier and Multimedia Filter Summary    318
          of Analytical Results Conventional, Nonconventional, and
          Toxic Pollutants

VI1-50    Case 6 - Sand Filter Summary of Analytical Results          319
          Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic Pollutants

VII-51    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         321
          (After Clarification) Traditionally Monitored Pollutants
          Wool Scouring Mills

VII-52    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         322
          {After Clarification) Toxic Pollutants Wool Scouring Mills


VII-53    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         323
          (First Treatment Step) Traditionally Monitored Pollutants
          Wool Finishing Mills

VII-54    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         324
          (First Treatment Step) Toxic Pollutants Wool
          Finishing Mills

VII-55    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia                    325
          Filtration (After Chemical Coagulation)
          Traditionally Monitored Pollutants Wool
          Finishing Mills

VII-56    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         326
          (After Chemical Coagulation) Toxic Pollutants Wool
          Finishing Mills

VII-57    Summary of Analytical Result Multimedia Filtration          327
          (First Treatment Step) Traditionally Monitored
          Pollutants Other Mills
                               xx

-------
                               TITLE
PAGE
VII-58    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         328
          (First Treatment Step) Toxic Pollutants Other Mills

VII-59    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         329
          (With Precoagulant) Traditionally Monitored Pollutants
          other Mills

VII-60    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         330
          (With Precoagulant) Toxic Pollutants Other Mills

VII-61    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         331
          (After Chemical Coagulation) Traditionally Monitored
          Pollutants Other Mills

VII-62    Summary of Analytical Results Multimedia Filtration         332
          (After Chemical Coagulation) Toxic Pollutants Other
          Mills

VII-63    Summary of Analytical Results Case 1 - Dissolved Air        337
          Flotation Unit Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic
          Pollutants

VII-64    Summary of Analytical Results Case 2 - Dissolved Air        339
          Flotation Unit Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic
          Pollutants

VII-65    Summary of Analytical Results Case 3 - Dissolved Air        340
          Flotation Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic
          Pollutants

VII-66    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     345
          Adsorption Traditionally Monitored Pollutants Wool
          Scouring Mills

VII-67    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     346
          Adsorption Toxic Pollutants Wool Scouring Mills

VII-68    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     347
          Adsorption Traditionally Monitored Pollutants Wool
          Finishing Mills

VII-69    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     348
          Adsorption Toxic Pollutants Wool Finishing Mills

VI1-70    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     349
          Adsorption Traditionally Monitored Pollutants Other Mills
                               xxi

-------
                               TITLE                                  PAGE

VII-71    Summary of Analytical Results Granular Activated Carbon     351
          Adsorption Toxic Pollutants Other Mills

VI1-72    Summary of Analytical Results Case 1 - Pact Process         353
          Conventional, Nonconventional, and Toxic Pollutants

VI1-73    Summary of Analytical Results Case 2 - Pact Process         354
          Toxic Pollutants

VI1-74    Summary of Analytical Results Case 3 - Pact Process         354
          Traditionally Monitored Conventional and Nonconven-
          tional Pollutants

VI1-75    Summary of Analytical Results Powdered Activated Carbon     356
          Treatment Traditionally Monitored Conventional and
          Nonconventional Pollutants Wool Scouring Mills

VII-76    Summary of Analytical Results Powdered Activated Carbon     358
          Treatment Traditionally Monitored Conventional and
          Nonconventional Pollutants Wool Finishing Mills

VI1-77    Summary of Analytical Results Powdered Activated Carbon     360
          Treatment Traditionally Monitored Conventional and
          Nonconventional Pollutants Other Mills

VI1-78    Long Term Effluent Concentrations 72 Selected               366
          Treatment Facilities

VI1-79    Median Long Term Average Treated Effluent Concentrations    368

VI1-80    Biological Treatment Effluent Concentrations Average        369
          of Field Sampling Data

VI1-81    Summary of Pollutant Removals for Add-on Components of      370
          Control Options Wool Scouring Mills

VII-82    Summary of Pollutant Removals for Add-on Components         371
          of Control Options Wool Finishing Mills

VII-83   'Summary of Pollutant Removals of Control Options            372
          All Other Mills

VI1-84    Long Term Average Effluent Characteristics                  374
          Option 1 - Biological Treatment

VI1-85    Long Term Average Effluent Characteristics                  376
          Option 2 - Biological Treatment Plus Multimedia
                              xxii

-------
                                TITLE
          Filtration
VI1-86    Long  Term Average Effluent  Characteristics
          Option 3 - Biological Treatment Plus Chemical
          Coagulation

VI1-87    Long  Term Average Effluent  Characteristics
          Option 4 - Biological Treatment Plus Chemical
          Coagulation Plus Multimedia Filtration

VII-88     PSES and  PSNS-Option 2
          Chemical  Coagulation Precipitation
          Effluent  Characteristics
 PAGE
 379
 381
384
                                xxiii

-------
                               TITLE
SECTION VIII
VIII-1    BPT Effluent Limitations

VIII-2    Calculation of BPT Limitations Water Jet
          Weaving Subdivision

VI1-3     Comparison of Raw Waste Loads Felted Fabric
          Processing and Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcategories

VIII-4    Calculation of BPT Limitations Felted Fabric
          Processing and Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcategories
PAGE



387

389


390


391
                               xxiv

-------
                               TITLE
SECTION IX
IX-1
IX-2
BAT Effluent Limitations
BAT Allowances
PAGE

395
396
                                XXV

-------
SECTION X

X-l

X-2


X-3

X-4


X-5
                               TITLE
New Source Performance Standards

Long Term Average Effluent Discharge Biological
Treatment (72 Plant) Data Base

Calculation of NSPS Long Term Average

Maximum Day Variability Factors Lognormal Data
Distribution

Maximum 30-Day Average Variability Factors for
BOD5., TSS, and COD
PAGE



403

407


410

415


417
                               xxvi

-------
                               TITLE

APPENDIX

A-l       Treatment and Control Options

A-2       Model Mill Cost Summary

A-3       Installed Equipment and Construction  Investment
          Costs for Component Technologies

A-4       Annual Operation and Maintenance Man-hours

A-5       Annual Maintenance Materials Costs

A-6       Estimated Annual Sludge Quantities for
          Component Technologies

A-7       Estimated Annual Power Requirements for
          Component Technologies

A-8       Estimated Annual Cnemical Costs for
          Component Technologies

A-9       Model Plant Control Cost Summary
PAGE



452

453

477


481

483

484


485


489


493
                              XXVll

-------
                           LIST OF FIGURES

                               TITLE
SECTION III
III-l     Wastewater Treatment Status-Wet Processing
          Mills on Master List

III-2     Fibers Used in the Manufacture of Textiles

III-3     Subcategory 1: Typical Wool Scouring
          Process Flow Diagram

III-4     Subcategory 2: Typical Wool Fi.nish.ing
          Process Flow Diagram

III-5     Subcategory 3: Typical Low Water Use Processing
          Process Flow Diagram

III-6     Subcategory 4: Typical Woven Fabric Finishing
          Process Flow Diagram

III-7     Subcategory 5: Typical Knit Fabric Finishing
          Process Flow Diagram

III-8     Subcategory 6: Typical Carpet Finishing
          Process Flow Diagram

II1-9     Subcategory 7: Typical Stock and Yarn Finishing
          Process Flow Diagram

IH-10    Subcategory 8: Typical Nonwoven Manufacturing
          Process Flow Diagram

III-l1    Subcategory 9: Typical Felted Fabric Processing
          Process flow Diagram

Section VII

VII-1     Detention time vs_ Aearation Horsepower Per  Unit
          Volume of Basin Plants with Activated Sludge Technology
APPENDIX A

A-l


A-2

A-3
Textile Industry BAT Review Treatment Cost
Computation Sheet

Screening - Installed Cost

Equalization - Installed Cost
                                                            PAGE



                                                               29


                                                               31

                                                               53


                                                               55


                                                              56


                                                              58


                                                              59


                                                              60


                                                              61


                                                              63


                                                              64
                                                             261
461


462

463
                              XXVlll

-------
A-4

A-5

A-6

A-7

A-8

A-9
                     TITLE

Activated Sludge -  Installed  Cost

Chemical Coagulation -  Installed Cost

Vacuum Filtration - Installed Cost

Multimedia Filtration -  Installed Cost

Dissolved Air Flotation  - Installed Cost

Granular Activated  Carbon -  Installed Cost
 PAGE

 464

 465

 466

 467

 468

 469
A-10

A-11

A-12

A-13

A-14



A-15


A-16
Powdered Activated Carbon-Installed Cost

Ozonation-Installed Cost

Estimated Engineering Compensation

Cost for Hauling and Disposing  Dewatered Sludge

Alternative A: Screening  and  Extended Aeration
Activated Sludge Investment and Annual Costs
for Existing Mills

Alternative B: Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation
Investment and Annual Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative C: Multimedia Filtration Investment
and Annual Costs for Existing Mills
470

471

479

488

494



495


496
A-17




A-18




A-19




A-20


A-21
Alternative D: Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation
and Multimedia Filtration  Investment and Annual
Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative E: Multimedia  Filtration and Granular
Activated Carbon  Investment  and Annual Cost for
Existing Mills

Alternative F: Chemical Coaulgation/Sedimentation,
Multimedia Filtration, and Granular Activated Carbon
Investment and Annual Costs  for Existing Mills

Alternative G: Ozonation  Investment and Annual
Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative H: Chemical  Coagulation/Sedimentation and
Ozonation Investment and Annual costs for Existing Mills
497



498



499



500


501
                               XXIX

-------
                               TITLE
SECTION VII
A-22
A-23
A-24
A-25
A-26
A-27
Alternative I: Powdered Activated Carbon Addition
To Biological Treatment Investment and Annual
Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative J: Multimedia Filtration and Ozonation
Investment and Annual Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative K: Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation,
Multimedia Filtration and Ozonation Investment and
Annual Costs for Existing Mills

Alternative M: Chemical Coagulation and Dissolved
Air FLoatation Investment and Annual costs for
Existing Mills

Alternative N: chemical Coagulation, Dissolved Air
Floatation, Multimedia Filtration, and Granular
Activated Carbon Investment and Annual Costs for
Existing Mills

Alternative P: Chemical coagulation, Dissolved Air
Floatation and Ozonation Investment and Annual
Costs for Existing Mills
PAGE



502



503


504



505



506
507
                              XXX

-------
                            SECTION I
                        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SUBCATEGORIZATION
For the purpose of establishing effluent  limitations  guidelines
for  existing  sources,  standards of performance for new sources
and pretreatment standards for  new  and  existing  sources,  the
textile  mills  point  source category has been subcategorized as
follows:

          Wool Scouring
          Wool Finishing
          Low Water Use Processing (formerly Dry Processing)
          Woven Fabric Finishing
          Knit Fabric Finishing
          Carpet Finishing
          Stock and Yarn Finishing
          Nonwoven Manufacturing
          Felted Fabric Processing
The  subcategorization  scheme  from  previous   rulemaking   was
reviewed, taking into account all available information.  Factors
such  as  age,  size  of  plant,  location, raw material, process
employed, products and  waste  treatability  were  considered  in
reviewing  the adequacy of the original subcategorization scheme.
This review resulted in the establishment of a new subdivision of
an existing subcategory (water jet weaving in the low  water  use
processing  subcategory)  and  two  new  subcategories   (nonwoven
manufacturing and felted fabric processing).

The water jet weaving subdivision of the low water use processing
subcategory (formerly the dry processing  subcategory)  has  been
established  to  account  for  mills using this new process.  The
nonwoven manufacturing and felted fabric processing subcategories
have  been  added  to  account  for  these  distinct   processing
operations.

In  the  woven  fabric finishing subcategory, simple, complex and
desizing subdivisions have been developed for NSPS  that  reflect
those processing differences.  For BAT, allowances for complexity
of  processing,  fiber  type  and commission finishing remain the
same as for BPT effluent limitations.

Also, the knit fabric finishing subcategory has  been  subdivided
into  simple, complex, and hosiery products subdivisions for NSPS
to reflect these processing differences.   For  BAT,  as  in  the

-------
woven  fabric finishing subcategory, allowances for complexity of
processing, fiber type and commission finishing remain  the  same
as for BPT.

EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

BPT

BPT   effluent  limitations  are  established  for  the  nonwoven
manufacturing and the felted fabric finishing  subcategories  and
for  the  water  jet  weaving  subdivision  of  the low water use
processing  subcategory.    These   limitations   control   three
conventional pollutants (BOD£, TSS and pH), three nonconventional
pollutants  (COD,  sulfide  and  total  phenols)  and  one  toxic
pollutant  (total chromium).  BPT  limitations  are  presented  in
Table  1-1  in terms of kilograms of pollutant per 1000 kilograms
of product (lb/1000  Ibs).   Product  is  defined  as  the  final
material produced or processed at the mill.

BPT  for  the  water jet weaving subdivision of the low water use
processing subcategory is based on the average performance of two
water jet weaving mills where biological treatment  is  employed.
BPT  for  the nonwoven manufacturing and felted fabric processing
subcategories is based on the transfer  of  technology  from  the
carpet  finishing and wool finishing subcategories, respectively,
because those subcategories have similar waste characteristics.

BAT

BAT  effluent  limitations  control  toxic  and   nonconventional
pollutants and are equal to BPT effluent limitations.  Therefore,
BAT  effluent  limitations have the same technology basis as BPT,
biological treatment.  The toxic pollutant total chromium and the
nonconventional pollutants, COD, total phenols  and  sulfide  (as
measured   by  the  procedures  listed  in  40  CFR  Part 136) are
regulated  in all subcategories except low water  use  processing.
The  nonconventional  pollutant  chemical  oxygen demand (COD) is
regulated  in all subcategories.   BAT  effluent  limitations  are
presented  in Table 1-2.  Additional discharge allowances for COD
in the woven fabric finishing, knit fabric finishing  and  carpet
finishing  subcategories  based  on  complexity of processing and
fiber type are presented in Table 1-3.

In all subcategories except wool  scouring  and  wool  finishing,
limitations  for  total  chromium, total phenols, sulfide and COD
are presented on a mass basis in terms of kilograms of  pollutant
per 1000 kilograms of product (lbs/1000 Ibs).  Product is defined
as  the final material produced or processed at the mill.  In the
wool scouring subcategory, limitations are presented on   a  mass
basis  in  terms  of  kilograms  of  pollutant per 1000 kilograms
(lbs/1000  Ibs) of wool.  Wool is defined as the dry raw  wool  as
it  is received by the wool scouring mill.  In the wool finishing
subcategory, limitations are presented on*a mass basis  in  terms

-------
   Subcategory

   Low Water Use Processing
     Water Jet Weaving

   Nonwoven Manufacturing

   Felted Fabric Processing
CO
                                                       TABLE  1-1
                                                BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS*

Maximum
any one
BODS
8.9
4.4
15.2
Conventional
for
day
TSS
5.5
6.2
55.4
Pollutants
Average of daily values
for 30 consecutive days
BODS TSS
4.6 2.5
2.2 3.1
17.6 27.7
                                 pH shall be within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times.
                                          Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants
   Subcategory

   Low Water Use Processing
     Water Jet Weaving

   Nonwoven Manufacturing

   Felted Fabric Processing
          Maximum for
          any one day

                              Total
    COD    Sulfide  Phenols  Chromium
                                                                               Average of daily values
                                                                               for 30 consecutive days
COD
Sulfide   Phenols
 Total
Chromium
   21.3      —        —        —        13.7

   40.0    0.046     0.023     0.023       20.0    0.023

  256.8    0.44      0.22      0.22       128.4    0.22

Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib)
                  0.011

                  0.11
                     0.011

                     0.11

-------
                                                     TABLE 1-2
                                             BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS*
Subcategory

Wool Scouring**

Wool Finishing**

Low Water Use Processing
   General Processing
   Water Jet Weaving

Woven Fabric Finishing**

Knit Fabric Finishing**

Carpet Finishing

Stock and Yarn Finishing

Nonwoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Processing
Maximum for any one day
COD
138.0
163.0
2.8
21.3
60.0
60.0
70.2
84.6
40.0
256.0
Sulfide
0.20
0.28
-
0.20
0.20
0.08
0.24
0.046
0.44
Phenols
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Total
Chromium
0.10
0.14
_
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Average of daily values
for 30 consecutive days
COD
69.0
81.5
1.4
13.7
30.0
30.0
35.1
42.3
20.0
128.4
Sulfide
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Phenols
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
Total
Chromium
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
     * Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib) except for wool scouring,  which is
       expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of wool processed and wool finishing which is expressed as kg
       pollutant/kkg of fiber processed.
    ** For commission finishers, an additional allocation of 100% of the limitations is allowed.

-------
                                                  TABLE 1-3
                                               BAT ALLOWANCES*

                                        CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
Simple Manufacturing Operations
employing a synthetic fiber or
complex manufacturing operations
employing a natural fiber.

     Woven Fabric Finishing

Simple Manufacturing Operations
employing a natural and synthetic
fiber blend or complex manufacturing
operations employing a synthetic
fiber.

     Woven Fabric Finishing
     Knit Fabric Finishing

Complex manufacturing Operations
employing a natural and synthetic
fiber blend.

     Woven Fabric Finishing
     Knit Fabric Finishing

Complex Manufacturing Operations

     Carpet Finishing
                                                   Maximum for
                                                   any one day
                 Average of daily values
                 for 30 consecutive days
20.0
40.0
20.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
10.0
20.0
10.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
* Ojiantities of pollutant which may be discharged by a point source in addition to
  the BAT limitations in Table 1-1.

-------
of  kilograms of pollutant per 1000 kilograms of fiber.  Fiber is
defined as the dry wool and other fibers as received at the  wool
mill for processing into wool and blended fibers.

NSPS

NSPS  are  based  on  the  performance  of  the  best  performing
biological treatment systems currently in place at textile mills.
Three  conventional  pollutants  (BOD5.,  TSS  and  pH)  and   one
nonconventional    pollutant   (COD)   are   regulated   in   all
subcategories.  One toxic pollutant (total chromium) and the  two
nonconventional   pollutants  (total  phenols  and  sulfide)  are
regulated in all but the low water  use  processing  subcategory,
NSPS are presented in Table 1-4.

PSES and PSNS

Categorical  pretreatment standards have not been promulgated for
existing and new indirect dischargers.  The textile  mills  point
source   category   is   subject  only  to  General  Pretreatment
Regulations (40 CFR Part 403).

-------
Subcategory
Wool Scouring

Wool Finishing

Low Water Use Processing
   General Processing
   Water Jet Weaving

Woven Fabric Finishing
   Simple Operations
   Complex Operations
   Desizing

Knit Fabric Finishing
   Simple Operations
   Complex Operations
   Hosiery Products

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing

Nonwoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Processing
                                                     TABLE 1-4
                                         NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS*
                                             CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS**
Maximum for any one day

     BODS     TSS
                                Average of daily values
                                for 30 consecutive days
      3.6

     10.7
      1.4
      8.9
      3.3
      3.7
      5.5
      3.6
      4.8
      2.3

      4.6
      3.6

      2.6

     16.9
30.3

32.3
 1.4
 5.5
 8.8
14.4
15.6
13.2
12.2
 8.4

 8.6
 9.8

 4.9

50.9
                                                                                        BODS
                                             TSS
1.9
5.5
0.7
4.6
1.7
1.9
2.8
1.9
2.5
1.2
2.4
1.9
1.4
8.7
13.5
14.4
0.7
2.5
3.9
6.4
6.9
5.9
5.4
3.7
3.8
4.4
2.2
22.7
     *  Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib) except for wool scouring which is
        expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of wool processed and wool finishing which is expressed as
        kg pollutant/kkg of fiber processed.
     #* For all subcategories, pH within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times.

-------
                                                TABLE  1-4  (coat'd)
                                         NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS*
                                       TOXIC AND NUNCONVENTIONAL  POLLUTANTS
Subcategory
Maximum for any one day
                                                                           Average of daily
                                                                                     for 30
values
consecutive days
Total

Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
General Processing
Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
Simple Operations
Complex Operations
•Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Simple Operations
Complex Operations
Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn finishing
No 11 wo ven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Manufacturin
COD
52.4
113.8

2.8
21.3

41.7
68.7
59.5

48.1
51.0
30-7
26.6
33.9
15.2
g 179.3
SuUide
0.20
0.28

-
-

0.20
0.20
0.20

0.20
0.20
0.20
0.08
0.24
0.046
0.44
Phenols
0
0




0
0
0

0
0
0
.10
.14

-
-

.10
.10
.10

.10
.10
.10
0.04
0
0
0
.12
.023
.22
Total
ChroaiuB
0
0




0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.10
.14

-
-

.10
.10
.10

.10
.10
.10
.04
.12
.023
.22
COD
33
73

1
13

26
44
38

31
32
19
17
21
9
115
.7
.3

.4
.7

.9
.2
.3

.0
.9
.8
.1
.9
.8
.5
Sulfide
0.10
0.14

-
-

0.10
0.10
0.10

0.10
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Total
Phenols
0.05
0.07

-
-

0.05
0.05
0.05

0.05
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
Total
Chromium
0.05
0.07

-
-

0.05
0.05
0.05

0.05
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
        Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib)  except for  wool  scouring which
        is expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of wool processed and wool finishing  which  is
        expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of fiber  processed.

-------
                           SECTION II

                          INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
The Federal  Water  Pollution  Control  Act  Amendments  of  1972
established  a comprehensive program to "restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and  biological  integrity  of  the  Nation's
waters "  (Section 101(a)).  By July 1, 1977, existing industrial
dischargers  were  required  to  achieve  "effluent   limitations
requiring   the  application  of  the  best  practicable  control
technology currently available  (BPT),"  [Section  301(b)(1)(A)].
By  July  1,  1983,  these  dischargers  were required to achieve
"effluent limitations  requiring  the  application  of  the  best
available  technology  economically  achievable (BAT), which will
result in reasonable further progress toward the national goal of
eliminating the discharge of pollutants," [Section 301(b)(2)(A)).
New industrial direct dischargers were required  to  comply  with
Section  306,  new  source performance standards (NSPS), based on
best  available  demonstrated  technology.    New   and   existing
dischargers  to  publicly  owned  treatment  works  (POTWs)  were
subject to pretreatment standards under Sections 307(b)  and  (c)
of  the  Act.  While the requirements for direct dischargers were
to be incorporated into National Pollutant Discharge  Elimination
System  (NPDES)  permits  issued  under  Section  402 of the Act,
pretreatment standards were  made  enforceable  directly  against
dischargers to POTWs (indirect dischargers).

Although Section 402(a)(l) of the 1972 Act authorized the setting
of requirements for direct dischargers on a case-by-case basis in
the  absence of regulations, Congress intended that, for the most
part,  control  requirements  would  be  based   on   regulations
promulgated  by  the Administrator of EPA.   Section 304(b) of the
Act  required  the  Administrator   to   promulgate   regulations
providing  guidelines  for effluent limitations setting forth the
degree of effluent reduction attainable through  the  application
of  BPT  and  BAT.   Moreover, Sections 304(c) and 306 of the Act
required promulgation  of  regulations  for  NSPS,  and  Sections
304(f),  307(b)  and  307(c) required promulgation of regulations
for pretreatment standards.  In addition to these regulations for
designated  industry  categories,  Section  307(a)  of  the   Act
required  the  Administrator  to  promulgate  effluent  standards
applicable to all  dischargers  of  toxic  pollutants.   Finally,
Section  501(a)  of  the  Act  authorized  the  Administrator  to
prescribe any additional regulations "necessary to carry out  his
functions" under the Act.

The Agency was unable to promulgate many of these toxic pollutant
regulations  and guidelines within the time periods stated in the
Act.  In 1976, EPA was sued by several environmental groups  and,
in  settlement of this lawsuit, EPA and the plaintiffs executed a

-------
"Settlement Agreement," which was approved by  the  Court.   This
Agreement  required  EPA  to  develop  a  program and adhere to a
schedule for promulgating, for 21 major industries, BAT  effluent
limitations  guidelines,  pretreatment  standards  and new source
performance standards for 65 "priority" pollutants and classes of
pollutants.  [See Natural  Resources  Defense  Council,  Inc.  v.
Train,  8  ERC  2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified, 12 ERC 1833 (D.D.C.
1979).] On December 27, 1977, the President signed into  law  the
Clean  Water  Act  of  1977.   Although  this  law  makes several
important changes in the federal water pollution control program,
its most significant aspect is its incorporation into the Act  of
many  of  the  basic elements of the Settlement Agreement program
for toxic pollution control.  Sections 301{b)(2)(A) and  (b)(2)(C)
of the Act now require  the  achievement  by  July  1,   1984,  of
effluent  limitations  requiring  application  of BAT for "toxic"
pollutants, including the 65 "priority" pollutants and classes of
pollutants which Congress declared "toxic" under  Section  307(a)
of  the Act.  Likewise, EPA's programs for new source performance
standards and pretreatment standards are now aimed principally at
toxic pollutant control.   Moreover,  to  strengthen  the  toxics
control  program, Congress added a new Section 304(e) to the Act,
authorizing the Administrator to prescribe what have been  termed
"best  management  practices"  (BMPs)  to  prevent the release of
toxic pollutants  from  plant-site  runoff,  spillage  or  leaks,
sludge  or  waste disposal and drainage from raw material storage
associated with, or ancillary to, the manufacturing or   treatment
process.

In keeping with its emphasis on toxic pollutants, the Clean Water
Act  of  1977  also  revises  the  control  program  for nontoxic
pollutants.   Instead  of  BAT  for   "conventional"   pollutants
identified  under  Section 304(a)(4) (including biological oxygen
demanding pollutants, suspended solids, fecal coliform   and  pH),
the  new  Section  301(b)(2)(E)  requires  achievement by July 1,
1984, of "effluent limitations requiring the application  of  the
best  conventional  pollutant  control  technology"   (BCT).   The
factors considered in assessing BCT include the reasonableness of
the relationship between  the costs of attaining  a  reduction  in
effluents  and  the  effluent reduction benefits derived, and the
comparison of the cost and level of reduction for  an  industrial
discharge  with  the  cost  and  level  of  reduction  of similar
parameters  for  a  typical  POTW   [Section  304(b)(4)(B)].   For
nontoxic  nonconventional  pollutants,  Sections 301(b)(2)(A) and
301 (b)(2)(F) require achievement  of  BAT  effluent   limitations
within  three years after their establishment, but not later than
July 1, 1987.

The purpose of this document is to describe  the  development  of
effluent   limitations    guidelines   for   BPT,  BAT,   NSPS  and
pretreatment standards for existing and  new  sources  (PSES  and
PSNS)  under  authority   of Sections 301, 304, 306 and 307 of the
Clean Water Act.
                                  10

-------
PRIOR EPA REGULATIONS

BPT, BAT, NSPS and  PSNS  were  originally  promulgated  for  the
textile   mills   category  in  1974.   Industry  representatives
challenged these limitations  in  the  Fourth  Circuit  Court  of
Appeals.  In response to a joint motion of petitioners and EPA to
hold  the  case  in  abeyance  while  EPA  reconsidered  the  BAT
limitations, the Court remanded all the regulations except BPT to
EPA  for  reconsideration.   In  the  joint  motion,  petitioners
withdrew  their  challenge  to the BPT limitations and therefore,
those limitations are presently in effect.  As a  result  of  the
court  order,  the  Agency and the American Textile Manufacturers
Institute (ATMI) began a joint study to collect  information  and
data  necessary  to  reconsider  the  BAT,  NSPS,  PSES  and PSNS
regulations.  PSES were promulgated in 1977 (42 FR 26979; May 26,
1977) .

The regulations supported by this document include  BPT  for  two
new  subcategories and one new subdivision and revised BAT, NSPS,
PSNS and PSES for all subcategories and subdivisions.

OVERVIEW OF THE INDUSTRY

The United States textile industries are covered by  two  of  the
twenty  major  groups of manufacturing industries in the Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC).  They are Textile Mill Products,
Major Group 22, and Apparel  and  Other  Textile  Mill  Products,
Major  Group 23.  According to the SIC, the Textile Mill Products
group  includes   30   separate   industries   that   manufacture
approximately  90  classes  of  products.   The Apparel and Other
Textile Products  group  includes  33  separate  industries  that
manufacture some 70 classes of products.

The  original  Textile  Mills  Point  Source Category Development
Document (1) published in 1974 covers those facilities classified
in Major Group 22.  These facilities are principally  engaged  in
receiving  and  preparing  fiber; transforming this material into
yarn, thread or webbing; converting the  yarn  and  webbing  into
fabric  or  related  products;  and  finishing these materials at
various stages of the production.  Many of the facilities produce
a final consumer product  such  as  thread,  yarn,  bolt  fabric,
hosiery,  towels,    •   sheets  and  carpet.   The  balance of the
facilities produce a  transitional  products  for  use  by  other
establishments in Major Groups 22 and 23,

The  facilities in Major Group 23, Apparel and Other Textile Mill
Products, are principally engaged in receiving woven  or  knitted
fabric  for  cutting, sewing and packaging.  Some of the products
manufactured  are  dry  cleaned  and   some   undergo   auxiliary
processing  to  prepare  them  for the consumer.  In general, the
processing is dry and no process-related wastewater is generated.
                                  11

-------
Exact figures for the number of wet-processing mills or the total
number  of  mills  in  the  textile  industry  are  difficult  to
establish  because  of the relatively large numbers involved, the
dynamic  state  of  the  industry  and  differing  classification
criteria.   Published  reports and surveys place the first figure
(wet processing) around 2,000 mills and the total  mills  between
5,000 and 7,500.  Nearly 80 percent of the facilities are located
in  the  Mid-Atlantic  and  Southern  regions  of  the  U.S.  The
remaining 20 percent are distributed nearly equally  between  the
New England region and the North Central and Western regions.

SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY

The  data  and technical findings presented in this document were
developed by performing the following major tasks:

1.   Collecting, reviewing and  evaluating  existing  information
     including:  the administrative record from previous effluent
     guidelines development studies; historical  wastewater  data
     from  EPA  regional  offices,  state water pollution control
     agencies  and  municipalities;   the   literature;   current
     research  projects;  and  information available from textile
     trade associations.

2.   Profiling the  industry  with  regard  to  age,  production,
     geographic  location,  type  of  discharge,  raw  materials,
     production processes,  final  products,  in-plant  controls,
     end-of-pipe treatment practices and wastewater data.

3.   Reviewing   the   existing   industry   categorization   and
     developing  a  revised categorization, where appropriate, to
     accommodate any  previously  unidentified  segments  of  the
     industry.

4.   Conducting  a  screening  sampling  program   to   determine
     qualitatively  which  of  the 129 toxic pollutants appear in
     textile industry raw wastewaters and treated effluents.

5.   Developing, distributing and retrieving 308 data  collection
     portfolios (DCPs) to update the existing data base.


6.   Conducting a verification  wastewater  sampling  program  to
     confirm  the  presence of the toxic pollutants identified in
     the  screening  sampling  program  and  to   establish   the
     effectiveness of in-place and pilot-scale advanced treatment
     technologies in removing toxic pollutants.

7.   Organizing, analyzing and interpreting the data collected in
     each  task  area  to  establish  an  updated  administrative
     record.
                                 12

-------
8.   Establishing the alternative in-plant control  measures  and
     end-of-pipe  treatment  technologies that will result in the
     elimination or reduction of  pollutant  discharge  from  the
     industry.

9.   Estimating  the   capital   and   the   annual   costs   and
     effectiveness   of  the  alternative  control  measures  and
     treatment technologies  for  representative  mills  in  each
     subcategory of the industry.

10.  Identifying technologies,  developing  the  methodology  and
     establishing the effluent limitations and standards that can
     be achieved in each subcategory of the industry.


DATA AND INFORMATION GATHERING PROGRAM

Previous Data Collection Activities

The collection, review and evaluation of existing information was
the  initial  major  task  performed.   This  task  provided  the
starting point for  subsequent  activities  and  established  the
extent  of  effort  that  was to be required in each of the other
tasks.  The  review  of  literature  and  evaluation  of  current
research projects continued throughout the project.

308 Data Request

The  308 data request (Data Collection Portfolio (DCP) - Industry
Survey) was performed to update  the  existing  data  base.   The
survey  involved  the  following activity: 1) developing a master
list  of  textile  mills  thought   to   have   wet-manufacturing
operations;  2}  contacting mills on the master list by letter to
outline the purpose and intent of the survey; 3) contacting mills
on the master list by telephone to assess the value of  available
wastewater  information and to gather basic facility information;
4) distributing detailed DCPs; and 5)  retrieving  and  analyzing
the DCPs.

In  developing  the  master list of wet-manufacturing facilities,
consideration was given to several sources of information.  These
sources included the Standard  Industrial  Classification  (SIC),
the  Census  of.  Manufactures,  data  collected  during  previous
textile industry studies, information  from  trade  associations,
and  information  in  a  commercial directory, "Davison's Textile
Blue Book" (8).  Examination of the various sources and knowledge
gained  from  previous  studies  indicated  that  the   directory
provided  the  most  useful and most current information.  It was
reviewed and each facility listed was tentatively  classified  as
either  a  wet-  or  dry-manufacturing  facility.  Of 5,500 mills
listed in  the  directory,  approximately  2,900  were  initially
classified  as dry manufacturing and 2,600 were classified as wet
manufacturing.   Wet-manufacturing facilities were further studied
                                 13

-------
to determine if additional subcategorization  based  on  product,
raw  materials,  production  processes  and  type  of  processing
equipment  would  be  appropriate.   Information   necessary   to
identify   and   contact   each  wet-manufacturing  facility  was
computerized and used to develop the master list.

A telephone survey of those mills originally classified as having
wet-manufacturing reduced the number of mills on the master  list
to   1,973  because  many  turned  out  to  be  dry-manufacturing
facilities  or  were  no  longer  in  the  textile  manufacturing
business.   Information  on  selected  low  water  use  mills was
obtained by means of a separate general survey.   General  survey
information  was replaced by detailed survey information obtained
from the DCPs for the wet-manufacturing facilities that noted the
availability of historical wastewater data.  DCPs  were  received
from  538  wet-manufacturing  mills  and  an additional 573 mills
provided general survey information.   The  information  obtained
from  both  types  of  surveys was computerized.  It provides the
best general representation of the textile industry developed  to
date  and serves as the basis for this document and the resulting
regulation.

Mill Visits

Visits to 25 mills were made during the  initial  data  gathering
program  to  develop  an  understanding  of the current operating
practices  used  in  the  textile   industry.    Raw   materials,
production  processes,  final  products,  in-plant  controls  and
end-of-pipe  treatment  technologies  were   examined   and   the
information  obtained was added to existing information about the
industry.  Visits to 53 mills  (including  15  of  the  25  noted
above)   were  made  in  conjunction  with the wastewater sampling
program.  Information similar to that noted  above  was  obtained
during these visits.

Raw Materials Review

The  raw  materials  used to manufacture textile products  include
various natural and manmade fibers and a wide variety of   organic
and  inorganic  chemicals  and  chemical products.  The types and
nature of these fibers and chemicals are discussed under "Profile
of Manufacturing" in Section III.  Current information about  the
raw  materials  was  obtained  from the literature, from industry
trade associations, from manufacturers of the materials and  from
the mills surveyed and visited.

Screening and Verification Sampling

The wastewater sampling program conducted to characterize  textile
industry  wastewater with respect to the 129 toxic pollutants was
performed  in  two  phases.   The  first  phase   (screening)  was
conducted  between  February  and  October  of  1977.  During this
phase,  12,446 data points were obtained by collecting 98   samples
                                 14

-------
from  40  mills.   The  second phase (verification) was conducted
between September 1977 and March 1980.  During this phase, 38,227
data points were obtained  by  collecting  301  samples  from  24
mills.   A  total  of  53 individual mills was sampled during the
study, some in both phases of the sampling program.

During both phases, mill  visits  were  made  before  the  actual
sampling  to  obtain  process  information and make the necessary
arrangements for the sampling crews.  The samples collected  were
analyzed  by either a private laboratory under contract to EPA or
by one of several EPA laboratories.  The sampling and  analytical
procedures  employed  in  all  phases  followed  recommended  EPA
procedures.  A detailed discussion of the sampling and analytical
methods is included in the record.

The screening  phase  of  the  wastewater  sampling  program  was
designed  to  identify which of the toxic pollutants were present
in textile industry untreated wastewaters and treated  effluents.
During  this  phase,  the  source water, untreated wastewater and
treated  effluent  at  each  mill  were  sampled   to   determine
qualitatively which pollutants were present.

The  verification  phase  consisted of sampling waste streams and
treated effluents to determine the amount of the toxic pollutants
identified in the screening phase that  are  present  in  textile
industry  wastewaters.   In  addition to this objective, sampling
was also conducted to determine  the  effectiveness  of  in-place
treatment   technologies   and   pilot-scale  advanced  treatment
technologies in removing toxic, nonconventional and  conventional
pollutants.   The  pilot-scale data were obtained on biologically
treated effluents at 19 of the mills sampled during the screening
phase by utilizing one of two mobile pilot  plants.   Each  pilot
plant   contained   the  following  treatment  systems:  chemical
coagulation/clarification,   multimedia   filtration,   activated
carbon  adsorption  and  ozonation.   Bench-scale  dissolved  air
flotation studies also were performed on the  waste  at  some  of
these mills.

Processing of Data and Information

The  data  collected  as  part  of  the  evaluation  of  existing
information, the DCP requests and the wastewater sampling program
were processed and analyzed.  Most of  the  data  were  processed
electronically.    Information obtained from the DCPs provides the
basis for the industry profile presented in Section III  and  the
industry  subcategorization  presented in Section IV.  Historical
and current wastewater monitoring data were used to establish the
typical raw waste and treated effluent characteristics  for  each
subcategory  (See  Section  V).   Subsequent  to the October 1979
proposal,  we  found  that  additional  data,  especially   daily
monitoring data, were needed in order to determine accurately the
performance  of  wastewater  treatment  systems.   Therefore, EPA
requested and received from ten mills daily results of  treatment
                                 15

-------
technology   performance   for  the  most  recent  full  year  of
operation.   The  historical  data   and   the   full-scale   and
pilot-scale  field  sampling  results  were used to determine the
effectiveness of the control and treatment technologies available
to the industry (Section VII) and to provide information  related
to  the  design  and  costing of those technologies (Appendix A).
These data and information, along with the findings  of  separate
environmental  and  economic  impact  analyses, were evaluated to
develop  the  effluent   limitations   guidelines,   new   source
performance  standards  and  pretreatment  standards presented in
Sections VIII through XI.
                                 16

-------
                           SECTION III

                   DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
This section presents a detailed profile of the textile   industry
and  a discussion of the unit manufacturing processes used by the
industry.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The United States textile industries are covered by  two  of  the
twenty  major groups of manufacturing industries in the Executive
Office of  the  President  -  Bureau  of  the  Budget's   Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC).  They are Textile Mill Products,
Major  Group  22,  and  Apparel  and Other Textile Mill Products,
Major Group 23.  The Textile  Mill  Products  group  includes  30
separate  industries that manufacture approximately 90 classes of
products.  The Apparel and Other Textile Products group   includes
33  separate  industries  that  manufacture  some  70  classes of
products.

The textile mills  point  source  category  effluent  limitations
guidelines and standards (40 CFR Part 410) apply to facilities in
Major  Group  22.   The  facilities  are  engaged principally in:
receiving and preparing fibers; transforming these materials into
yarn, thread or webbing; converting the  yarn  and  webbing  into
fabric  or related products; and finishing these materials.  Many
facilities produce a final consumer product such as thread, yarn,
bolt fabric, hosiery, towels, sheets and carpet, while  the  rest
produce a transitional product for use by other establishments in
Major Groups. 22 and 23.

The  facilities in Major Group 23, Apparel and Other Textile Mill
Products, are involved principally in receiving woven or  knitted
fabric  for  cutting, sewing and packaging.  Some of the  products
manufactured  are  dry  cleaned  and   some   undergo   auxiliary
processing  to  prepare  them  for the consumer.  In general, the
processing is dry and no process related wastewater is generated.

Profile of Major Group 22_

Exact figures for the number of wet processing mills or the total
number  of  mills  in  the  textile  industry  are  difficult  to
establish  because  of their relatively large number, the dynamic
state of the  industry  and  differing  classification  criteria.
Published  reports  (1,  3,   4, 5, 6) and surveys (7, 8)  over the
past ten years estimate the number of  wet  processing  mills  at
approximately  2,000,  and  the  total mills at between 5,000 and
7,500.  A U.S. Department  of  Commerce  Publication,  Census  of
Manufactures  (Census) provided the most structured and inclusive
                              the
information.   Reports  from  the  1977
developing the general profile (7).
Census  were   used
in
                                 17

-------
A breakdown of the textile mill products group by SIC code  (major
product  class)  and  region (geographic location) is provided in
Table III-l.   The  information  in  this  table  was  taken  from
preliminary   statistics   developed   for   the   1977   Census.
Approximately 16 percent of the known facilities had not yet been
assigned to a specific region.   Assignments for these  facilities
were  not  specified to avoid disclosing operations of individual
companies and to avoid further verification of data  for  smaller
producing  states.  Nearly 77 percent of the facilities for which
the locations are specified are located in the Middle-and  South-
Atlantic  regions.   Of the remaining 23 percent of the specified
facilities, approximately 10  percent  are  located  in  the  New
England  region,  approximately  six  percent  are located in the
Pacific region, approximately four percent  are  located  in  the
East  South  Central  region  and  approximately one and one-half
percent each are located in the East North Central and West South
Central regions.  Only a few facilities are  in  the  West  North
Central  region.   Many  mills,  particularly yarn manufacturing,
weaving and carpet  manufacturing,  are  concentrated  in  a  few
southeastern states.

The geographic distribution of mills is based in part on historic
considerations.   The  textile  industry in this country began in
the northeast and spread south because of  that  region's  cotton
production.   Although  synthetics  have  replaced  cotton as the
primary raw material in recent years,  the southeast continues  to
be the center of the textile industry.

General  statistics regarding number of establishments, number of
employees and economics of manufacture  are  presented  in  Table
III-2   for  the  textile  mill  products  group.   The  Standard
Industrial Classification  system  (SIC)  identifies  nine  major
product  classes.  Of these nine classes (three digit SIC Codes),
three  have  been  subdivided  to  present  information  for  the
industry  segments  that are of primary concern here and are most
likely to be affected by the development of effluent  limitations
guidelines,  new  source  performance  standards and pretreatment
standards.

Knitting Mills (SIC 225) is  the  largest  single  major  product
class in terms of number of establishments with 36 percent of the
industry  total.   These  mills  employ 25 percent of all textile
workers and the value of their shipments is  18  percent  of  the
industry  total.   Weaving mills (SIC 221), yarn and thread mills
(SIC 228), finishing mills (SIC 226)  and  floor  covering  mills
(SIC   227)   follow   knitting  mills  in  terms  of  number  of
establishments and number of employees.   The number of facilities
manufacturing felt goods, nonwoven  goods  and  scoured  wool  is
small  relative  to  the  rest  of the industry.  Combined,  these
three subdivisions accounted for less than three percent  of  the
employees  and  three percent of the value of shipments,  based on
data available for the period prior to 1977.
                                18

-------
                                   TABLE III-l
                            GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
                  TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS MAJOR INDUSTRIAL GROUP
  Region
221   222   223
  SIC Code
224   225   226
227   228   229
22
New England

Middle Atlantic
East North
West North
Central
Central
South Atlantic
East South
West South
Central
Central
5
36
3
-
163
31
10
50
74
-
-
230
16
12
60
36
2
3
14
1
8
91
112
6
-
87
12
-
38
1149
8
-
760
63
-
91
245
9
-
193
19
1
5
32
5
2
381
19
12
74
113
5
-
454
63
3
169
343
56
5
213
38
35
Mountain Division - - - - - - - - '-
Pacific
Unspecified
Total

*

20
46
314
26
41
449
7
34
165
11
16
335
73
498
2589
41
79
678
71
65
592
19
67
798
92
303
1254
583
2140
94
10
2495
262
81
0
360
1149
7174
  Census incomplete at time distribution was prepared;  not all facilities
  have been assigned to a region to avoid disclosing operations of indi-
  vidual companies and to permit further verification of data for smaller
  producing states.
Notes:     New England
          Middle Atlantic
          East North Central
          West North Central
          South Atlantic
          East South Central
          West South Central
          Mountain Division
          Pacific
          - ME,  NH,  VT,  MA,  RI,  CT
          - NY,  NJ,  PA
          - OH,  IN,  IL,  MI,  WI
          * MN,  IA,  MO,  ND,  SD,  NB,  KS
          - DE,  MD,  DC,  VA,  WV,  NC,  SC,  GA,  FL
          - KT,  TN,  AL,  MS
          - AR,  LA,  OK,  TX
          - MT,  ID,  CO,  NM,  AZ,  UT,  NV
          - WA,  OR,  CA,  AK,  HI
221 - Weaving Mills, Cotton           226
222 - Weaving Mills, Synthetic        227
223 - Weaving & Finishing Mills,  Wool 228
224 - Narrow Fabrics Mills            229
225 - Knitting Mills (Incl, Finishing) 22

Source:  1977 Census of Manufacturers

                                  19
                        Textile Finishing,  Exc.  Wool & Knits
                        Floor Covering Mills
                        Yarn & Thread Mills
                        Miscellaneous Textile Goods
                        Textile Mill Products

-------
ro
CD
                                                       TABLE III-2
                                                  GENERAL STATISTICS
                                      TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS MAJOR INDUSTRIAL GROUP
       Industry Segment
SIC Code
   Establishments    Employees
Total  20+ Employees  (1000's)
 Value Added     Value of
by Manufacture  Shipments
  (million dollars/year)
Weaving Mills, Cotton
Weaving Mills, Synthetics
Weaving & Finishing Mills,
Wool
Narrow Fabrics Mills
Knitting Mills (+ Finishing)
Hosiery Mills
All Other Knitting Mills

Finishing Mills (Except
Wool & Knits)
Broadwoven Fabric
Stock, Yarn, Narrow Fabric
Floor Covering Mills
Yarn & Thread Mills
Miscellaneous Textile Goods
Felt Goods
Nonwoven Goods
Wool Scouring & NEC Goods
Other Miscellaneous
Products
Total Industry-All Segments
All Group No.
All Group No.

All Group No.
All Group No.
All Group No.
2251, 2252
2253, 2254,
2258, 2259

All Group No.
2261, 2262
2269
All Group No.
All Group No.
All Group No.
2291
2297
2299
2292, 2293,
2295, 2296,
Major Group No
221
222

223
224
225

2257


226


227
228
229



2294"
2298
. 22
314
449

165
335
2589
613

1976

678
495
183
592
798
1254
46
100
436

672
7174
192
351

84
182
1491
375

1116

395
283
112
285
608
523
27
74
90

332
4048
117.2
151.0

14.6
20.8
230.7
58.7

172.0

72.1
58.0
14.1
55.8
140.4
67.8
4.3
13.0
6.7

43.8
914.2
1944
2791

313
351
3720
818

2902

1417
1143
274
1530
2261
1641
103
386
109

1043
17011
4431
6326

583
683
9222
1790

7431

3995
3164
831
4775
6114
4174
198
864
231

2881
52405
       NEC = Not Elsewhere Classified
       Source:   1977 Census of Manufacturers

-------
 Water  use  and  wastewater discharge  statistics  for  the  nine   major
 product  classes  and  their subdivisions  are  provided  in Table III-
 3.   Because   this information  has  not  yet  been  compiled  from the
 1977 Census data, the values were developed from the 1972 Census.
 Because  of this, and because the Census reports  these   statistics
 only   for  establishments   that discharge 75,700 cubic meters (20
 million  gallons) per year or more,  the  numbers of  establishments
 do  not  correspond  between Tables  III-2 and III-3.  The  value of
 shipments,  which  are  provided  in  each   table,   give  a   good
 indication  of  the  significance of the establishments covered in
 Table  III-3.   The average value of  shipments for  the   facilities
 covered  by  Table   III-3 constituted approximately  50 percent of
 the  industry  total  in  1972,  while   the average  number   of
 establishments  represented only   about 10 percent of the  total
 mills  in the industry at that time.

 Based  on the 1977 Census, the industries in Major  Group 22 employ
 over 900,000 persons and manufacture  goods valued  at  over  52
 billion   dollars    annually.   According   to  the  1972  Census,
 approximately  600 million cubic meters  (160 billion  gallons!of
 process wastewater is discharged annually.

 Industry Survey  (308 Data Request)

 The  industry  survey  discussed  in Section II  provided  specific
 information about the facilities in Major Group  22.    A  primary
 result  of the survey was compilation of a  master  list of the wet
 processing facilities in the  industry.   A breakdown of   those
 facilities  is presented   in  Table  III-4.   The   manufacturing
 segments listed correspond  to the  recommended   subcategorization
 of  the  industry for purposes of effluent  limitation  guidelines,
 new source  performance  standards  and  pretreatment   standards.
 There  are 1,165 mills in the nine wet processing  classifications
 and 808 mills  classified as low water use processing  operations.
 Detailed  survey  information  was  received  for  537  of the  wet
 processing  mills,   with  574  mills  providing  general   survey
 information.    Wet  processing  activities   at   the  remaining 54
 locations could not be confirmed.

 Just over two-thirds of  the  wet  processing  facilities  finish
 either woven or knit fabrics (including  hosiery).  Stock  and  yarn
 finishing  mills  comprise nearly one-fifth of the wet processing
 facilities;  wool  goods  processing,   carpet  manufacturing   and
 nonwoven manufacturing and felted fabric processing  together each
 comprise  approximately  five  percent.   Detailed surveys provide
 information on more than one-third  of  the  mills   in  each   wet
processing segment.

Low water use processing operations were surveyed separately from
 the  wet  processing   mills;  315   detailed survey responses were
obtained from a random sample of approximately half  of the  mills
 initially classified  as low water  use operations.
                                 21

-------
ro
ro
    Industry Segment
                                                     TABLE III-3
                                    WATER USE AND WASTEWATER DISCHARGE STATISTICS
                                    TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS MAJOR INDUSTRIAL GROUP
                                                           Value of
                                               Establish-  Shipments    Water Use#
                                                              ,6
                                        Wastewater Discharge
                                       Indirect        Direct
ments"
$/yr)
cu m/yr)  (1Q  cu m/yr) (10  cu m/yr)
Weaving Mills, Cotton
Weaving Mills, Synthetics
Weaving & Finishing Mills, Wool
Narrow Fabrics Mills
Knitting Mills (+ Finishing)
Hosiery Mills
All Other Knitting Mills
Finishing Mills (Except Wool & Knits)
Broadwoven Fabric
Stock, Yarn, Narrow Fabric
Floor Covering Mills
Yarn & Thread Mills
Miscellaneous Textile Goods
Felt Goods
Nonwoven Goods
Wool Scouring & Goods NEC
Other Miscellaneous Products
Total Industry - All Segments
96
113
32
10
162
47
115
139
93
46
65
101
70
7
10
13
40
788
2058
2179
277
87
2357
459
1898
1852
1463
389
1868
1907
1328
64
140
74
1050
13913
35.2
51.9
22,0
0.8
88.9
5.7
83.3
169.6
141.9
27.3
58.7
39.0
15.5
1.5
4.9
3.8
5.3
481.6
22.0
28.4
11.4
1.1
84.8
9.1
75.7
78.3
53.0
25.4
43.5
30.7
20.8
0.8
2.3
3.4
14.4
321.0
26.9
48.1
13.6
0.4
25.7
0.0
25.7
105.2
100.7
4.5
23.8
27.6
12.1
1.5
3.4
2.3
4.9
283.4
    * Only includes locations with greater than 7.57 x 10  cu m/yr discharge.
    # Process water not including recirculated flow.
    NEC = Not Elsewhere Classified
    Source:  1972 Census of Manufactures

-------
                                                     TABLE III-4
                                    SURVEY STATUS SUMMARY - MILLS ON MASTER LIST
ro
CO
Manufacturing Segment
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Hosiery Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
SIC Codes
Covered
2299
223
221, 222, 224, 2295
2296, 2298
2261, 2262
2253, 2254, 2257
2258, 2259, 2292
2251, 2252
227
2269
2297
2291
Total Mills
Listed
17
37
808
336
280
162
58
217
38
20
1973
Survey Status*
Detailed General No Response
13
19
315
151
113
58
37
121
14
11
852
4
15
15
158
155
103
18
90
23
8
589
0
3
478#
27
12
1
3
6
1
1
532
       * A "detailed" survey status signifies that a detailed survey questionnaire (308 portfolio), was ob-
         tained.  A "general" survey status signifies that a telephone survey questionnaire only was obtained,
         A "no response" survey status signifies that while contact was attempted, and in some cases made,
         no response was obtained.
       # A random sample of approximately 50 percent of the low water use processing segment was surveyed,
         so this value represents facilities that were not surveyed as well as facilities that did not
         respond to the surveys.

       Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980.

-------
The  geographic  distribution of the industry survey responses is
shown in Table III-5.   The  distribution  confirms  observations
made  previously  regarding Major Group 22.  Over half of the wet
processing facilities are located in the  southeast  (EPA  Region
IV),  principally  in  the  Carolinas  and  Georgia.   Another 25
percent are located in the northeast   (EPA  Regions  I  and  II).
Less  than  5  percent  of the mills are located in the west (EPA
Regions VI through X).

Table III-6 illustrates the rang-e of plant  sizes   (in  terms  of
production   exposed  to  wet  processing).   Wet  production  is
dependent on  the  weight  of  material  in  the  final  product.
Therefore,  mills  producing lightweight products such as hosiery
and other sheer knit goods occupy the smaller  production  ranges
while  mills  manufacturing  heavyweight woven goods (upholstery,
drapery fabric and carpet) occupy the larger  production  ranges.
Variation  in  production  is  substantial even within individual
manufacturing segments as evidenced by the fact that all but  two
segments  have  production  ranges  of  two  to  three  orders of
magnitude.  The woven fabric finishing segment  is  the  largest,
with  almost  twice  as  many  facilities than any other segment,
processing greater than 22,000 kg/day (48,000 Ib/day).

Wastewater  discharge  quantities,  discharge  type  (direct   or
indirect)  and general treatment status are illustrated in Tables
III-7 and III-8 and  Figure  III-l,  respectively.   Table  III-7
illustrates the distribution of discharge volume for the mills in
each  segment  of manufacturing.  Each segment shows variation in
discharge from two to four  orders  of  magnitude.   The  largest
dischargers  are  in  the  woven  fabric  finishing manufacturing
segment, which has almost 50 percent  of  the  mills  discharging
greater  than  3,785 cu in/day (1.0 mgd).  The smallest discharges
are associated with hosiery finishing, nonwoven manufacturing and
felted fabric processing facilities with 87, 76 and 90 percent of
the facilities, respectively,  discharging  less  than  1,890  cu
m/day (0.5 mgd).

Based on the results of the industry survey, it is estimated that
over  three-fourths  of  the  wet  processing  facilities  in the
industry discharge process  wastewater  to  POTWs.   Table  II1-8
illustrates  the  numbers  of  mills  on the master list that are
known to be direct  dischargers,  indirect  dischargers  or  zero
discharge  facilities.  At one extreme, 95 percent of the hosiery
mills discharge to POTWs (indirect discharge), while on the other
extreme,  less  than  30  percent  of  the  wool  scouring  mills
discharge to POTWs.

Figure   III-l  illustrates  the  type  of  wastewater  treatment
provided by direct and indirect dischargers.  Over  half  of  the
indirect  dischargers provide no treatment of process wastewater,
while slightly less than 10 percent provide  treatment  processes
equivalent  to,  or  better than biological treatment.   Over two-
thirds of the direct dischargers  provide  biological  treatment.
                                24

-------
                              TABLE III-5
          GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION - MILLS ON MASTER LIST
Manufacturing
   Segment
                      EPA Region                       All
   I   II   III   IV   V   VI   VII   VIII   IX   X  Regions
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use
Processing
Woven Fabric
Finishing
Knit Fabric
Finishing
Hosiery
Finishing
Carpet
Finishing
Stock & Yarn
Finishing
Nonwoven
Manufacturing
Felted Fabric
Processing
All Segments
6
20

86

69

27
2
0

33

10

7
260
1
2

108

54

57
2
1

19

3

2
249
3
4

125

34

45
9
4

31

4

3
262
3
3

463

155

133
141
39

120

11

3
1071
0
1

11

11

9
5
1

6

7

2
53
3
1

8

3

1
2
4

3

2

0
27
0
1

1

1

2
0
0

1

0

0
6
0
1

0

2

0
0
0

0

0

0
3
0
0

4

7

6
0
9

4

1

3
34
1
4

2

0

0
1
0

0

0

0
8
17
37

808

336

280
162
58

217

38

20
1973
Notes :
EPA Region I
EPA Region II
EPA Region III
EPA Region IV
EPA Region V
ME,NH,VT,MA,RI,CT        EPA Region VI
NY,NJ                    EPA Region VII
PA,WV,VA,MD,DE           EPA Region VIII
KY,TN,NC,SC,MS,AL,GA,FL  EPA Region IX
MN,WI,MI,IL,IN,OH        EPA Region X
NM,TX,OK,AR,LA
NE,KS,IA,MO
MT,ND,SD,WY,U!,CO
CA,NV,AZ,HI
AK,WA,OR,ID
Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980.
                                 25

-------
Manufacturing
   Segment
0-2   2-4
              TABLE III-6
 PRODUCTION SIZE - MILLS ON MASTER LIST

Mills Within Given Production Range, kkg/day
4-9   9-13   13-22   22-34   34-45   45-68   68-91
      Un-    All
91+  known* Mills
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use
Processing
Woven Fabric
Finishing
Knit Fabric
ro -r,. . , .
01 Finishing
Hosiery Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn
Finishing
Nonwoven
Manufacturing
Felted Fabric
Processing
All Segments
2
8

10

36
42
94
2

32

3

6
235
3
9

7

27
26
26
2

47

3

5
155
0
9

11

33
34
10
7

35

2

2
143
1
2

19

28
29
5
3

23

4

1
115
4
1

23

33
48
2
8

25

3

0
147
2
2

21

21
21
0
5

20

5

0
97
2
2

7

20
7
0
6

6

2

0
52
2
0

5

12
9
0
7

7

2

1
45
0
0

3

9
5
0
5

1

0

0
23
0
0

2

21
1
0
5

2

1

0
32
1
4

700

96
58
25
8

19

13

5
929
17
37

808

336
280
162
58

217

38

20
1973
* Reflects the fact that many of the facilities surveyed by telephone were reluctant to provide pro-
  duction information.
Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980.

-------
Manufacturing
   Segment
                      TABLE III-7
     WASTEWATER DISCHARGE - MILLS ON MASTER LIST
                                              2
        Mills Within Given Discharge Range, 10  cu m/day (mgd)
  0-0.36    0.36-3.70   3.70-18.9   18.9-37.8  37.8-94.6  94.6-378
(0-0.009)  (0.010-0.099)(0.10-0.49) (0.50-0.99) (1.0-2.4) (2.5-10.0)
Un-     All
known*  Mills
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
ro Hosiery Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Segments
0
5
243
48
38
57
2
27
16
7
443
10
8
60
65
60
70
7
61
7
1
349
5
10
23
71
68
13
17
70
6
10
293
1
4
0
33
44
0
16
25
2
0
125
1
5
1
35
26
0
9
18
0
0
95
0
0
0
19
3
0
0
1
0
0
23
0
5
481
65
41
22
7
15
7
2
645
17
37
808
336
280
162
58
217
38
20
1973
* Reflects the fact that many of the facilities surveyed by telephone  could not provide an estimate  of
  their rate of discharge.
Source:  EPA Industry Surveys,  1977 &  1980.

-------
Co
                Manufacturing
                  Segment
            TABLE III-8
DISCHARGE TYPE - MILLS ON MASTER LIST

Total Mills  Mills Reporting   Direct     Indirect     Zero
  Listed     Discharge Type  Dischargers Dischargers Discharge-
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Hosiery Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing

17
37
808#
336
280
162
58
217
38
20
1,973
17
36
309
311
268
161
55
211
37
19
1,424
6
8
26
77
38
7
11
36
5
1
215
10
25
87
226
221
152
42
172
25
14
974
1
3
196
8
9
2
2
3
7
4
235
                *  Includes mills that  recycle wastewater, dispose of wastewater on  land  (spray  irrigation),
                   send waste to a landfill, use septic tanks, place wastewater into nondischarging
                   holding ponds, or have waste hauled from mill  site by a private contractor.

                #  Only 408 of these mills were surveyed.

                Source:  EPA Industry  Surveys, 1977 & 1980.

-------
                                                  FIGURE III-l
                        WASTEWATER TREATMENT STATUS - WET PROCESSING MILLS ON MASTER LIST*
               NO
           TREATMENT
    PRELIMINARY
     TREATMENT
 NUMBER
OF MILLS
   BIOLOGICAL  OR
EQUIVALENT TREATMENT
 ADVANCED
TREATMENT
                    504
ro
         40
Includes neutraliza-
tion,  screening,
equalization,  heat
exchange, disinfec-
tion,  preliminary
sedimentation,
and/or flotation.
                                            289
                                 15
                                                     -500-
                                                       400—
                       —300—
                                                     —200 —
                                                     — 100 —
            Includes aerated  and
            unaerated lagoons,
            biological filtra-
            tion, activated
            sludge,  chemical
            coagulation/floccu-
            lation without
            preceeding biologi-
            cal treatment.
                                                                   148
                                                                               77
                         Includes activated
                         carbon, chemical
                         coagulation  follow-
                         ing biological
                         treatment, ozona-
                         tion,  filtration,
                         ion exchange, mem-
                         brane  processes,
                         etc.
                                                                                           18
       DIRECT      INDIRECT      DIRECT      INDIRECT                 DIRECT      INDIRECT      DIRECT      INDIRECT

    *0f the 1,973 mills on the master list, the figure does not include 808 mills  classified as "Low Water Use
      Processing," 57 mills that could not be contacted, and 16 wet processing mills  for which the treatment
      could not be classified.
      Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.

-------
Direct  dischargers  without  treatment  are  predominantly mills
waiting  to  connect  to  POTWs  presently  in  the   design   or
construction phases.

UNIT MANUFACTURING  (INDUSTRIAL) PROCESSES

The  textile  industry  (SIC  Major  Group  22)  consists  of  an
estimated 6,000 manufacturing facilities.  These  facilities  are
engaged  in  various processing operations which transform fiber,
the industry's basic raw material, into  yarn,  fabric  or  other
finished  textile  products.   Approximately  70  percent  of the
facilities  perform  manufacturing  operations  that  require  no
process  water  and  an  additional  10  percent  use  only small
quantities of process  water.   In  contrast,  the  remaining  20
percent  of  the  facilities  that  scour  wool fibers, clean and
condition other natural and man-made fibers  and  dye  or  finish
various  textile  products  generally require large quantities of
process water.  The  remainder  of  this  section  discusses  the
principal  raw materials utilized by the industry, final products
manufactured  by  the  industry  and  the  processing  operations
required  to  manufacture  those products.  Emphasis is placed on
operations and products requiring  large  quantities  of  process
water.

Raw Materials

A  variety  of  natural  and  man-made  fibers  are  used  in the
manufacture of textiles.  Presently,  wool,  cotton  and  various
man-made fibers (e.g., nylon, polyesters and rayon) are the basic
fibers used.

The  term  "synthetic"  often  is used synonymously with the term
"man-made"  when  referring  to  fiber.   There  is,  however,  a
technical distinction.  As shown in Figure III-2, man-made fibers
consist of two major groups: the synthetic fibers (noncellulosic)
and  the  natural polymers (regenerated) group.  Synthetic fibers
are  usually  synthesized  from  simple  monomers  while  natural
polymer  fibers  are  manufactured  from  naturally occurring raw
materials.  The major portion of the man-made fibers produced are
synthetic fibers, with a  lesser  amount  of  regenerated  fibers
produced.  Because the term "synthetic" commonly is used to refer
to  all  man-made  fibers,  this terminology has been adopted for
this document.

In 1977, wool consumption by the industry (computed on a  scoured
basis)  was  approximately  0.05  billion kilograms (0.11 billion
pounds),  cotton  consumption  was  approximately   1.6   billion
kilograms  (3.5  billion  pounds) and synthetic fiber consumption
was approximately 4.0 billion kilograms (8.8 billion pounds) (9).
Other fibers such as animal hair, silk and glass also are used by
the industry, but consumption is insignificant in  comparison  to
wool,  cotton or synthetic fiber.
                                 30

-------
                                   FIGURE III-2
                  FIBERS  USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF TEXTILES (9,10)
                                      FIBERS
               NATURAL FIBERS
                                     MAN-MADE FIBERS
VEGETABLE
  ORIGIN
 COTTON
 JUTE
ANIMAL
ORIGIN
WOOL
ANIMAL HAIR
SILK
                          MINERAL
                           ORIGIN
ASBESTOS
METALS
GLASS
                                                           1
                                                    NATURAL POLYMERS
                                                      (REGENERATED)
                                                    (CELLULOSIC)
                                  1
                                                             I
                                               RAYON
                                                          CELLULOSE
                                                           ACETATE
                                                           PROTEIN
                                    SYNTHETICS
                                 (NON-CELLULOSIC)
     1
       1
            t
                                                       1
                                                             1
POLYAMIDES
  (NYLON)
                 POLYESTERS
                 POLYACRYLONITRILES
                                        POLYVINYL
                                        DERIVATIVES
                                        MISCELLANEOUS
                                           OTHER

-------
Cotton  and  wool are supplied in staple  (short fiber) form while
the synthetic fibers are supplied as either staple or  continuous
filament.   The  steps  required  to  prepare  these  fibers  for
processing are dependent on fiber type.

Wool  Raw wool, depending on the breed and habitat of  the  sheep
from  which  it  is  obtained/  may contain from 30 to 70 percent
natural and acquired impurities such  as  grease,  soluble  salts
(suint)  and dirt (10).  Thorough scouring of this fiber prior to
spinning and other processing  is  necessary,  and  there  are  a
number of mills in the industry that perform this function only.

Cotton   Consumption  of cotton exceeded  that of any other single
fiber in 1977.  Cotton is a much cleaner  raw fiber than wool  and
initial fiber preparation consists only of dry operations such as
opening, picking, carding, combing and  drawing  to  mechanically
remove  vegetable  matter  and  other impurities and to align the
fibers for spinning.

Synthetics Total synthetic fiber consumption was two and one-half
times greater than cotton  consumption  in  1977.   Noncellulosic
fibers,  including  nylon (polyamides), acrylics, modacrylics and
particularly polyester, are used more extensively than cellulosic
fibers.  Major cellulosic fibers are rayon and cellulose acetate.
Synthetic fibers are much cleaner than cotton fibers, eliminating
the need for the extensive dry fiber preparation  processes  used
with cotton.

Manor Dry oj: Low Water Use Processes

Depending  on  the  primary  fiber  type, a variety of production
processes are used to manufacture the various  products  of  this
industry.   In  general,   the  dry  or  low  water use processing
operations  precede  the  wet  processing   operations   in   the
manufacturing sequence.

Spinning   Spinning  is  the  process by which fiber is converted
into yarn  or  thread.    It  is  performed  after  initial  fiber
preparation and consists of drawing out the fibers, twisting them
into  yarn and winding the newly made yarn onto a bobbin, cone or
other  suitable  holder.    This  process   is   completely   dry.
Texturizing  (modification  of physical and surface properties of
yarn by mechanical or  chemical  means)  also  may  be  performed
during yarn manufacture.

Some  yarn  is  dyed  and  finished  as a final consumer product;
however, most manufactured yarn is used within the  industry  for
tufting, knitting,  weaving or other fabric manufacturing.

Tufting    Mechanical   tufting  is  the  predominant  method  of
manufacturing carpet.   It  is  performed  on  large,  vertically
positioned  needle  punch  machines  (tufting machines) that have
hundreds of needles in a horizontal bank.  Multiple ends of  yarn
                                 32

-------
are  fed   to  the  bank  of  needles  and  the  needles  pull  or  loop the
yarns through a woven  or  nonwoven' backing material,  usually   made
of  polypropylene or   jute.    The backing  moves relative to the
needles to anchor each stitch,  and the  result  is  loops that   form
the  carpet  pile.   If  the   loops  are   cut   during  the tufting
process, the  construction is  known as cut pile rather   than   loop
pile.  Tufting is a  completely  dry operation.

Knitting   Knitting  is a major method  for manufacturing  fabrics.
Nearly all hosiery is  knit, as  well as  large   amounts of  piece
goods,  outerwear and underwear.    Knitting   is accomplished by
interlocking series  of loops  of one or  more  yarns using any  of  a
number  of  popular  stitches  and  is performed  with sophisticated,
high-speed machinery.   Although  knitting is   a   completely  dry
process,   oils  usually  are  applied  to the yarn  to   provide
lubrication  during  stitching.    These  oils   are  removed   in
subsequent wet processing and enter the wastewater stream.

Weaving    Weaving is  the most  common method of producing fabrics
in the textile industry,   and  woven  fabrics   are  used   in  the
manufacture   of   numerous   consumer  and  industrial  products.
Weaving is performed on any of  a  number of types  of  looms which,
generally  speaking,   cause   lengthwise   yarns {warp   yarns)   to
interlace with yarns running  at right angles (filling   yarns)   by
going  over  and  under  the  filling  yarns.   A special type of
shuttleless loom, known as a  water  jet  loom, uses a  jet of   water
to propel  the filling  yarn.   Similarly, an air jet loom,  which is
a new weaving technology,  uses  sequential  pulses  of  air to propel
the filling yarn.  With the exception of,water jet"looms,  weaving
is  a  dry  operation.    However,   to  prevent warp  yarn  breakage
caused by friction during  the  weaving  operation,   a   processing
step known as slashing  usually  is necessary  and a small amount of
wastewater may be generated as  a  result.

Slashing   Slashing  consists  of   coating warp yarns with sizing
compounds to impart tensile   strength   and  smoothness  and   thus
prevent  yarn  rupture.    It  is  performed  by dipping the  yarns
through a box or  trough containing  the  sizing  agent.    This   size
is  dried  on  the  yarn   and remains until  removed  in  subsequent
operations at a finishing mill.   As a   result  of slashing,   the
woven fabric may  contain  add-ons  (sizing  compounds)  equivalent to
as much as 15 percent of  the  weight of the fabric (11).   The most
common   sizing  agents   are  starch,   polyvinyl   alcohol  (PVA),
carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic  acid (PAA).  Starch
traditionally is associated with  the  sizing  of cotton.    Slashing
may generate occasional wastewater  discharges,  usually  because of
spillage and the  cleaning of  slasher  boxes,  rolls  and size makeup
tanks.

Other Fabric Manufacturing

Two  other  general  fabric manufacturing  methods, in addition to
the methods previously  described,  are felted fabric manufacturing
                                 33

-------
and nonwoven fabric manufacturing.  These  manufacturing  methods
do not involve the use of yarn.   Instead, they  involve  the direct
use  of  fiber  to form a web or  continuous sheet of fibers.  The
differences between felts and  nonwovens  are   in  the  types  of
fibers  used  and  in  the methods of bonding the fibers  together
into a fabric.

Traditionally, felt has been made of wool, with manufacture based
on the ability of the scaly structured wool fibers  to  felt,  or
adhere,  together  naturally.   Although  use of wool in  felts is
still common, the use of synthetics (mostly rayon and   polyester)
has  increased  in  recent  years.   Felts are made by  physically
interlocking the  fibers  through a  combination  of   mechanical
action, chemical action, moisture and heat.

Nonwovens,  or  webbed textiles as they are sometimes called, are
used in numerous applications, with more uses being discovered as
the relatively new industry expands.  They  are  made   of  fibers
held  together  by  an  applied bonding agent or by the fusing of
self-bonding  thermoplastic fibers.  This  results  in  a  fabric
structure  built  up  from  a  web  or  continuous mat  of fibers.
Although a number of  methods  are  used  to  form  the web  and
accomplish bonding of the fibers, certain operations are basic to
all  methods  of  nonwoven fabric manufacture.  These include, in
sequence: (1) preparation of the  fiber; (2)  web  formation;  (3)
web bonding; (4) drying; and (5)  finishing techniques.

Web  formation  usually  is  accomplished  by  overlaying several
layers of carded fiber or, in the .case  of  thermal  processing,
randomly  laying  down  filament.   A  less  common method of web
formation, called "wet lay," uses water as a transport  medium for
the fibers.  The fibers, suspended in the  water,  are  deposited
onto  a  screen,  and  a web that is carried from the screen by a
large moving belt is formed.  Once a nonwoven web is  formed,  by
any  method,  bonding  usually  is  achieved  by  roller padding,
dipping or spraying with adhesives such as acrylic  or  polyvinyl
acetate resins.  A less common bonding method, applicable only to
low  melting  point  fibers,  is  to  fuse  the  fibers  together
thermally.

Adhesive Products Processing  Adhesive product processes  include
operations  such  as  bonding,  laminating, coating and flocking.
These  processes  are  similar  in  that  an  adhesive  or  other
continuous  coating  is applied to a fabric or carpet in order to
change the original properties.   These processes  are   completely
dry  or  extremely  low  in  water use, although discharge of the
bonding and adhesive chemicals (often latex compounds)  or coating
materials   (often   polyvinyl    chloride)   may   result    from
overspraying,  spillage,  rinsing  and  equipment cleanup.  Brief
descriptions of the most  prevalent  adhesive  product  processes
follow.
                                 34

-------
Bonding   joins  two  textile  materials   together  permanently  by
application of  a  thin  adhesive   layer.    The  process   enables
different   fabric  constructions,  colors   and  textures   to   be
combined so that performance, appearance  and use  are  extended.
Fabric-to-fabric  bonding  frequently  is  performed using either a
wet adhesive  {often a water based acrylic compound)  or  urethane
foam.  In wet adhesive bonding, the underside of the first  fabric
is  coated  with  adhesive  and  the   second fabric is joined  by
passing both fabrics through rollers.  The adhesive is cured with
heat to effect a permanent bond.  In foam flame bonding, a  layer
of  urethane  foam is passed over a gas flame to make it tacky  on
one side.  The foam and the first fabric  then are joined as they
pass  through  rollers.   The  second  fabric can be joined  to the
other side of the foam layer by repeating the process.

Laminating is similar to  bonding  except that  laminated  goods
generally  consist  of  foam  or  nontextile materials bonded  to
fabrics, or thick layers of foam bonded to two  fabrics.    Carpet
backing,  performed  to  secure  the yarns and impart dimensional
stability, is a specialized laminating process.  It  is  achieved
by bonding a foamed latex or jute backing to the underside  of the
carpet.   Latex  adhesives  typically  are used in both cases.   An
alternative to latex adhesives is the  application of a  hot melt
(thermoplastic) composition.

Fabric coating is an adhesive process  that uses various chemicals
and  synthetic  resins  to form a relatively distinct, continuous
film on a base fabric.   Polyvinyl  chloride  (PVC)  is  the most
common  coating for textile fabrics.   The coatings may be applied
as a 100 percent "active  solids"  system  either  as  plastisols
(dispersions  of  polymer particles in liquid plasticizers) or  as
melts (flexible grade polymer plus plasticizer).   The  plastisols
generally  are  applied by knife over roll coaters;  and the melts
are applied by calenders (rollers).    Although  coatings  of  PVC
plastisols  and  melts  are the most common, other substances and
methods also may be used  for  various  reasons.    One  important
process  is the application of latex coating to tire cord fabric.
The loosely woven tire cord fabric  is  dipped  and  coated  with
latex  so  that  the fabric will bond securely with rubber  during
the manufacture of tires.

Flocking is an adhesive process in  which  short  chopped   fibers
are  applied to an adhesive pattern that  has been "preprinted"  on
a fabric.   In this manner,  design areas can be  produced  on  any
type  of  fabric to resemble embroidery or woven clipped figures.
The process is achieved by spray or electrostatic techniques.

Functional  Finishing   Functional  finishing   refers   to   the
application  of  a large group of chemical treatments that  extend
the  function  of  a  fabric  by  providing  it  with   desirable
properties.    Special  finishes  can  be applied to make a  fabric
wrinkle  resistant,   crease  retentive,  water  repellent,   flame
resistant,  mothproof,  mildew resistant,  bacteriostatic and stain
                                35

-------
resistant.  Although the range of chemicals used   is  broad,  the
wastewater  generated  during  application  usually is relatively
small.  The finishes often are applied to the fabric from a water
solution.  It is possible to apply several finishes from a single
bath.  Application is by means of calenders  that  transport  the
finish from a trough to a roll to the surface of the fabric.  The
finish  then  is dried and cured onto the fabric.  The wastewater
sources are bath dumps and cleanup of  applicator  equipment  and
mix tanks.

Wrinkle  resistance  and  crease  retention (permanent press) are
achieved by treating  the  fabric  with  synthetic  resins.   The
resins  are  adhesive  in nature and are permanently cross-linked
with the fiber molecules.  Durability is achieved by curing  with
heat   and   a   catalyst,   resulting   in   a  reaction  called
polymerization.  The actual physical structure of the  fabric  is
changed  and  the  fabric  is  said to have obtained a "permanent
memory" of its flat,  finished state.

Water  repellency  is  achieved  by  treating  the  fabric   with
silicones and other synthetic materials.  Insoluble soaps and wax
emulsions  have  been  used in the past, but these materials lack
permanency.  If properly applied,  the  silicone  treatments  can
stand  repeated washings or dry cleanings.  In addition to water,
the silicones successfully repel oily fluids.

Flame resistant finishes are applied  to  cellulosic  fabrics  to
prevent   them  from  supporting  combustion.   Phosphorus  is  a
component of most flame  retardants,  as  it  is  theorized  that
oxides   of   phosphorus   combine  with  water  formed  at  high
temperatures to restrict the  production  of  combustible  gases.
Tetrakis  (hydroxymethyl)  phosphonium  chloride  (THPC)  is  the
essential ingredient of many flame retardant formulations.

Mothproofing finishes typically are applied  to  wool  and  other
animal   hair   fibers.    Fabric  made  from  these  fibers  are
impregnated with chemicals that make the fabric unfit as food for
the moth larva.  Chemicals such as  silicofluoride  and  chromium
fluoride are used in the formulations.

The  growth  of  mildew,  mold,  fungus  and  rot is inhibited by
application of biocides that destroy their growth.   Commonly used
compounds contain chlorinated phenols or metallic salts of  zinc,
copper  or  mercury.   Hygienic additives also are used to inhibit
the growth of bacteria.  These additives prevent  odors,  prolong
the life of the fabric and also combat mildew,  mold and fungus.

Soil  release  finishes  make  it  possible to remove stains from
fabrics  by  ordinary  washing.   Most  of   the   finishes   use
organosilicone  compounds  that  are  applied by the pad-dry-cure
process.    Other   soil   release   finishes   in   use   contain
fluorocompounds  or oxazoline derivatives.   Soil release finishes
                                 36

-------
produce  a hydrophilic state  in  the  fabric  and  thus  make polyester
and polyester blend fabrics  less  conducive to  static  collection.

In addition to functional finishing processes,  there  are a  number
of mechanical finishing operations  such as calendering,  embossing
and napping that change the  surface effect of  fabric  by means   of
rollers,  pressure, heat or  similar actions.   These processes  can
be performed before or after the  chemical  treatment  but do   not
result in wastewater.

Major Wet Processes

Most  high  water use textile manufacturing processes  involve  the
conventional finishing of fiber and fabric products.    The most
significant   processes   are  desizing,   scouring,  mercerizing,
bleaching, dyeing and printing.   In the case   of  wool   products,
the  distinct  nature  of  this   fiber often makes  additional  wet
processing necessary prior to conventional  finishing.   Additional
specific  processes  for  wool    include    raw   wool    scouring,
carbonizing and fulling.

Although  the  various wet processes are described  separately,  it
is not uncommon for two or more operations  to occur  sequentially
in a single batch unit or on a continuous  range.  For example,  it
is common for desizing, scouring  and mercerizing operations to be
placed   in  tandem  with the continuous bleaching range  to  finish
cotton more efficiently.  A  variety of wet  finishing   situations
of  this type may occur, depending upon factors such as  processes
used, type and quality of materials and product and original mill
and equipment design.

Raw Wool Scouring  Wool scouring  is the first treatment  performed
on wool and is employed to remove the impurities peculiar to wool
fibers.  These impurities are present  in   great  quantities   and
variety in raw wool and include natural wool grease and  sweat  and
acquired  impurities  such  as  dirt,  feces and vegetable matter.
Disinfectants  and  insecticides  applied   in  sheep   dips    for
therapeutic  purposes  also  may  be present.  Most of the natural
and acquired impurities in  wool  are  removed  in  the  scouring
process.

Two   methods  of  wool  scouring,  solvent  and  detergent,   are
practiced in the U.   S.,  although  detergent  scouring  is  used
almost  exclusively.   In the detergent process, the wool is raked
through a series of 5,700 to 11,400 liter  (1,500 to 3,000 gallon)
scouring bowls known as a "scouring train." Unless the first bowl
is used as a steeping or desuinting bowl,   the  first  two  bowls
contain  varying  concentrations  of  either  soap and alkali, or
nonionic detergents of the ethylene oxide condensate class.     The
soap-alkali   scouring baths are generally at a temperature of  46°
to 54<>C (115° to  130°F>  and  a  pH  of  9.5  to  10.5;  neutral
detergent  baths  normally  have  a  pH -of  6.5  to  7.5  and  a
temperature  of 57° to 71°C (135° to 160°F).  The last  two  bowls
                                37

-------
of   the  scouring  train  are  for  rinsing  and  a  counterflow
arrangement usually is employed using the relatively clean waters
from these bowls in preceding bowls.

Scouring emulsifies the dirt and grease  and  produces  a  brown,
gritty,  turbid  waste  that often is covered with a greasy scum.
It is estimated that for every pound of fibers obtained, one  and
one-half  pounds  of  waste impurities are produced.  Because the
wool  grease  present  in  the  scour  liquor  is   not   readily
biodegradable and is of commercial value, grease recovery usually
is  practiced.   In  the most typical recovery process, the scour
liquor first is piped to a separation tank where settling of grit
and  dirt  occurs.   The  supernatant  from  the  tank  then   is
centrifuged  (one  or  more  stages)  into  high  density, medium
density  and  low  density  streams.   The  high  density  stream
consists  mainly  of  dirt  and grit, and is discharged as waste.
The medium density stream is recycled to the wool scouring train.
The low density stream contains concentrated grease that normally
is refined further to produce lanolin.  Acid cracking,  utilizing
sulfuric  acid  and  heat,  is  an  alternative  method of grease
recovery, but it is not practiced widely at this time.

Carbonizing  Carbonizing removes burrs and other vegetable matter
from loose wool or woven wool goods.  These cellulosic impurities
may be degraded to hydrocellulose,  without  damaging  the  wool,
when  acted  on  by  acids.   It  is  important  to  remove these
impurities from the wool to prevent unequal absorption of dyes.

The  first  operation  in  carbonization  is  acid  impregnation.
Typically,  this  step  consists  of soaking the wool in a 4 to 7
percent solution of sulfuric acid for a period of 2 to  3  hours.
The  excess acid is squeezed out and the wool is baked to oxidize
the cellulosic contaminants to gases and a solid carbon  residue.
The   charred  material,  primarily  hydrocellulose,  is  crushed
between pressure  rollers  so  that  it  may  be  shaken  out  by
mechanical  agitation.   Some  solid waste is generated but, with
the exception of an occasional dump of contaminated acid bath, no
liquid waste results.   However, after the residue has been shaken
out,  the acid must be removed.  This is achieved  by  preliminary
rinsing  to  remove  most  of the acid followed by neutralization
with sodium carbonate solution.  A final rinse is used to  remove
residual alkali.  As a result, the overall water requirements for
the carbonization of wool are substantial.

Fulling   Fulling  gives  woven woolen cloth a thick, compact and
substantial feel, finish and appearance.  To accomplish  it,  the
cloth  is mechanically worked in fulling machines in the presence
of heat, moisture and sometimes pressure.  This allows the fibers
to felt together, which causes shrinkage,  increases  the  weight
and obscures the woven threads of the cloth.

There  are  two  common  methods of fulling, alkali and acid.  In
alkali fulling, soap or detergent provides the needed lubrication
                                 38

-------
and moisture for proper  felting  action.   The   soap   or   detergent
usually   is  mixed with  sodium carbonate  and  a sequestering  agent
in a concentrated solution.   In  acid  fulling,  which  can   be   used
to  prevent  bleeding  of   color, an  aqueous  solution of sulfuric
acid, hydrogen peroxide  and a small amount  of  a metallic catalyst
(chromium, copper or cobalt)  is  used.

The first step in both methods is to  impregnate the  fabric in the
fulling machines with heated fulling  solution.   If   acid fulling
is  performed,  it  is   followed by  alkali fulling.  No waste is
produced during this step because all of  the  solution is absorbed
by the cloth.  At this point, 10 to   25   percent of  the fabric
weight   may   be   process   chemicals   such   as  soap,  alkali,
sequesterant and carding oil.  Fulling is followed   by   extensive
washing  to  remove  process  chemicals and prevent  rancidity and
wool spoilage.  The usual washing procedure   is to  subject   the
fulled cloth to two soapings, two warm rinses  and one cold rinse.
The  first soaping usually  is achieved by agitation  of the fabric
in the soapy solution created by the  fulling soap already on   the
cloth.   After a warm rinse, the cloth usually  is soaped a second
time in a stationary bath with a two  percent solution of soap  or
synthetic  detergent.   This  step  is  followed by  a second  warm
rinse at 40°C (105°F) and a cold rinse to cool  the cloth.

Desizinq  Desizing removes  the sizing compounds applied   to   yarn
in  the slashing operation  and is usually the  first  wet  finishing
operation performed on woven fabric.  It  consists of solubilizing
the size with mineral acid or  enzymes  (starch size  only)   and
thoroughly  washing the fabric.  Acid desizing  uses  a solution of
dilute sulfuric acid to hydrolyze the starch' and render  it  water
soluble.   Enzyme  desizing  uses  vegetable or animal enzymes to
decompose starches to a water soluble form.  In either case,   the
desizing  agent  normally is applied  to the fabric by roller  pad.
After the desizing solution  has  been  applied,  the  goods   are
soaked  or  steeped  in storage bins, steamers  or J-boxes.  After
the size has been solubilized, the solution is  discarded and   the
fabric is washed and rinsed.  For desizing of PVA and CMC, sizing
materials that are directly soluble in water, no decomposition is
required and the goods are washed only with water.

Scouring   Scouring  is  employed  to remove natural and acquired
impurities from fibers and fabric.   The nature   of  the   scouring
operation  depends on the fiber type.  Raw wool  scouring  has  been
discussed separately because  of  its  uniqueness  among  textile
processes.   Synthetic  fiber scouring is milder than scouring  of
cotton fiber because of the smaller amount of impurities  present.

Cotton fabric contains natural impurities such   as  wax,  pectins
and alcohols,  as well as processing impurities  such as size,   dirt
and  oil.    These  substances  are removed from  the fabric by  hot
alkaline detergents or soap  solutions.    Also,  cotton   scouring
makes  the  fibers  whiter  and  more  absorbent  for  subsequent
bleaching and dyeing.    Scouring  of  cotton  often  is   done   in
                                 39

-------
conjunction  with  desizing  rather  than  as  a totally separate
operation and usually is accomplished  by  either  kier  or  open
width boiling.

In  kier  boiling,  desized  cotton fabric in rope form is loaded
into a large cylindrical pressure vessel.  An aqueous solution of
sodium hydroxide, soap and sodium silicate, or a similar mixture,
is recirculated through the goods at  temperatures  up  to   104°C
(220°F),  pH  values  of  10 to 13, and pressures of 0.70 to 1.41
kg/sq cm (10 to 20 psig) for 6 to 12 hours.  The fabric  then  is
cooled and rinsed in the kier.  Goods processed in the open width
normally  are scoured in open width boil-out machines, also known
as progressive jigs.  The goods are fed continuously through  the
scouring  solution  by  the  use of transfer rolls, and after the
required  contact  period,  are  unrolled  through  wash   boxes.
Methods of scouring and dumping the scour waste vary from mill to
mill,  but  at  all mills the cloth is rinsed completely to clean
the fibers and remove residual alkali.   Either  light  or  heavy
scouring  of wool goods may be performed during wool finishing to
remove acquired impurities.

Special Scouring  The manufacture of  synthetic  fibers  is  well
controlled  and  the  fibers  are  relatively free of impurities.
Consequently, only light scouring and little or no  bleaching  is
required  prior to dyeing.  Sizes and lubricating oils applied to
synthetics usually are removed  in  a  special  scouring  process
rather  than  in  a  separate desizing step.  Scour baths usually
contain weak alkalis,  antistatic  agents,  lubricants,  soap  or
detergents,  and  special  scouring  agents  such  as ethoxylated
phenols  and  other  emulsifiers.   Optical  brighteners,   which
function  in  a  capacity similar to dyes, often are applied to a
fabric  during  the  special  scouring  process.    The   optical
brighteners  function  to  absorb  ultraviolet  rays  and reflect
certain  wavelengths  of  visible  light,  which  in   turn   add
brightness to the color of the fabric.

Although acetate fibers may be scoured and dyed in one bath, most
synthetics  are  scoured  independently  of the dyeing operation.
Rope soapers, jig scours, beck scours, drum or paddle  scours  or
beam dyeing equipment may be used.  After scouring, the goods are
rinsed to remove excess material in preparation for the dye bath.

Mercerizing    Mercerization   increases  the  tensile  strength,
luster, sheen, dye affinity and  abrasion  resistance  of  cotton
goods.   It may be performed on yarn or greige goods, but usually
is conducted  after  fabric  scouring.   It  is  accomplished  by
impregnating  the  fabric with cold sodium hydroxide solution (15
to 30 percent by volume).  The solution causes  swelling  of  the
cotton  (cellulose)  fibers  as  the  alkali is absorbed.  Higher
concentrations, longer residence  times  and  lower  temperatures
favor  greater  swelling.   When  increased tensile strength is a
primary consideration, the  fabric  is  mercerized  on  a  tenter
frame.   After  the  desired  period  of  contact, the caustic is
                                40

-------
washed off thoroughly, sometimes with the aid of an   intermediate
acid  wash.   In many mills, the sodium hydroxide  is  reclaimed  in
caustic recovery units and concentrated for reuse  in  scouring   or
mercerization.  It  is estimated that less than half of all  cotton
fabrics  are  mercerized  and, with the increasing use of cotton-
polyester blends, less mercerization is likely in  the future.

Bleaching  Bleaching is a common finishing process used to  whiten
cotton, wool and some synthetic fibers.  In addition  to  removing
color,  bleaching can dissolve sizing, natural pectins, waxes and
small particles of  foreign  matter.   It  usually  is  performed
immediately  after  scouring or mercerizing and prior  to dyeing  or
printing.  Bins, jigs or continuous equipment  may  be  employed.
Bleaching  is  accomplished  primarily  with  hydrogen  peroxide,
although hypochlorite, peracetic acid, chlorine  dioxide,   sodium
perborate or even reducing agents may be used.

Most  cotton  fabrics are bleached on continuous bleaching  ranges
directly after scouring.  The fabric, fed in either rope or  open
width  form,  first is washed with hot water to ensure removal  of
all contaminants.   As the goods leave the washer, excess water  is
removed and sodium  hydroxide  is  added.   The  saturated   fabric
remains at about 80° to 82°C (175° to 180°F) for approximately  40
to  60  minutes, resulting in the conversion of fats  and waxes  to
soaps.  The material then is rinsed with  hot  water  and  passed
through  a  peroxide  solution  containing  hydrogen  peroxide and
sodium silicate.  At this point, the cotton is bleached out at  a
temperature  of  90°C  (195°F) for approximately 40 to 60 minutes
before the final hot water rinse.   A second stage  of  bleaching,
sometimes with sodium hypochlorite, may be used in some mills.

In  sodium  hypochlorite  bleaching, whether batch or continuous,
the cloth is rinsed, scoured with a weak solution of  sulfuric   or
hydrochloric  acid  and  rinsed  again.  The cloth then is passed
through a solution of sodium hypochlorite and allowed to  bleach
out  in  bins  (batch)  or  J-boxes (continuous) for  a designated
period of time.   A final rinse then is performed.

Bleaching methods for synthetic fabrics  depend  on   fiber  type.
Because  there  is  less  coloring  matter  to remove, cellulosic
fibers (rayon and acetate) are bleached using methods similar to,
but  less  extensive  than,   those  used  in  bleaching   cotton.
Noncellulosic  fibers  (polyesters, acrylics, nylons) usually are
not bleached unless  blended  with  natural  fibers   (principally
cotton  and  wool).    When  bleaching  is performed,  various weak
acids may be used.

Wool top or fabric may be bleached if white or very light colored
fabric is required.   Hydrogen  or  sodium  peroxide,  or  optical
brighteners  composed  of  various organic compounds  may be used.
Control of pH is important in  peroxide  bleaching  of  wool  and
usually  is  achieved  by  mixing  hydrogen  peroxide with sodium
silicate or sodium peroxide with acid.   Optical  brighteners  are
                                41

-------
useful in combination with peroxide bleaching agents to help give
wool  a good white base for subsequent dyeing.  Solvent bleaching
systems and pressure steamers for reduction of residence time  in
continuous  bleaching  are  two  developments that may change the
character of bleaching operations in the future.

Dyeing  Dyeing is the most complex  of  all  the  wet  processing
operations.  It is performed essentially for aesthetic reasons in
that  it  does  not contribute to the basic structural integrity,
wearability  or  durability  of  the  final  product.   It  does,
however,  play  a  major  role  in  the  marketability of textile
products.

The function of dyeing is to anchor dyestuff molecules to textile
fibers.  The color observed  is  a  result  of  the  light  waves
absorbed  and reflected by the dyestuffs.  The methods of dyeing,
the types of dyestuffs and auxiliary chemicals used in dyeing and
the types of equipment available and in use for  the  application
of dyes are discussed below.

The  mechanisms  of  dyeing  textile  fibers can be summarized as
follows (10):

1.    Migration of the dye from the  solution  to  the  interface,
accompanied by adsorption on the surface of the fiber.
2.   Diffusion of the dye from the surface towards the center
the fiber.
                                               of
3.   Anchoring of the  dye  molecules  by  covalent  or  hydrogen
bonds, or other physical forces.

Dye/fiber  interfacing  is  a  function  of the type of equipment
utilized, while the specific dye formulas  provide  the  chemical
conditions  for  bonding  to take place.  Dyeing can be performed
while the goods (fiber) are in  the  stock,  top  (wool  or  wool
blends),  yarn  or  fabric state.  Both single and multiple fiber
goods can be dyed, although multiple  fiber  dyeing  may  require
multiple steps.
Stock  dyeing is
the top or yarn
placing  stock
sufficient quant
allowing  time
to produce fancy
fibers used for
 performed before the fiber has been converted to
state.   In simplest terms, the  process  involves
fiber  in  a  vat  or pressure kettle, applying a
ity of  dye liquor, providing optimum  conditions,
for the chemical reaction and rinsing.  Wool used
 goods  and a small amount of cotton or  synthetic
flocking are dyed in this manner.
Top  dyeing is performed on sliver or slubbing that is wound into
a cylindrical shape approximately 46 cm  (18  in.)  in  diameter.
The  top  has  been  carded  and  combed  but not spun into yarn.
Dyeing is accomplished by placing the top int cans,  placing  the
cans  in  a  dye  .vat,  circulating  the  dye liquor and allowing

-------
sufficient time for reaction.  Fibers
usually are dyed  in this manner.
used  for  worsted  fabric
Yarn  dyeing is performed on yarns that are used for woven goods,
knit goods  and  carpets.   The  traditional  methods  are  skein
(hank),  package  and space dyeing.  Skein dyeing  is accomplished
by placing turns of yarn on a frame, placing the frame in  a  dye
bath  in  which either the frame or the dye liquor  is circulated,
providing optimum conditions,  allowing  time  for  reaction  and
rinsing.   Package  dyeing is the most common yarn  dyeing process
and is accomplished by placing yarn wound onto  perforated  tubes
on a frame, placing the frame into a pressure vessel, circulating
dye  liquor  in  and  out  of  the  cones  and yarn under optimum
conditions and rinsing.  Warp yarns  wound  on  large  perforated
beams  also are dyed using the package method.  The beams of dyed
yarn can be used directly in weaving.

Package dyeing is favored over skein dyeing because skein-reeling
is a comparatively  expensive  process,  more  working  space   is
required  and  the  skein-dyed  yarn must be wound onto a bobbin,
cone or spool at a later stage.

Space dyeing is a specialty yarn dyeing process.   The  technique
resembles  the  roller  printing process discussed below, in that
the dye liquor is applied to warp yarns at  a  repeat  or  random
interval  by  a roller type dye pad.  The dyed yarn then enters a
hot water steam box for development and fixation of the color and
finally is rinsed.   Two or more dyes can be padded.  The  process
is especially important to the manufacture of tufted carpet.

Fabric  dyeing is the most common dyeing method in use today.    It
is preferred over yarn dyeing  because  it  is  a  continuous  or
semicontinuous  process  and  because  a  mill  does  not have to
process large lots to be cost effective.    The  methods  employed
include beck (winch),  jet,  jig and continuous range.

Beck  dyeing  is  accomplished  with the fabric in the rope form.
Both atmospheric and pressure machines are used.  In either case,
the fabric, connected end to end, is rotated through  dye  liquor
by  passing  over a large rotating drum.   Twelve or more loops of
fabric can be dyed side by side,  being  kept  apart  by  dividing
fingers.   The length of each loop is such that the fabric lies in
a  heap  at  the bottom of the beck for a short time.   The proper
conditions and residence time must be provided as  in  the  other
previously described methods.

Jet  dyeing  also  is  accomplished with the fabric in rope form.
Jet machines are similar to the pressure becks except  that  each
loop  of fabric passes through a venturi  tube.   A pump circulates
the dye liquor through the tubes and the suction at  the  venturi
causes  the  fabric  to  rotate.    Jet  machines have improved on
certain deficiencies of beck dyeing  by allowing shorter  liquor-
to-fabric  ratios  (less  dye  liquor per unit weight of fabric),
                                43

-------
reducing  the  risk  of  tangling,  providing  a   more   uniform
temperature,  reducing elongation of the fabric caused by tension
and lessening the formation of creases in synthetic fabrics.  Jet
dyeing is especially suitable to synthetic fibers.

Jig dyeing  is performed with the fabric in the open width.   Both
atmospheric  and  pressure  equipment  are  available.  Dyeing is
accomplished by slowly winding the fabric over rollers that stand
above a shallow trough containing the dye liquors.  The  rollers,
by   rotating   in   clockwise  and  counterclockwise  directions
alternately, move the cloth  through  the  dye  liquor,  complete
immersion  being  insured  by  guide rollers at the bottom of the
trough.  Because only a few meters of the fabric are immersed  at
a  time,  it is possible to work with an exceedingly short liquor
ratio (low dye liquor volume per unit  weight  of  fabric).   Jig
dyeing  is  particularly attractive for cellulosic fibers because
the dyes used generally do not exhaust well and less dyestuff  is
wasted.

Continuous  dyeing  also is performed with the fabric in the open
width.  It is accomplished under atmospheric conditions  on  what
are  termed  "continuous  dyeing ranges."  These ranges generally
consist of a number of dip troughs through which  the  fabric  is
dyed  and oxidized, rinse boxes that remove excess dye liquor and
heated rotating drying cans.

Thermosol  dyeing  is  a  continuous  process  used  for   dyeing
polyester,  and  polyester/cotton blends.  Dye is padded onto the
fabric in the pigment form from a pad box and  dried,  causing  a
film  containing  the dye to adhere to the surface of the fibers.
The fabric then is heated to 180° to 220°C (355° to 430<>F) for  a
period  of  30 to 60 seconds to set the dye.   The transfer of dye
from the surface deposit to the polyester is  through  the  vapor
phase.
Dyes  are  classified according to their
on the basis of their dyeing properties,
between the two systems.  Classification
is   most   relevant  and  is  discussed
according to chemical constitution  is
reader  is referred to the Colour Index,
the Society of Dyers and Colourists and
of Textile Chemists and Colorists for a
subject.
 chemical constitution or
 with little  correlation
 according to application
  below.    Classification
not  discussed,  but  the
 Volume III, published by
the American  Association
thorough  coverage of this
The following tabulation provides the classification name and the
principal  fiber  types for which the dye classes are used, based
on the application classification.
                                44

-------
Dye Class
Applicable Fiber Types
Acid
Azoic  (Naphthal)
Basic  (Cationic)
Direct
Disperse
Mordant  (Chrome)
Premetallized
Reactive
Sulfur
Vat
     Protein, polyamide (nylon)
     Cellulosic
     Acrylic, silk,  protein, cellulos.ic if mordanted
     Cellulosic
     Cellulosic, acetate,  synthetics (man-made)
     Protein, cellulosic
     Protein
     Cellulosic, protein,  silk
     Cellulosic
     Cellulosic, protein,  silk
     Acid Dyes  -   These  dyes  are  sodium  salts,  usually  of
sulfonic  acids,  but  in  a  few  cases  carboxylic acids.  They
invariably are manufactured as sodium  salts  because  free  acid
dyes  are  more  difficult  to  isolate and they are hygroscopic,
which makes them difficult to pack and store.  Acid dyes  have  a
direct affinity for protein fibers and are the main class of dyes
used  in  wool dyeing.  Most will not exhaust on cellulosic fiber
but, because acid dyes  resemble  the  direct  dyes  in  chemical
constitution,  there  are a number that dye cellulose quite well.
The dyes also have an affinity for polyamide fibers.

There  are  many  ways  in  which  the  acid  dyes  are  applied.
Primarily,  the variations create conditions suitable to the type
of dye used.  In addition to the dyes,  the  following  auxiliary
chemicals may be required for satisfactory dyeing:

sodium sulfate (Glauber's salt)
sulfuric acid
formic acid
acetic acid
ammonium acetate
ammonium sulfate
ammonium phosphate
leveling agents

     Azoic  Dyes   -   These dyes are insoluble pigments anchored
within the fiber by padding with a soluble coupling compound  and
then  treating  with  a diazotized base or stabilized color salt.
Because naphthol is used as the coupling  component,  azoic  dyes
are  also referred to as naphthol dyes.   They are used for dyeing
cellulosic fibers when  comparatively
brightness  of shade are required at a reasonable cost.
especially satisfactory in the yellow, orange and  red
They  have  been  applied  to  protein
                                        fibers,
                                     fastness  and
                                          They are
                                         spectrum.
                                  but equally good
results can be obtained with acid dyes by simpler methods.

Dyeing  with  azoic  dyes  is  a  two-stage   process   involving
impregnating  the  fiber  with  an  azoic  coupling component and
coupling with a diazonium  salt.   There  are  over  50  coupling
components  listed  in  the Color Index (C.I.), and over 50 bases
that can be diazotized and coupled  with  the  former  (10).   In
addition  to  the  coupling  component  and base, common salt and

-------
surface-active compounds  (sulfated  fatty  alcohol  or  ethylene
oxide condensate) are usually used to speed the reaction.

     Basic  Dyes   -   These  dyes  are usually hydrochlorides of
salts or organic  bases.   The  chromophores  are  found  in  the
cation;  therefore,  these dyes often are referred to as cationic
dyes.  Because of poor fastness to light,  these  dyes  virtually
had been discontinued until it was discovered that they would dye
acrylic  fibers  and  give  bright,  clear  shades of color which
possess good light fastness.  Cellulbsic  fibers  have,  for  all
practical  purposes, no affinity for basic dyes.  The dyes can be
applied to cellulose if the fibers are mordanted  before  dyeing;
however,  these  dyes  are  rarely  applied  to cotton in current
practice.  In the case of protein  fiber,  there  is  substantial
evidence that the affinity is of a chemical nature.

There  are  several  methods  of  applying  basic dyes to acrylic
fibers and many dyes that are suitable.  In addition to the  dye,
the   following   auxiliary   chemicals   may  be  necessary  for
satisfactory dyeing:

acetic acid
formic acid
oxalic acid
tannic acid
sodium sulfate
sodium acetate ,
ethylene carbonate

     Direct Dyes  -  These dyes resemble acid dyes in  that  they
are  sodium salts of sulfonic acids and are almost invariably azo
compounds.   They have a direct affinity  for  cellulosic  fibers.
These dyes frequently are referred to as substantiative dyes and,
in  special  circumstances,   they are used to dye protein fibers.
The distinction between acid and direct dyes is  often  not  well
defined.   For  example,  C.I.  Direct Dye 37 may be applied as a
direct dye to cellulose or as an acid dye to protein fibers.  The
dyes offer a rather wide range of  color;  however,  their  water
fastness and light fastness vary depending on shade.

The  direct  dyes  are  divided into three classes; self-leveling
(Class  A),  salt  controllable  (Class   B),   and   temperature
controllable  (Class C).  Depending on the class of the dye used,
one or more of the following auxiliary chemicals may be necessary
for satisfactory dyeing:

sodium chloride
sequestering agents
sodium sulfate
sodium nitrite
hydrochloric acid
aromatic amines
                                 46

-------
     Disperse Dyes  -   this  class  of  dyes  arose  out  of   the  need
to  find  an  easy and  satisfactory way  to dye cellulose acetate.
These dyes are suspensions of  finely   divided  organic   compounds
with very slight aqueous solubility.   Hydrophobic  fibers,  such  as
secondary or tertiary cellulose acetate, and the synthetic fibers
often  will  dye  better  with insoluble dyes than those that are
dissolved in water.

There are numerous disperse  dyes but  no  sharp dividing   lines  to
group  them  into  separate  classifications  according   to their
dyeing behavior.  In addition  to the  dyes,  one   or  more  of the
following  auxiliary  chemicals may be necessary for satisfactory
dyeing:

acetic acid
dispersing agents
orthophenylphenol
butyl benzoate carriers
chlorobenzene
diethyl phthalate
other carriers

     Mordant Dyes  -  This class of dyes   includes  many  natural
and  synthetic  dyes,   the   latter  usually  being  obtained from
anthracene.  These dyes have  no  natural   affinity  for  textile
fibers, but are applied to cellulosic  or protein fibers  that have
been  mordanted  with  a metallic oxide.  Because  chromium is the
most commonly used mordant, these dyes often are referred   to  as
chrome  dyes.   At  one  time,  there  were a number of  naturally
occurring mordant  dyes  in  use,  but  acid  mordant  dyes   have
replaced  these.   The  acid  mordant  dyes are applied to  wool  or
polyamide fibers as if they were acid  dyes  and,  by  subsequent
mordanting, are given good water fastness.

The  mordant  dyes usually are applied in a boiling  acid dye bath
and, when  exhaustion   is  complete,   an  appropriate  amount  of
dichromate  is  added  and  the  bath  boiled for an  additional  30
minutes.    The  following  auxiliary   chemicals    are    generally
necessary to achieve satisfactory results:

acetic acid
sodium sulfate (Glauber's salt)
penetrating agents
sulfuric or formic acid
potassium or sodium dichromate
ammonium sulfate

     Premetallized  Dyes   -   These  dyes were  developed  so wool
could be dyed directly without the  need  for  mordanting   in   an
after-treatment  step.    They are classified as  1:1 and  2:1  metal
complex dyes depending on the number of dye molecules present for
each metallic atom.   Premetallized dyes  are  quicker  to  apply,
easier to match,  and for some colors,  brighter than mordant  dyes.
                                 47

-------
The  premetallized  dyes  are applied like acid mordant dyes in a
boiling acid dye bath.  In addition to the  dyes,  the  following
auxiliary   chemicals   are  necessary  to  achieve  satisfactory
results:

sulfuric acid
sodium sulfate
leveling agent

     Reactive Dyes  - These are  the  latest  dyestuff  discovery
and,  because  they react chemically with cotton, viscose, linen,
wool and silk, they possess very good water fastness.   They  can
be  dyed  by  many  methods and adapt well to the requirements of
continuous dyeing.  The whole spectrum of color  can  be  applied
with these dyes.

There  are  several classes of reactive dyes that are specific to
the fibers being processed.  In addition to the dyes, one or more
of  the  following  auxiliary  chemicals  may  be  necessary  for
satisfactory dyeing:

sodium chloride
urea
sodium carbonate
sodium hydroxide
trisodium phosphate
tetrasodium pyrophosphate
     Sulfur  Dyes
These
      _____  ____              dyes are complex organic compounds
that contain sulfur linkages within the molecules.   Sulfur  dyes
usually  are  insoluble  in  water, but dissolve in a solution of
sodium sulfide to which  sodium  carbonate  may  be  added.   The
sodium  sulfide  acts  as  a reducing agent, severing the sulfide
linkage and breaking down the molecules into  simpler  components
that  are soluble in water and have an affinity toward cellulose.
The soluble components then are oxidized  in  the  fiber  to  the
original  insoluble  sulfur  dyes.   These  dyes  have  excellent
resistance to washing, but poor resistance to  sunlight.   Sulfur
dyes  will  dye  cotton,  linen and rayon, but the colors are not
very bright.

In the reduced state, the dyeing properties of  the  sulfur  dyes
resemble  those of the direct dyes.  These dyes exhaust better in
the presence of electrolytes and vary considerably with regard to
the temperatures at which maximum exhaustion takes place.  Sulfur
dyes are decomposed by acids,  usually  with  the  liberation  of
hydrogen  sulfide,  and when exposed to air or acted upon by mild
oxidizing agents, some of the  sulfur  is  oxidized  to  sulfuric
acid.   In  addition  to  the  dyes, one or more of the following
auxiliary chemicals may be necessary for satisfactory dyeing:

sodium sulfide
sodium carbonate
                                48

-------
 sodium dichromate
 acetic or  alternative  acids
 hydrogen peroxide
 sodium chloride
 sodium sulfate
 copper sulfate

     Vat Dyes  -  These are  the  best   known   dyes   in   use   today
 because of all-around  fastness to  both washing  and  sunlight.   Vat
 dyes  are  among  the  oldest  natural  coloring matters  used  for
 textiles.  These dyes  are  insoluble in water  and cannot  be  used
 without  modification.   When  treated  with  reducing  agents,  vat
 dyes are converted  into leuco  (combining)  compounds, all  of  which
 are soluble  in water   in   the  presence  of   alkali.    The   leuco
 compounds  have  an  affinity  for cellulose  and reoxidize to  the
 insoluble  colored pigment  within the.fiber when exposed  to  air.
 Vat dyes are made from indigo, anthraquinone  and carbazol and  are
 successfully  used  on  cotton,  linen,  rayon,  wool,  silk   and
 sometimes  nylon.  These dyes also  are  used  in  the   continuous
 piece   goods   dyeing  process,   sometimes   called the  pigment
 application process.   In this method,  the dyes  are  reduced   after
 they have  been introduced  into the fabric.

 Each  vat  dye  has  its   own  optimum  temperature and  specific
 proportions of  alkali  and  reducing  agents   for  vatting.    In
 practice,  however,  it  is  practical to classify  them into four
 groups, based on method of application:

 Method 1  - Dyes requiring  relatively high alkali concentration
           and high vatting and  dyeing temperatures.

 Method 2 - Dyes requiring  moderate alkali concentrations, lower
           temperatures for reducing and dyeing, and some
           electrolyte to  complete exhaustion.

 Method 3 - Dyes requiring  low alkali concentration, low vatting
           and dyeing temperatures and large quantities of
           electrolyte.

 Method 4 - A special case  for dyeing blacks requiring
           exceptionally high alkali concentration  and
           temperature but no electrolyte.

 In addition to the dyes,  one or more of the  following  auxiliary
 chemicals may be necessary for satisfactory dyeing:

 sodium hydroxide
sodium hydrosulfite
dispersing agents
hydrogen peroxide
acetic acid
sodium perborate
sodium chloride

-------
Printing   Printing, like dyeing, is a process for applying color
to fabric.  However, the color application techniques  are  quite
different.   Instead  of  coloring  the whole cloth as in dyeing,
print color is applied only to specific areas  of  the  cloth  to
achieve  a  planned  design.   Consequently,  printing  often  is
referred to as localized dyeing.

Most of the textiles wet-printed in the U.S. are printed  by  the
roller  machine  method  and  a  smaller proportion by the screen
method.  Highly advanced electronically-controlled spray printing
techniques are beginning to emerge, especially in the printing of
carpet.

Roller printing  is  accomplished  by  transferring  the  desired
design  onto copper rollers; applying print paste from reservoirs
to rotating rollers that contact  a  main  cylinder  roller  that
transports  the  fabric; transferring the design to the fabric by
contacting  the  rollers  and  fabric;  and  steaming,  aging  or
performing other after-printing operations.

The  design  can be transferred to the rollers by hand engraving,
photo engraving or chemical etching.  The latter two methods  are
used  most  today.   The  copper rollers, as many as 16 per print
machine, may have a circumference of from 35 to 91 cm (14  to  36
in.),  and  a  length of from 117 to 152 cm (46 to 60 in.).  They
are hollow, and steel mandrils are pressed into  the  hollows  to
hold  the  rollers  in  position  and to turn them at the desired
speed.  The rollers generally are coated with  a  thin  layer  of
chromium  to  prevent  damage  to  the engraving during handling.
Each roller imprints one repeat of the design with color supplied
from the color trough.  As  the  roller  spins,  a  doctor  knife
continuously  scrapes  the  extraneous  color  back  to the color
trough.  A different design and color can be transferred for each
roller.  Generally, only one side of the fabric is printed.

Final washing of the fabric removes excess print paste and leaves
a uniformly smooth effect.  This process, along with the  cleanup
of  print  paste  mixing tanks,  applicator equipment (troughs and
rollers) and belts, contributes the pollutant loading  associated
with the printing process.

Screen  printing  differs  from roller printing in that the print
paste is transferred forceably to the fabric through the openings
in specially  designed  screens.   The  process  can  be  manual,
semiautomatic or completely automatic.  Automatic screen printing
can  be either flat bed or rotary, while manual and semiautomatic
screen printing are flat bed processes only.

Screens  are  made  by  manually  (sketching   or   tracing)   or
photographically   transferring   the  desired  design.   If  the
transfer is performed manually,  the area outside  the  design  is
opaqued   so   that   print  paste  will  be  retained.   In  the
photographic transfer technique, which is the method most  widely
                                 50

-------
used   in   current practice,  the  negative  is  used  for  the  opaquing
process,  using a  specially   sensitized   coating.   The   screens,
which  are largely made of synthetic materials  today,  are  securely
stretched  over   a  wooden   frame  so   they   can  be  correctly
positioned.  A separate screen is made  for  each   color   in   the
design.

In  manual  screen  printing,  the fabric  is  stretched out on  long
tables, the screens representing the pattern laid on  it according
to the repeat  pattern,  and   the  selected  print  paste  forced
through the screen mesh onto  the fabric by squeegee.   The fabric
is  dried by placing it on a  rack above the  table,  steamed to set
the color, followed by other  finishing  treatments  for   fineness
and texture.

The semiautomatic process is  similar to the  manual  process except
that   the fabric travels and  the screens  representing the pattern
are stationary.  The handling of the screens and the  application
of the color still are performed manually.

Automatic flat  bed screen printing is accomplished  on a machine
that electronically  performs and  controls  each  step   of   the
operation.   It is a continuous  process in which the  fabric moves
along  a   table,  the  screens   representing   the    design    are
automatically positioned and  the color automatically  is deposited
and  squeegeed  through  the   screen onto the  fabric.  The fabric
moves  forward one frame between  each application of color and as
it leaves the last frame, it  passes into a drying box, from which
it emerges dry and ready for  aging (curing).

Rotary  screen  printing  combines some of the  advantages of  both
roller printing and screen printing.  Instead   of   flat   screens,
the  color is transferred to  the fabric through lightweight metal
foil screens that resemble the cylinder  rollers  of  the roller
printing  process.   The desired  design is transferred to  the  foil
screens in much the same way  as  for the flat screens.  The fabric
moves continuously under the  cylinder screens and print paste is
forced,   under  pressure,  from  the inside of the screens through
and onto  the fabric.   A separate  screen  is  required  for   each
color  in  the design.

Rotary  screen  printing  is  faster  than   flat bed printing  and
approaches the production speed  of  roller   printing.   The   down
time   (out  of  production  time)  during  pattern  changeover is
somewhat  less than for roller printing.  As  with roller printing,
wastewater is generated primarily from the final cleaning  of   the
fabric, cleanup of applicator equipment and  cleaning of belts.

Another   type  of  printing   that  is in use today  is sublistatic
(heat transfer)  printing.   This method employs a prepared pattern
paper from which a design can be transferred to nearly any fabric
by a simple hot transfer  or  calendering  operation.   The  main
advantages  of  the  sublistatic process are ease of application,
                                 51

-------
clarity of reproduction, flexibility in design choice and a  wide
range  of  design sizes.  After printing, no subsequent treatment
such as washing or steaming is required and  there  is  no  print
paste  to  clean  from equipment.  Consequently, the process does
not generate wastewater.

The auxiliary chemicals used in printing each of  the  dye  types
are  included  in the lists provided in the discussion of dyeing.
In addition, a thickener is used to  give  the  print  paste  the
desired  viscosity  for  the  method  employed  and  the  pattern
desired.  The thickeners commonly used  are  locust  bean,  guar,
alginate,  starch and combinations of these gums.  Urea, thiourea
and glycols also are used in many print formulations.

In printing with pigments, which do not react chemically with the
fiber as do some dyes, the same general formula is "used  for  all
fiber  types.   The  formula includes the pigment, resin, binder,
latex,  emulsifier, varsol (solvent), thickener and water.

FINAL PRODUCTS

It has been noted earlier in this section that the  textile  mill
products   group  (SIC  Major  Group  22)  includes  30  separate
industries that manufacture approximately 90 classes of products.
Throughout  the  90  product  classes,   there  are  hundreds   of
individual  products  and  the number is changing constantly as a
result of ongoing research, development and marketing.   Many  of
the  industries and product classes do not include wet operations
in their manufacturing processes and, consequently,   are  not  of
specific  interest  here.   Nine  major  subcategories  have been
established to  represent  the  wet  processing  segment  of  the
industry  in  the  development of effluent limitations guidelines
and standards for this industry.  Two of the nine  major  classes
(woven  fabric  and  knit  fabric)  have  been further subdivided
resulting in thirteen  separate  subcategories  or  subdivisions.
(See   Section   IV  for  explanation  of  the  subcategorization
developed     for      the      textile      industry).       The
subcategories/subdivisions  represent  13  processing  classes in
which the products are composed of characteristic  raw  materials
and  in  which  the  production  is  the  result of similar manu-
facturing  operations.   A  description  of  each   major   class
(subcategory) follows.

Wool Stock and Top (Wool Scouring subcategory)

Raw wool is very dirty and must be cleaned and prepared before it
can be processed.  A number of mills scour wool and make wool top
as  a  final  product and ship it to other facilities for further
processing.  A schematic of a typical wool scouring operation  is
presented in Figure III-3.  Raw wool is scoured after it has been
sorted  and  blended.   The  scouring  process has been described
previously.  Most mills in this segment  practice  countercurrent
flow  of wash water and recover grease from the scour waste.  The
                                 52

-------
                   FIGURE III-3

SUBCATEGORY 1:  TYPICAL WOOL SCOURING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
Water,
Alkali and
Detergent
Water t
Water _

\
/
SORT AND
BLEND
\
t
SCOUR

Liquor _ GREASE Liquid Waste ^
* RECOVERY *
1 i r
J,
WASH
\
t
DRY
s\
\ /RTwN
"— ' ( Wool J
V Grease J
CREASE Liquid Waste
PURIFICATION
^,
               TOP
             MAKING


                                 Lanolin
                               ^^
                      53

-------
scoured wool must  be  dried  thoroughly  to  prevent  rancidity.
Dried  wool  may  be shipped as a final product, combed to create
wool top or finished in another portion of the mill.

Finished Wool Goods (Wool Finishing subcateqorv)

Wool not only requires more preparation than  other  fibers,  but
also  requires  unique  finishing operations.  As a result, there
are a number of mills in  the  industry  devoted  exclusively  to
finishing  wool goods.  A schematic of the typical wool finishing
process is presented in Figure  III-4.   Finished  wool  products
include  top, yarn, blankets and fabrics for apparel, upholstery,
outerwear and numerous other uses,  A single mill may manufacture
any number of these products.  Light scouring, dyeing and washing
are employed regardless of whether top, yarn or fabric  is  being
finished.   In  addition, carbonizing, bleaching, oiling, carding
and  spinning  may  be  performed  when   finishing   wool   top.
Carbonizing  and  bleaching also are performed at mills finishing
wool  fabric,  as  is  fulling  (felting)  and  final  finishing.
Knitting  or  slashing  and  weaving must be performed to produce
wool fabric from yarn.  These steps can occur at a  greige  mill,
at  a top finishing mill after spinning, at a yarn finishing mill
after dyeing and washing, or at a fabric finishing mill prior  to
carbonizing or fulling.

Greiqe  Goods  and  Adhesive  Products  (Low Water Use Processing
subcateqorv)

Greige goods are materials  that  are  woven  or  knit,  but  not
finished.   A  large  number  of  mills  perform  the  mechanical
operations to produce greige goods and ship them to  other  mills
for  dyeing and finishing.  The manufacture of woven greige goods
is the only fabric  construction  process  that  results  in  the
generation  of  process  wastewater.  A typical woven greige mill
operation (Figure III-5) consists  of  opening  and  picking  the
fiber, carding and spinning the fiber into yarn, applying size to
the  yarn  and  weaving the yarn into fabric on a loom.  Usually,
only a small quantity of wastewater is generated  during  slasher
cleanup,  although  at  the  few mills where water jet weaving is
employed, the wastewater discharge may be substantial.

Adhesive products are goods that have been  created  or  modified
because  of  operations  such  as bonding, laminating, coating or
flocking.  Backed carpet, tire cord fabric other coated  fabrics,
laminated fabric, and flocked fabrics are the principal products.
A  schematic  of  a  typical  adhesive  operation is presented in
Figure III-5.  Application of adhesive and setting or drying  are
the main adhesive processes.

Finished Woven Goods (Woven Fabric Finishing subcateqorv)

Finished  woven  fabric is a primary textile product that is used
in  countless  applications.    Sheeting,   industrial   fabrics,
                                54

-------
                             FIGURE  III-4
     SUBCATEGORY 2:  TYPICAL WOOL FINISHING PROCESS FLOW  DIAGRAM
Water
H2SO4and
Na2CO3
Detergent, Acid,
and/or Alkali-
H202

* —
Scouring
Agents ^
Dyestuffs
and
Auxiliary
Chem. ^
Detergents
Lubricants,
Sizing, and
Finishing Agents

/ Wool \
1 Stock 1
\&Top >/
\
/
CARBONIZE
AND
SCOUR

\

/
BLEACH
AND
RINSE

N,
/
LIGHT
SCOUR
\
i
DYE
V
f
WASH

\
/
OIL AND
CARD
\
/
SPIN
\
/
( Wool \
\ Yarn /
f We
V Ya
A
/•
A
A
^ .....
j
-»»
-*•
^
H»

\
)0l \
rn y
/-
/
LIGHT
SCOUR
\
/
DYE
N
f
WASH
"X
\
t
SIZE
(Warp Yarns)

\
/
KNIT OR
WEAVE
\
/
f Wool \
1 Fabric I
t
f-
/-
A
f-

*


j
^
^>
^
^
A Wool A
I Fabric y

\
f
CARBONIZE
AND
SCOUR

<
/
FELT
AND
RINSE

^
V
BLEACH
AND
RINSE
>
f
LIGHT
SCOUR
\
f
DYE
\
/
WASH

<
t
FINAL
FINISH
\
f
I Finished ]
V Fabric J
Liquid
Waste
Liquid
Waste
Liquid
Waste
Liquid
Waste ^
Liquid
Waste ^
Liquid
Waste
Liquid
Waste
{From Cleanup)
                        (TOP)
(YARN)
(FABRIC)
                                  55

-------
SUBCATEGORY  3:
              FIGURE III-5
TYPICAL LOW WATER USE PROCESSING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAMS
Water,
Starch, PVA,
and/or CMC
Water
(Water-jet
only)
f Stock \
1 Fiber I
\
f
OPEN AND
PICK
N
f
CARD AND
SPIN
\
f
SIZE
(SLASHING)
\
f
WEAVE
\
L
f Woven A
\ Fabric /
Liquid Waste
(From
Cleanup)
Liquid Waste^

/YarnA
f Fabric, ]
V Carpety
Water, Resin, 	 ^
/
Latex, Acrylic DIP/PAD/ Liquid Waste
* SATURATE (From *
	 1
Cleanup)
/
DRY
V
f Coated \
1 Goods I
f Bac
I Car
(ADHESIVE P
V,
/Lam-\
I inated ]
V Fabricy
kedA
pet J
RODUCTS)
        (WOVEN QREIQE GOODS)
                                 56

-------
 upholstery,   towels   and  materials  for  numerous  types  of  apparel
 are  finished  at  the mills in  this  subcategory.  A typical  process
 flow diagram  is  presented in  Figure  III-6.   For   cotton fabrics,
 typical processing consists of  desizing  to  remove size  applied to
 the  yarn  prior to  weaving,  scouring to remove  natural  and
 acquired impurities from the  fabric, mercerizing  to  increase  the
 luster,  strength and dye affinity of  cotton fabric,  bleaching to
 whiten cloth  and remove stains, dyeing and/or printing  to   impart
 desired  colors  and patterns  to the  fabric  and final  finishing to
 add  other desired qualities and properties  to the fabric.    For
 synthetic  fabrics, extensive desizing,  mercerizing and bleaching
 are  less common.

 Finished Knit Goods (Knit Fabric Finishing  subcateqory)

 Finished knit  goods  include  fabrics  and  hosiery.    Principal
 fabric  products -are underwear,  numerous  types of  outerwear,
 various types of household and  industrial items,   circular  knits
 and  warp  knits.  Hosiery  products   include both   conventional
 footwear, ladies nylon hose and pantyhose.   Typical process  flow
 diagrams  for  knit   fabric processing and  hosiery processing  are
 presented in Figure III-7.  Knit fabric  finishing  is  similar   to
 the  finishing required for woven  goods, except that  desizing  and
 mercerizing are  not   necessary.    Hosiery   finishing  usually   is
 simpler  because the  cleaning  and   dyeing  processes  often  are
 combined and can be less extensive.

 Finished Carpet  (Carpet Finishing  subcateqory)

 Carpet manufacturing  is an important and distinct  segment  of   the
 textile  industry.    Most  carpet mills  are integrated operations
 that  tuft,  finish   and  back  carpet   at   the  same    location.
 Finishing  operations  may  include  scouring, bleaching,  dyeing,
printing and  application  of   functional   finishing  agents.   A
 typical process  flow diagram  is presented in  Figure II1-8.

Finished Stock and Yarn (Stock and Yarn Finishing  subcateqory)

Many of the products previously noted  often are manufactured from
 finished yarn.   Stock also is used in  the manufacture of products
already  noted.   Bo.th  yarn  and  thread   are  used  outside  the
 industry and as  such are sold as final products.    A schematic  of
typical yarn and stock finishing operations  is provided  in Figure
 III-9.    Yarn finishing and stock finishing basically involve  the
same processes except that mercerizing is not performed on stock.

Nonwovens (Nonwoven Manufacturing subcateqory)

Nonwoven manufacturing is a relatively new  and  rapidly  growing
segment of the textile industry.  Typical products include filter
media,   diapers,   interliners, padding, surgical  gowns,  absorbent
wipes and other disposable products,  as well as fabrics for other
uses.  A schematic of a typical nonwoven manufacturing  operation
                                 57

-------
                             FIGURE III-6
SUBCATEGORY  4:   TYPICAL WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING PROCESS  FLOW DIAGRAM
           Enzymes
              or
            H2SO4
 Water
              NaOH and
           Auxiliary Chem.
           Concentrated NaOH
H2O2orNaOCI
              Dyestuffs
            Auxiliary Chem.
             Print Pastes
           Auxiliary Chem.
           Finishing Agents
                                  Finished
                                   Woven
                                   Fabric
                                  Liquid Waste
                                  >• •••••••••••j
                                 (From Cleanup)
                                  58

-------
                             FIGURE III-7
SUBCATEGORY 5:  TYPICAL  KNIT FABRIC FINISHING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
                           Knit
                          Greige
                          Goods
 Water
Detergent and
Scouring Agents
*?.,.
fs
Bleaching
Agents 1 ^

Dyestuffs and
Auxiliary Chem.
Print Pastes v 	
and T
Auxiliary Chem._

Finishing Agents

\
f
WASH/
SCOUR

N
/
BLEACH

N
/
DYE
\
f
EXTRACT/
DRY

\
/
PRINT

N
/
FINAL
FINISH
^
L
^^
^^^^
^^
/ 	
^^^m

/




\
f
WASH/ Liquid Waste _
SCOUR

\
BLE

\
D^

Liquid Waste ^
(From Extract)
Liquid Waste
(From Cleanup)
Liquid W
(From Clea
aste
• • «^^
nup)
\
^~*
f
Liquid Waste

/
Liquid Waste

t
^"^
                         Finished
                          Fabric
                         (FABRIC)
 Finished
 Hosiery
(HOSIERY)
                                 59

-------
                           FIGURE III-8
  SUBCATEGORY  6:   TYPICAL CARPET FINISHING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
Water
   Bleach or
Scouring Agents
              Dyestuff and
            Auxiliary Chem.
            Finishing Agents
            Latex Compounds
                                              Liquid Waste
                                   Liquid Waste
                                   Liquid Waste

                                  (From Cleanup)
LATEX
SEGREGATION
J
L
                                                                Liquid
                                                               (From Cleanup)
                                                  I  Latex  J
                                 60

-------
                                   FIGURE  III-9
      SUBCATEGORY 7:  TYPICAL STOCK AND YARN FINISHING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
Water
                                                     Stock
Detergents
and
Scouring Agents
\
Concentrated
NaOH
H2O2or NaOCI
Dyestuff and
Auxiliary Chem.
s








\
f
WASH/
SCOUR

T
f
MERCERIZE

>j
f
BLEACH


Liquid Waste
\
/
WASH/
SCOUR

>
^
f
BLEACH
f \
DYE/
PRINT
\
/
[Finished\
1 Yarn I
^^^^^.
^^^^^^
/
DYE
\
L
/Finished \
1 Stock I
Liquid Waste
Liquid Waste
Liquid Waste

                            (YARN)
(STOCK)
                                      61

-------
is  presented in Figure 111-10.  Web formation is a dry operation
unless the wet-lay process is employed.  In the  latter  case,  a
portion  of  the  water used to transport the fibers and form the
web often is discharged.

Felted Fabric (Felted Fabric Processing subcateqorv)

Although felted fabrics comprise a relatively  small  segment  of
the textile industry, they are used in a variety of applications.
In  addition  to woven papermakers1 felt, there are pressed felts
and  punched  or  needleloom  felts.   Typical  products  include
polishing  cloth, insulating fabric, lining, trimming, acoustical
fabric, automotive padding, felt mats and felt apparel fabric.  A
typical felted fabric processing flow  diagram  is  presented  in
Figure   III-ll.    Rinsing  following  fulling  and  dyeing  (if
employed) is responsible for the rather high water  use  of  this
segment.
                                62

-------
SUBCATEGORY 8:
            FIGURE 111-10
TYPICAL NONWOVEN  MANUFACTURING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
               (Wet-Lay Only)
    Water
                      Water
                     Re-use
           l
   Acrylic,
 Latex, Resins,
 and Pigments
                  Finishing
                   Agents
                                 I Stock  A
                                    Fiber
                                 OPEN AND
                                  BLEND
                                    WEB
                                FORMATION
                                  WET OUT
                                 BONDAND
                                  COLOR
                    _w
                  FINAL
                  FINISH
                                   Non-
                                   woven
                                 V Goodsy
                                Liquid Waste
  Liquid Waste
»•••••••••••
(From Cleanup)
  Liquid Waste

  (From Cleanup)
                                 63

-------
                              FIGURE III-ll
SUBCATEGORY 9  - TYPICAL FELTED FABRIC PROCESSING PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
                                  ( Stock A
                                  I Fiber  j
                                    OPEN,
                                    BLEND
                                  AND CARD
             (Harden)
   Water
                                     WEB
                                 FORMATION
                Detergent, Acid,
                 and/or Alkali
  FELT
(FULLING)
                Dyestuffs and
               Auxiliary Chem.
               Finishing Agents
                                    RINSE
                                    DYE
                                    FINAL
                                   FINISH
                                   Finished
Liquid Waste
                                               (Batch Dumps)
              Liquid Waste
              Liquid Waste
             Liquid Waste
            »*••*§•••••
            (From Cleanup)
                                  64

-------

-------

-------
                           SECTION IV
                   INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of subcategorization is to group  together  mills  of
similar  characteristics  to  allow  for  development of effluent
limitations  and   standards   representative   of   each   group
(subcategory)  of mills.  This enables permits to be written on a
uniform  basis.    The   following   seven   subcategories   were
established when BPT, BAT, NSPS and PSNS were promulgated on July
5, 1974 (39 FR 24736; 40 CFR Part 410):

     Wool Scouring
     Wool Finishing
     Dry Processing
     Woven Fabric Finishing
     Knit Fabric Finishing
     Carpet Mills
     Stock and Yarn Dyeing and Finishing

The   factors   considered  in  identifying  these  subcategories
included raw materials used,  products  manufactured,  production
processes  employed,  mill  size  and  age,  waste  treatability,
location, climate  and  treatment  costs.   Additional  pollutant
allowances  were  provided  in the wool scouring, wool finishing,
woven fabric finishing and knit  fabric  finishing  subcategories
for   "commission  finishers"  (those  facilities  where  textile
materials, 50 percent or more of which are owned by  others,  are
finished).   In  the  woven  fabric  finishing  and  knit  fabric
finishing subcategories, additional allowances were provided  for
COD to account for different combinations of specified simple and
complex   processing   operations   and   natural,  synthetic  or
natural/synthetic  blend  fiber  types.   In  the  carpet   mills
subcategory,   additional   COD   allowances  were  provided  for
specified complex processing operations.

As part of the BAT review program, detailed information has  been
collected  on  538  mills  in the textile industry.  EPA reviewed
available data in light of the original subcategorization  scheme
to  determine  the  adequacy  of  the  original  subcategories in
representing  current  industry  characteristics.    Conventional
pollutant  data  have been reviewed to determine the relationship
of raw wastewater characteristics to the processes  employed  and
the  products  manufactured at mills in the textile industry.  In
addition,  toxic  pollutant  data  have  been  gathered  and  the
subcategorization  scheme  has  been  reviewed  for  validity  in
accounting for toxic pollutant generation.  As  discussed  below,
this  review  led  to the identification of two new subcategories
and one subdivision of an existing subcategory representative  of
portions  of  the textile industry not recognized in the original
subcategorization scheme.
                                 65

-------
RESULTS

With the  following  exceptions,  the  revised  subcategorization
scheme  that forms the basis of final regulations is identical to
the subcategorization scheme used in establishing BPT regulations
promulgated  in  1974.   Two  new  subcategories,  the   nonwoven
manufacturing   subcategory  and  the  felted  fabric  processing
subcategory,  have  been  established.   In   addition,   a   new
subdivision of the low water use processing subcategory (formerly
dry processing) has been established to account for a new textile
manufacturing  process,  water jet weaving.  Water jet weaving is
not technically a low water use process;  it  is  included  as  a
subdivision  of  the low water use processing subcategory because
it is related to greige goods production.

In addition, the Agency has decided to change the names of  three
existing subcategories: (a) the dry processing subcategory is now
called  the  low water use processing subcategory; (b) the carpet
mills subcategory is now called the carpet finishing subcategory;
and (c) the stock and yarn dyeing and  finishing  subcategory  is
now called the stock and yarn finishing subcategory.

The following revised subcategorization scheme forms the basis of
final regulations for the textile mills point source category:

     Wool Scouring
     Wool Finishing
     Low Water Use Processing
          -General Processing
          -Water Jet Weaving
     Woven Fabric Finishing
     Knit Fabric Finishing
     Carpet Finishing
     Stock and Yarn Finishing
     Nonwoven Manufacturing
     Felted Fabric Processing

In addition, separate NSPS are being established for subdivisions
of  the  woven fabric finishing subcategory  (simple manufacturing
operations, complex manufacturing operations  and  desizing)  and
the  knit  fabric  finishing  subcategory   (simple  manufacturing
operations,  complex   manufacturing   operations   and   hosiery
products.

BASIS OF FINAL SUBCATEGORIZATION SCHEME

Rationale for Selection o£ Final Subcategorization Scheme

The  original subcategorization scheme of  the textile  mills point
source category included seven  subcategories.   After reviewing
all available data on the textile industry,  the Agency determined
that  certain  processing  operations  were  not  covered  by the
existing subcategorization scheme: nonwoven  manufacturing, felted

                                 66

-------
fabric processing and water jet weaving.  The  Agency  determined
that  raw  waste  loadings  at  mills  where these operations are
employed are significantly different than  those  at  mills  that
conform  to the seven original subcategory definitions (see Table
IV-1).  Therefore, EPA has revised the original subcategorization
scheme to account for these process differences.

Water  jet  weaving  is  a  relatively  new  weaving  technology.
Because  it is used in the production of greige goods, the Agency
has included it as  a  new  subdivision  of  the  low  water  use
processing  subcategory  which  includes mills where greige goods
are   produced.    EPA   has   established   separate    nonwoven
manufacturing  and  felted  fabric  processing  subcategories  to
account for these processing operations.

Also, as shown in Table IV-1,  raw wastewater loadings of  various
mills  within  the  woven  fabric  finishing  and the knit fabric
finishing  subcategories  differ  significantly.   In  the  woven
fabric  finishing  subcategory, at mills where complex processing
operations   {printing,   water-proofing   and   application   of
functional  finishes in addition to dyeing and fiber preparation)
are performed, wastewaters are  discharged  that  are  higher  in
volume  and have higher BOD5_,  COD and TSS raw waste loads than at
mills where simple operations (dyeing and fiber preparation)  are
performed.   In  addition, at mills where the desizing process is
employed, wastewaters are generated that are higher in volume and
raw waste loadings than at complex mills.

In the knit fabric finishing subcategory,  wastewaters  that  are
higher  in volume and raw waste loadings are generated at complex
mills (mills where printing, water-proofing  and  application  of
functional finishes are performed in addition to dyeing and fiber
preparation)  than  at simple mills (mills where dyeing and fiber
preparation are performed).  In addition, at mills where  hosiery
products    are    manufactured,    wastewater    loadings    are
distinguishable  from  those  associated  with  both  simple  and
complex processing.

Accordingly,  final  NSPS  include separate limitations for these
subdivisions of  the  woven  fabric  finishing  and  knit  fabric
finishing subcategories; however, the promulgated BAT limitations
do  not.   As  discussed  in  Sections  I  and  IX, the Agency is
establishing  BAT  effluent  limitations  controlling  toxic  and
nonconventional  pollutants  equal  to the previously promulgated
BPT  limitations.   BPT  limitations  were  based  on  biological
treatment  and  apply to all of the different operations employed
in the woven fabric  finishing  and  the  knit  fabric  finishing
subcategories.   BPT  does  include COD allowances to account for
the higher COD raw waste loads typical of more complex operations
in both subcategories.  It is likely that costs would be incurred
at some mills if BAT limitations required attainment of  specific
new  limitations  for  the  new subdivisions (simple, complex and
desizing or hosiery operations) different from those specified in
                                 67

-------
                                               TABLE IV-1

                               MEDIAN UNTREATED WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
CD
          Subcategory
    Wastewater
  Discharge Rate
(I/kg)     (gal/lb)
Pollutant Mass Discharge Rate
  BOD5        COD         TSS
(kg/kkg)   (kg/kkg)    (kg/kkg)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
11.7
304.4
6.7
86.7
76.7
97.6
105.9
117.6
122.6
75.1
46.7
96.7
40.0
212.7
1.4
36.5
0.8
10.4
9.2
11.7
12.7
14.1
14.7
9.0
5.6
11.6
4.8
25.5
41.8
63.6
1.3
16.0
22.3
33.2
45.1
23.1
28.1
25.8
25.6
19.5
6.7
70.2
225.7
204.8
7.7
18.2
88.4
104.9
122.0
84.4
121.5
88.4
82.3
62.1
38.4
186.0
51.9
16.3
1.6
2.7
7.7
9.1
14.8
6.3
8.4
6.1
4.7
4.5
2.2
64.1
     Source:   Industry 308 Survey,

-------
existing permits based on the BPT regulation.   The  Agency  does
not  have  sufficient  information  to determine the magnitude of
these costs and, therefore, cannot assess the economic impact  of
establishing  different  limitations.   Accordingly,  other  than
those  allowances  included  in  the  existing  BPT   regulation,
separate  BAT limitations are not established for simple, complex
and desizing operations in the woven fabric finishing subcategory
or for simple, complex and hosiery operations in the knit  fabric
finishing subcategory.

Additional Analyses

Prior  to  proposal  of  regulations  in  October  of  1979,  EPA
conducted additional analyses to investigate the possibility that
certain of the subcategories could be combined  to  simplify  the
subcategorization  scheme.   The  subcategories tested were those
established in earlier effluent guidelines studies of the textile
industry (wool scouring, wool finishing, woven fabric  finishing,
knit  fabric  finishing,  carpet  finishing  and  stock  and yarn
finishing), plus  segments  not  previously  recognized  (hosiery
products,  nonwoven  manufacturing and felted fabric processing).
Specific statistical tests were used to determine if any  of  the
subcategories or industry segments could be combined or to verify
that  they  are  truly different.  Wastewater discharge rates and
BOD5> COD and TSS raw waste loadings were used in this  analysis.
Long-term  averages  (means) were calculated for these parameters
based  on  historical  sampling  data  and  available  production
information.    The   medians  of  the  long-term  averages  were
determined for each subcategory  and  new  industry  segment  and
compared.   Because  extensive  historical sampling data were not
available for all mills, it was necessary to use only those  data
that  are  representative  of  the segments of the industry being
compared.  Questionable data, such as  single  grab  samples  and
estimated  production  values,   and  old  data suspected of being
nonrepresentative of current processing, were  not  used  in  the
comparisons.

While  statistical  methods are a powerful tool for comparing and
drawing conclusions about different populations  (subcategories),
other factors also can influence these comparisons.  For example,
wastewater  characterization  data  can  vary  from  mill to mill
because of  reasons  not  related  to  subcategorization.   These
reasons  include such factors as operation of ancillary equipment
and  differences  in  sampling  or  analytical  techniques.    In
addition,  a  degree of uncertainty is inherently involved in the
use of statistics because  conclusions  are  drawn  about  entire
populations  (subcategories)  based on limited samples from those
populations.   This  study  has  attempted  to   minimize   these
influences  by  using  the  95 percent confidence level (level of
significance) in deciding whether the statistical tests  indicate
a true difference between subcategories.
                                 69

-------
To  select  the  most  appropriate  statistical  tests  to use in
determining statistical validity, it is  necessary  to  establish
the  type  of distribution (e.g., normal, lognormal or geometric)
that the data most closely represent.  To accomplish this for the
textile industry, wastewater discharge rates  (I/kg  of  product)
and  raw waste loadings (kg/kkg of product) for BOD£,  COD and TSS
were plotted for selected trial subcategories on linear  and  log
probability  paper.   However,  the  plots,  along with graphs of
frequency  distribution,  were  inconclusive  in  establishing  a
typical distribution for the data.  As a result, EPA decided that
distribution-free tests would be most appropriate for testing the
subcategorization.  The tests chosen were the Wilcoxon Two-Sample
Test  and  Mann-Whitney  U  Test  (12,  13,  14).   The tests are
similar, with the Wilcoxon Two-Sample  Test  more  applicable  to
smaller samples  (usually less than 20 values).

The Wilcoxon Two-Sample and Mann-Whitney U Tests examine the null
hypothesis  that  two  samples  come  from  identical  continuous
populations (subcategories)  against  the  alternative  that  the
populations  have unequal means, i.e., that the subcategories are
statistically different.  Under certain assumptions, they are  an
alternative to the standard two-sample "t" test used for normally
distributed  data.   The  tests employ ranking of observations as
the basis for statistical decision-making and take  into  account
the  relative  position  of  each data point within the groups of
data being tested.  The results of the statistical tests are  the
determination  of  levels  of  significance  that  represent  the
probability that an error has been made in stating that  compared
samples  come  from statistically different subcategories.  A low
level of significance indicates a high probability that  the  two
samples (subcategories) are statistically different.

The  results of  this analysis indicated that each of the original
subcategories and new  industry  segments  are  unique  and  that
combining  any   of  the  subcategories  was  not justified.  Some
comparisons of the knit fabric finishing, woven fabric finishing,
carpet finishing and stock and yarn finishing  subcategories  and
the  hosiery  and felted fabric segments are shown in Table IV-2.
Based on the results of  this  analysis,  EPA  used  the  revised
subcategorization scheme as the basis of proposed rules published
in October 1979.

Comments  received  on  the October  1979 proposed regulation were
very  supportive of  the   revised   subcategorization   scheme.
However,  some   comments  were  received suggesting the following
revisions to the proposed subcategorization scheme:

     a.   one commenter suggested that,  in   the  wool  finishing
          subcategory,   significant  differences  in  wastewater
          characteristics result from the  processing  of  virgin
          and reprocessed wool.
                                 70

-------
                                                      TABLE IV-2

                                     COMPARISON 07 RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
                                    OF SELECTED SUBCATEGORIES AND INDUSTRY SEGMENTS
                                     Wastewater
Pollutant Mass Discharge Rate
Products Compared
(Subcategories)
Woven Fabric vs Knit Fabric
Knit Fabric vs Carpet
Kait Fabric vs Stock & Yarn
Carpet vs Stock & Yarn
Nonwoven vs Felted Fabric
Hosiery vs Carpet
Hosiery vs Stock & Yarn
Knit Fabric vs Hosiery
Discharge Rate
Sample*
138/108
108/37
108/117
37/117
11/11
58/37
58/117
108/58
Level #
0.5
(0.1)
11
(0.1)
0.1
0.5
2
(0.1)
BODS
Sample*
94/54
54/10
54/61
10/61
4/4
42/10
42/61
54/42
Level #
5
[20]
19
[20]
3
[20]
[20]
[20]
COD
Sample*
70/41
41/14
41/45
14/45
3/4
30/14
30/45
41/30
Level #
[20]
5
1
[20]
6
17
11
[20]
TSS
Sample*
76/51
51/12
51/58
12/58
4/4
31/12
31/58
51/31
Level #
3
2
0.2
[20]
1
17
15
[20]
* Number of data points (mills) in comparison; slash separates subcategories compared.

# The level of significance represents the probability that an error has been made in stating that the samples
  (subcategories) compared are different (come from different populations).   A 0.1 percent level of significance
  indicates that the probability is 0.1 percent that an error has been made.  A 10 percent level of significance
  indicates that the probability is 10 percent that an error has been made.   Levels of significance of 5 percent
  or less indicate that the samples compared are statistically different.

Notes:   1.  ( ) Indicates Level of Significance is less than reported value.
        2.  [ ] Indicates Level of Significance is greater than reported value.
        3.  The Mann-Whitney U Test was used when one or both samples exceeded 20.
        4.  The Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test was used when both samples were less than 20.

-------
     b.    one commenter suggested that significant differences in
          wastewater characteristics result from  the  production
          of ladies' hosiery compared to anklets and socks.

     c.    one commenter  suggested  that  COD  limits  should  be
          revised  because  of significant differences in process
          water requirements for  yarn  dyeing  mills  processing
          only polyester/cotton blends.

     d.    some commenters suggested that the commission finishing
          allowances contained in the BPT regulations  should  be
          retained  in  final  BAT  regulations  and  new  source
          performance standards.

In response to comments on the proposed subcategorization scheme,
the  Agency  performed  statistical  tests  identical  to   those
described  above  (see  Table  IV-3).   EPA found that, while raw
materials,  processes  and  process  machinery  differ   in   the
production  of  ladies' hosiery and anklets/socks, differences in
wastewater discharge rate and pollutant mass discharge rates  are
not  statistically different.  Therefore, further segmentation of
the hosiery products subdivision of  the  knit  fabric  finishing
subcategory  cannot  be justified.  Further, based on the limited
data available on wastewater characteristics resulting  from  the
processing  of  virgin  compared  to  reprocessed  wool,  further
segmentation of the wool finishing subcategory is not warranted.

The Agency does not have sufficient data available  to  determine
if there are differences in process water requirements or COD raw
waste loads because of the type of fiber processed at yarn dyeing
mills    (i.e.,    natural    fibers,    synthetic    fibers   or
natural/synthetic fiber blends).  The commenter  did  not  submit
additional  data  on water usage, production or COD discharges to
support his contention that an additional COD allowance should be
provided when only polyester/cotton  blends  are  processed.   He
simply  stated that his yarn dyeing mill requires three times the
median wastewater discharge rate reported by  the  Agency  to  be
typical  of  the  stock  and  yarn finishing subcategory.  In the
absence of data, the Agency cannot justify further subdivision of
the stock and yarn finishing subcategory.

The Agency also evaluated "commission finishing" to determine  if
the  special  nature  of  the  processing performed by commission
finishers (small lot sizes, short  runs,  variability  in  fabric
processed  and  variability  in chemical use) warrants additional
discharge allowances.  A limited amount of historical  data  were
available  on  commission  finishers  from  the  initial industry
survey; therefore, the Agency conducted a special industry survey
in which current data on commission finishing were solicited from
industry.  The Agency expended  considerable  effort  to  collect
these data, but response by the industry was poor; only a limited
amount  of  new data was made available.  The Agency analyzed the
available data and determined that the wastewater characteristics
                                 72

-------
                                                                       TABLE IV-3
                                                     COMPARISON OF RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS OF
                                                              SELECTED SUBCATEGORY SEGMENTS
w
Wastewater
Discharge Rate
Subcategocy
Wool Finishing
Hosiery Finishing
Woven Fabric, Desizing
Knit Fabric, Complex
Subdivisions Compared
Virgin vs Reprocessed
Ladies vs Socks & Anklets
Commission vs Noncommissioo
Commission vs Noncomnission
Sample*
138/108
108/37
108/117
37/117
Level #
0.5
(0.1)
11
(0-1)
Pollutant Mass Discharge Rate
BODS
Sample*
94/54
54/20
54/61
10/61
Level #
5
(20)
19
[20]
COD
Sample*
70/41
41/14
41/45 '
14/45
Level #
[20]
5
1
[20]
TSS
Sample*
76/51
51/12
51/58
12/58
Level #
3
2
0.2
[201
      * Number of data points (mills) in comparison; slash separates subcategories compared.

      it The level of significance represents the probability that an error has been made in stating that the samples
        (subdivisions) compared are different (come from different populations).  A 0.1 percent level of significance
        indicates that the probability is 0.1 percent that an error has been made.  A 10 percent level of significance
        indicates that the probability is 10 percent that an error has been made.  Levels of significance of 5 percent
        oc less indicate that tile samples compared are statistically different.

      Notes:  1.  [ ] Indicates Level .of Significance is greater than reported value; ( ) indicates less than.
              2.  NC Indicates that no comparison was made due to an insufficient sample size to perform the statistical test.
              3.  The Mann-Whitney U Test was used when one or both samples exceeded 20.
              4.  The Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test was used when both samples were less than 20.

-------
of commission finishers are not significantly different than  for
other  mills  (see  Table IV-3),  In fact, in some subcategories,
raw waste loadings for commission finishers are  lower  than  for
other   mills   where   commission  finishing  is  not  employed.
Accordingly,  final  NSPS  do  not  provide  an   allowance   for
commission   finishing.    Current   BPT   limitations  allow  an
additional discharge allowance  for  commission  finishing.   The
Agency has not investigated the economic impact on existing mills
of   the  elimination  of  the  commission  finishing  allowance.
Because, as discussed  in  Sections  I  and  IX,  the  Agency  is
establishing  BAT  limitations  equal  to BPT limitations for the
textile  industry,  the  Agency   has   decided   that   existing
dischargers shall still be entitled to this allowance.

IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA

As  part  of  technical study undertaken to review and revise, if
necessary,  the  effluent  guidelines  and  standards  previously
published,  the  Agency  conducted  a  comprehensive sampling and
analytical program.  The program was designed  to  determine  the
frequency  and  amounts of toxic pollutants discharged from mills
in the  textile  industry.   EPA  reviewed  the  analytical  data
generated  through  this  sampling program.  The Agency concluded
that,  although  certain  toxic  pollutants  (e.g.,   napthalene,
acrylonitrile,   arsenic,   cadmium  and  silver)  occurred  more
frequently than  did  other  toxic  pollutants,  no  relationship
exists  between  the frequency of occurrence or quantity of toxic
pollutants discharged from mills  characteristic  of  a  specific
subcategory   or   subcategories.    Therefore,  toxic  pollutant
generation is not a factor  affecting  subcategorization  of  the
textile mills point source category.

SUBCATEGORY DESCRIPTIONS

Wool Scouring Subcateqory

This subcategory includes facilities where natural impurities are
scoured  from raw wool and other animal hair fibers.  Before they
can be converted into textile products, raw wool and other animal
hair fibers must be thoroughly  cleaned.   This  results   in  the
generation   of  wastewaters  that  contain  considerably  higher
pollutant concentrations than those of other  subcategories  (see
Section  V).  A complete description of the wool scouring process
is presented in Section III.

At integrated mills where both wool scouring and other  finishing
operations   are   employed,   discharge   allowances  should  be
determined by applying wool scouring effluent limitations to  the
wool  scouring  production and by applying limitations associated
with other finishing operations to the production associated with
each finishing operation.
                                 74

-------
Wool Finishing Subcateqory

This subcategory includes facilities where  fabric  is  finished,
the majority of which is wool, other animal hair fiber, or blends
containing  primarily  wool  or  other  animal  hair fibers.  The
following  processing  operations  are   employed:   carbonizing,
fulling,  bleaching,  scouring {not including raw wool scouring),
dyeing  and  application  of  functional  finish  chemicals.    A
description  of typical wool finishing operations is presented in
Section III.

Mills where stock or yarn consisting  primarily  of  wool,  other
animal  hair fibers, or blends containing primarily wool or other
animal  hair  fibers  are  finished  and  where  carbonizing   is
performed  are included in this subcategory; however, those mills
where carbonizing is not performed are included in the stock  and
yarn finishing subcategory.

At  integrated  mills where both wool finishing and other textile
operations  are  performed,  discharge   allowances   should   be
determined by applying wool finishing effluent limitations to the
wool  finishing production and by applying limitations associated
with other operations to  the  production  associated  with  each
operation.

Low Water Use Processing Subcateqorv

Low  water  use  processing operations include the manufacture of
greige goods (yarn, woven fabric and knit fabric), laminating  or
coating  fabrics,  texturizing  yarn, tufting and backing carpet,
producing tire cord fabric, and similar  manufacturing  processes
in  which  either  cleanup is the primary source of wastewater or
process water requirements per unit of production are  small,  or
both.

As  discussed  previously, water jet weaving is not technically a
low water use process.  It is included as a subdivision  of  this
subcategory  because  it  is  related to greige goods production.
The wastewater discharge rate is significantly higher  for  water
jet  weaving than for other low water use processes; however, the
low strength of the wastewater  results  in  low  pollutant  mass
discharge rates.

The   low  water  use  processing  subcategory  consists  of  two
subdivisions:

General Processing  This low  water  use  processing  subdivision
includes all low water use processes except water jet weaving.

Water Jet Weaving   This  low  water  use  processing subdivision
covers the manufacture of woven greige goods using the water  jet
weaving process.
                                 75

-------
Woven Fabric Finishing Subcategorv

This subcategory includes facilities where primarily woven fabric
is  finished using the following processing operations: desizing,
scouring,   bleaching,   mercerizing,   dyeing,   printing    and
application  of functional finish chemicals.  These processes are
described in Section III.

Integrated mills where primarily woven fabric is  finished  along
with  greige  manufacturing or other finishing operations such as
yarn dyeing and denim finishing are included in this subcategory.
At many finishing facilities, weaving is also done but the  added
hydraulic  and  pollutant loadings from slasher equipment cleanup
are insignificant compared to the finishing wastes.  Woven fabric
composed primarily of wool, other animal hair  fiber,  or  blends
containing  primarily  wool  or  other  animal  hair  fibers  are
included in the wool finishing subcategory.

At integrated mills where both woven fabric finishing  and  other
textile  operations are performed, discharge allowances should be
determined  by   applying   woven   fabric   finishing   effluent
limitations  to  the  woven  fabric  finishing  production and by
applying limitations associated  with  other  operations  to  the
production associated with each operation.

The  desizing process is a major contributor to the oxygen demand
in woven fabric finishing wastewater.  When  synthetic  compounds
such  as  PVA, CMC and PAA are the primary sizing agents removed,
the COD load is noticeably increased.  In addition, the number of
processes performed at a  particular  mill  may  vary  from  only
scouring  or  only  bleaching  to  all of those listed above.  As
explained   previously,   BPT   effluent   limitations   provided
additional  allowances  for COD to account for the higher COD raw
waste  loads  typical  of  more  complex   operations   in   this
subcategory.   In  addition, in developing new source performance
standards, the following subdivisions were identified to  account
for   higher   raw  waste  loads  associated  with  more  complex
operations and desizing:

Simple Manufacturing  Operations   This  woven  fabric  finishing
subdivision  includes  facilities where desizing, dyeing or other
fiber preparation processes are performed.

Complex Manufacturing Operations   This  woven  fabric  finishing
subdivision  includes  facilities where the simple unit processes
{desizing, dyeing and fiber preparation) are employed in addition
to   other   manufacturing   operations   such    as    printing,
water-proofing  or  application  of  stain  resistance  or  other
functional fabric finishes,

Desizinq   This  woven  fabric  finishing  subdivision   includes
facilities  where, more  than  50 percent  of total production is
desized.  At these facilities, other processes are employed  such
                                 76

-------
as   fiber   preparation,   scouring,   mercerizing,   functional
finishing, bleaching,  dyeing and printing.

Knit Fabric Finishing  Subcateqory

This subcategory includes facilities where primarily knit fabrics
of cotton and/or synthetic fibers are  finished.   The  following
processing  operations are employed: scouring, bleaching, dyeing,
printing and application of  lubricants,  antistatic  agents  and
functional   finish   chemicals.   Basic  knit  fabric  finishing
operations are similar to those in  the  woven  fabric  finishing
subcategory.  Knitting is performed in conjunction with finishing
at  most  of  these facilities.  Desizing is not required in knit
fabric finishing and  mercerizing  is  uncommon.   The  generally
lower  wastewater loads of this subcategory compared to the woven
fabric finishing subcategory can be attributed to the absence  of
these processes.

Integrated  mills  where  primarily  knit  fabrics or hosiery are
finished and greige manufacturing or other  finishing  operations
such   as   yarn   dyeing  are  employed  are  included  in  this
subcategory.   At  integrated  mills  where  both   knit   fabric
finishing  and  other  textile operations are performed, discharge
allowances should be determined by applying knit fabric finishing
effluent limitations to the knit fabric finishing production  and
by  applying  limitations associated with other operations to the
production associated  with each operation.

As with woven fabric finishing, the number of processes performed
at  a  mill  may  vary  considerably.    In   addition,   hosiery
manufacture  is  distinct  in  terms  of  manufacturing  and  raw
wastewater. characteristics  (see  Tables V-29  and  V-30).    As
explained   previously,   BPT   effluent   limitations   provided
additional allowances  for COD to account for the higher  COD  raw
waste   loads   typical   of  more  complex  operations  in  this
subcategory.  In addition,  in  developing  NSPS,  the  following
subdivisions  were  identified  to  account  for higher raw waste
loads associated with  more complex operations and to account  for
hosiery production.
                                                i
Simple  Manufacturing   Operations    This  knit  fabric finishing
subdivision  includes   facilities  where  fiber  preparation  and
dyeing are performed.

Complex  Manufacturing  Operations   This  knit  fabric finishing
subdivision  includes   facilities  where  simple  unit  processes
(dyeing  and  fiber  preparation)  are  employed  in  addition to
manufacturing operations  such  as  printing,  water-proofing  or
application  of  stain  resistance  or  other  functional  fabric
finishes.

Hosiery  Products    This  knit  fabric   finishing   subdivision
includes  facilities  where  hosiery  of  any  type  is  dyed  or
                                 77

-------
finished.  Compared to other knit  fabric  finishing  facilities,
hosiery  finishing  mills  are generally much smaller in terms of
wet production {an average  of  2,950 kg/day  for  hosiery  mills
compared to 18,400 kg/day for other knit fabric finishing mills),
more  frequently  employ  batch processing and more often perform
only one major wet-processing operation (dyeing).  All  of  these
factors  contribute  to  the  lower raw waste loadings associated
with hosiery production (see Tables V-l and V-2).

Carpet Finishing Subcateqory

This subcategory includes facilities  where  textile-based  floor
covering  products,  of  which carpet is the primary element, are
finished by employing any of the following processing operations:
scouring, carbonizing, fulling, bleaching, dyeing,  printing  and
application  of functional finish chemicals.  These processes are
described in Section III.

Integrated mills where primarily carpet is  finished  along  with
tufting or backing operations or other finishing operations (such
as  yarn  dyeing)  are included in this subcategory.  Mills where
only carpet tufting and/or backing are performed are included  in
the  low  water  use  processing (general processing subdivision)
subcategory.

At integrated mills where both carpet finishing and other textile
operations  are  performed,  discharge   allowances   should   be
determined  by  applying carpet finishing effluent limitations to
the carpet  finishing  production  and  by  applying  limitations
associated  with  other  operations  to the production associated
with each operation.  Carpet manufactured by  woven  or  nonwoven
processes  are  included in this subcategory if the wet-finishing
operations are consistent with those presented above.

Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcateqory

This subcategory includes facilities where stock, yarn or  cotton
and/or synthetic fiber thread is finished by employing any of the
following    processing    operations:    scouring,    bleaching,
mercerizing,  dyeing  or   application   of   functional   finish
chemicals.   Thread  processing (including bonding, heat setting,
lubrication and dressing) is basically dry and does not  generate
much   wastewater.    Stock  and  yarn  finishing  processes  are
described in Section III.  The concentrations and mass  discharge
rates  of  the commonly measured conventional and nonconventional
wastewater pollutants (BOD, COD and TSS) are typically lower than
in the other major wet-processing subcategories  (see  Tables V-29
and V-30).

Facilities  where  stock  or yarn consisting principally of wool,
other animal hair fiber  (or blends containing primarily  wool  or
other  animal  hair fibers) is finished are also  included in this
subcategory if carbonizing is not performed.  At  integrated mills
                                  78

-------
where both stock and yarn finishing and other textile  operations
are  performed,  discharge  allowances  should  be  determined by
applying stock and yarn finishing  effluent  limitations  to  the
stock  and  yarn finishing production and by applying limitations
associated with other operations to  production  associated  with
each operation.

Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcateqory

This  subcategory  includes  facilities  where  nonwoven  textile
products of wool, cotton or synthetics, singly or as blends,  are
manufactured  by  mechanical,  thermal  and/or  adhesive  bonding
procedures.   Nonwoven  products  manufactured  by  fulling   and
felting  processes  are  covered  in the felted fabric processing
subcategory.

The nonwoven manufacturing  subcategory  includes  a  variety  of
products   and   processing   methods.   The  processing  is  dry
(mechanical and thermal  bonding)  or  low  water  use  (adhesive
bonding)  with  the  major  influence  on  process-related  waste
characteristics resulting from the cleanup of bonding  mix  tanks
and  application  equipment.   Typical  processing operations are
described in Section III  and  include  carding,  web  formation,
wetting,  bonding  (padding  or  dipping  with  latex  acrylic or
polyvinyl acetate resins) and application  of  functional  finish
chemicals.   Pigments  for coloring the goods are sometimes added
to  the  bonding  materials.   As  discussed   in   Section   IX,
wastewaters  generated  in  this subcategory are similar to those
discharged from mills in the carpet finishing subcategory.

At integrated mills where both nonwoven manufacturing  and  other
textile  operations are performed, discharge allowances should be
determined   by   applying   nonwoven   manufacturing    effluent
limitations  to  the  nonwoven  manufacturing  production  and by
applying limitations associated  with  other  operations  to  the
production associated with each operation.

Felted Fabric Processing Subcategory

This  subcategory  includes  facilities  where primarily nonwoven
products  are  manufactured  by  employing  fulling  and  felting
operations  as  a  means of achieving fiber bonding.  Wool, rayon
and blends of wool, rayon and polyester  are  typically  used  to
produce  felts.  Felting is accomplished by subjecting the web or
mat to moisture, chemicals (detergents)  and  mechanical  action.
Wastewater is generated during rinsing steps that are required to
prevent  rancidity  and  spoilage  of the fibers.  Typical felted
fabric processing operations are discussed in  Section  III.   As
discussed   in   Section   IX,   wastewaters  generated  in  this
subcategory are similar to those discharged  from  mills  in  the
wool finishing subcategory.
                                 79

-------
At integrated mills where both felted fabric processing and other
textile  operations are performed, discharge allowances should be
determined  by  applying  felted   fabric   processing   effluent
limitations  to  the  felted  fabric processing production and by
applying limitations associated  with  other  operations  to  the
production associated with each operation.
                                 80

-------
                            SECTION V

                      WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
INTRODUCTION
Section IV  provides  the  rationale  for  the  subcategorization
scheme  developed  by  EPA  in  establishing effluent limitations
guidelines, new source  performance  standards  and  pretreatment
standards  for  existing and new sources in the textile industry.
The information presented in this section  includes:  a  detailed
discusssion  of the untreated wastewater characteristics relative
to the typical processing in each subcategory;  total  wastewater
discharge  (cu m/day) and rate of wastewater discharge per unit of
production  (liter  of  wastewater/kg  of  production)  for  each
subcategory; pollutant concentrations (ug/1  or  mg/1)  and  mass
discharge  rates  (kg  of  pollutant/kkg  of production) for each
subcategory.  Pollutant characteristics are presented  separately
for   toxic   pollutants  and  for  the  traditionally  monitored
nonconventional  and  conventional  pollutants  in  the   textile
industry.

The   discussion  of  untreated  wastewater  characteristics  was
developed from textbooks,  technical  periodicals,  mill  visits,
survey  information  and  general  discussion  with knowledgeable
industry personnel.

Wastewater volume and traditionally monitored nonconventional and
conventional pollutant data were, for  the  most  part,  acquired
from the records of textile industry wastewater treatment plants,
Federal  and  state  discharge  monitoring  reports,  records  of
publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and field sampling.  Toxic
pollutant  data  were  not  readily  available  and   acquisition
required  a detailed field sampling program.  (See Section II for
a discussion of the sampling and analysis program.)

Besides characterizing untreated wastewater, the  field  sampling
program  included  the  acquisition of toxic, nonconventional and
conventional pollutant data  for  the  water  supply  at  various
mills.   These  data.were collected to determine the relationship
between  water  supply  and  untreated  process  wastewater.   In
addition, data were acquired for biological and physical/chemical
treatment systems.  These data are presented in detail in Section
VII to document the effectiveness of treatment technologies.  The
data  showing the presence and concentrations of toxic pollutants
after biological treatment  are  presented  in  this  section  to
identify  the  toxic  pollutants of significance in the industry.
The methods used to aggregate individual mill data, the data  for
the  mills  represented  by each subcategory and the data for the
industry as a whole are presented and discussed below.
                                81

-------
DISCUSSION OF UNTREATED WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS

The untreated wastewater characteristics for the textile industry
generally reflect the products produced and the methods  employed
to  produce them.  Because there is such a diversity in products,
processing raw materials and process control,  there  is  a  wide
range  in  wastewater  characteristics.   This  variation  exists
within  subcategories  as  well  as  between  the  subcategories.
Nonprocess  variables  such as intake water quality and discharge
of nonprocess wastes (e.g., sanitary wastewater, boiler blowdown,
cooling water) contribute to this lack of uniformity.

In  Section  III,   the   typical   wet   processing   operations
contributing to wastewater discharge are presented and discussed.
In  Section  IV, the selected subcategories are presented and the
basis for their selection explained.  The discussions that follow
relate the processing and  untreated  wastewater  characteristics
for  each subcategory and explain the source(s) of the pollutants
specific to each.

Wool Scouring Subcategory

Wool  scouring  wastewater  contains  significant  quantities  of
natural  oils, fats, suint and adventitious dirt that, even after
in-process  grease   recovery   steps,   result   in   wastewater
characteristics   that   are   distinctly  different  from  other
subcategories.  These materials are collectively responsible  for
high  concentrations and quantities of BOD5., COD, TSS and oil and
grease.  Because the natural fat is technically a wax, it is  not
readily biodegradable and must be removed by physical or chemical
treatment.

According  to Trotman (10), a typical dirty wool might consist of
33 percent keratin  (wool protein), 26 percent  dirt,  28  percent
suint,  12  percent  fat  and  1  percent  mineral  matter.   The
constituents are different for the wool from different breeds  of
sheep,  and it is stated that raw wool may contain between 30 and
70 percent impurities.

Sulfur, phenolics and other organic compounds are brought in with
the wool.  Phenolics are derived from sheep urine, feces,  blood,
tars,  branding  fluids  and  insecticides  used  in  sheep dips.
Sulfur makes up approximately 3 to 4 percent of clean keratin and
enters the waste stream as fiber (10).

Wool scouring is generally performed  in  a  series  of  scouring
bowls  using  a  counterflow process.  The total concentration of
soap or detergents  and alkali  (generally  sodium  carbonate)  is
about  1  percent.   The  contribution  of  pollutants from these
scouring materials  is  insignificant  compared  to  the  residual
materials scoured from the stock fiber.  Complete purification of
the  wool  is  not  practical, and it  is usually accepted that the
                                 82

-------
scouring has been satisfactory if the wool contains less than 0.5
percent oil and grease (10).

Wastewater from the  wool  scouring  process  is  usually  brown,
thickly  turbid  and  noticeably greasy.  It is strongly alkaline
and very putrescibe.

Wool Finishing Subcateqory

Wool finishing wastewaters are typically low in concentration  of
BOD5_,  COD,  TSS  and  oil  and  grease, but because of the large
volumes  generated,  contribute   large   quantities   of   these
pollutants   per   unit  of  production  relative  to  the  other
subcategories.   The  other  traditionally  monitored  pollutants
(total  phenols,  chromium,  sulfide  and color) are high in both
concentration and mass discharge  rate,  relative  to  the  other
subcategories.    These  conditions  can  be  attributed  to  the
numerous steps required in processing and finishing wool yarn and
wool fabric and to the  wide  variety  of  chemicals  used.   The
contributions of pollutants from each of the major wool finishing
steps are detailed below.

Heavy  Scour  Even after effective raw grease wool scouring, wool
fiber contains a small amount of  grease  and  foreign  material.
Also,  oil  (2  to  5  percent by weight) is often added prior to
spinning to provide lubrication.  All of these materials must  be
removed  before  finishing can be performed and to prevent future
degradation of the wool fiber by bacteriological action.

The heavy scour process  consists  of  washing  the  fabric  with
detergents,  wetting  agents,  emulsifiers,  alkali,  ammonia  or
various other agents to remove the foreign and applied materials.
Fibers used to manufacture fancy goods  are  dyed  in  the  stock
state  and  undergo  heavy  scour prior to the stock dyeing step.
Piece-dyed goods are scoured  in  the  fabric  state  before  the
dyeing  step;  the weight, foreign material content and degree of
felting of the fabric all have a direct bearing on the degree  of
scouring required.

Heavyweight,  closely-woven  fabrics  with  a  high percentage of
recycled wool require very heavy detergents, long wash times  and
extensive  rinsing  periods.   Relative  to lighter weight fabric
with no or a low percentage of recycled wool,  high  organic  and
hydraulic  discharge  rates  are  associated with the scouring of
these types of fabric.  Light, open goods with a  low  percentage
of  recycled  wool  generally  scour  more  easily  with  lighter
detergents, shorter wash times and  less  rinsing,  resulting  in
lower  organic  and  hydraulic  discharges  than  the heavy scour
process.

Because some woolen mills produce only heavyweight  fabric,  some
produce  only  lightweight  fabric,  and some produce both, it is
apparent that considerable hydraulic and organic fluctuations can
                                 83

-------
exist  from  the   heavy   scour   process.    Typically,    these
fluctuations alone do not significantly influence the variability
of  the total discharge among wool finishing mills because of the
large amount  of  flow  associated  with  the  other  major  wool
finishing processes.

Carbonizing  Carbonizing  does  not  contribute  greatly  to  the
pollutant concentration of wool finishing wastewater but,  because
of the rinsing steps used to neutralize the acid taken up by  the
fabric,  does  add  significantly  to  the  hydraulic  load.   As
discussed in Section III, carbonized vegetable matter is  removed
as  a  solid  waste  and  only  the  residual  sulfuric  acid and
neutralizing  agents  {generally  sodium  carbonate)  enter   the
wastewater.   The  acid  bath  must be dumped when it becomes too
contaminated for efficient carbonization and the acid taken up by
the fabric must be neutralized to  prevent  damage  to  the  wool
fibers.    The  wastewaters  from  the  carbonizing  process  are
typically acidic, low  in  organic  content  and  high  in  total
solids.

Fulling   Fulling,  like carbonizing, does not contribute greatly
to the pollutant concentration of wool finishing  wastewater  but
does  add  to the hydraulic load.  Wastewater is generated during
the washing and rinsing steps,  which  are  required  to  prevent
rancidity  and  wool  spoilage,  when the water bath (wet fulling
only) is dumped.  If alkali fulling is used,  the  rinse  streams
will contain soap or detergent, sodium carbonate and sequestering
agents  (phosphate compounds).  If acid fulling is used, sulfuric
acid, hydrogen peroxide and small amounts of  metallic  catalysts
(chromium, copper or cobalt) also are present.

Bleaching   Bleaching  is  performed  on woolens, but to a lesser
degree than on cotton goods.  Only 40 percent of the woolen mills
that returned detailed surveys practice bleaching.   Those  mills
that  perform  bleaching  do  so  on  20 percent or less of their
production.  Hydrogen peroxide is generally used  because  sodium
hydrochloride  and calcium hydrochloride discolor and damage wool
fibers.  The discharge rate of wastewater from hydrogen  peroxide
bleaching  of  wool is generally  in the range of 8.3 to 25.0 I/kg
(1 to 3 gal/lb) of product and the BOD  contribution  is  usually
less  than  1 percent of the total for the typical wool finishing
process.   The  mass  discharge   rates  for  other   conventional
parameters  are  generally  very  small relative to the discharge
rates from other processes.

Dyeing   The  typical  dyeing  processes  for  the  industry  are
discussed  in  Section III.  As noted in that discussion, some of
the dyes and dye chemicals used for wool goods  are  specific  to
the  wool  fiber.   The acid and  metalized dyes are commonly used
while mordant and fiber  reactive  dyes  are  used  to  a   lesser
extent.   Because  of the recognized hazards of chromium entering
the waste streams, the use of mordant dyes has greatly diminished

-------
and they presently are used only if exceptional wash fastness
required.
is
In  sensitive  dyeing, a prescour step is often used.  Detergents
and wetting agents are added,  the  scouring  performed  and  the
fabric  thoroughly  rinsed.  The wastewater generated contributes
to  the  hydraulic  load  but  adds  little  to   the   pollutant
concentration.

For  acid  dyes, control of pH to a value suitable to the type of
dye in use is necessary.  The ingredients,  in  addition  to  the
dyes,  include Glauber's salt (sodium sulfate), sulfuric acid and
formic acid.

The metalized dyes have very good wash fastness and a  very  high
affinity  for wool even under mildly acidic conditions and at low
temperatures (below no°C).  These dyes often  are  used  on  100
percent  wool  fabric.   Metalized  dyes  are  almost  completely
exhausted so only a small quantity of  metallic  ions  (chromium)
enter the wastewater.

Blends  of wool and synthetic fibers are dyed in a single bath or
in two separate baths.  When two baths are used, dyes specific to
each fabric type are used and the hydraulic load can increase  by
50  percent.   In  each type of dyeing, the fabric is cooled with
fresh water and thoroughly rinsed; both steps add greatly to  the
hydraulic load.

Low Water Use Processing Subcateqory

Low  water  use processing refers, almost exclusively, to weaving
or adhesive products processing.  Weaving facilities include  the
conventional  weavers  and  water  jet weavers.  The conventional
weavers and  adhesive  products  processors  (general  processing
subdivision   of   the  subcategory)  have  very  low  wastewater
discharge rates relative to the other  subcategories,  while  the
water  jet  weavers have wastewater discharge rates comparable to
many of the other subcategories (see Table V-l).  The only  mills
with  relatively  large discharges are those engaged in water jet
weaving and those discharging large volumes of cooling  or  other
nonprocess  wastwater.   Process  wastewater  characteristics are
determined  primarily  by  the  slashing  process   (conventional
weaving),  the  weaving  process (water jet weaving mills) or the
dipping,   padding  or  saturating  process   (adhesive   products
processing  mills).   The  contributions of pollutants from these
processes are discussed below.

Slashing The slashing operation (see  Section  III)  consists  of
coating   yarn  with  sizing  compounds  prior  to  weaving.   At
conventional weaving mills, slashing is generally the only source
of process wastewater.  Wastewater results from spillage  in  the
size  mixing  area,  dumps  of  excess  sizing and cleanup of the
slasher and mixing equipment.  Among the components that are used
                                85

-------
in sizing formulations and that may enter the wastewater are  the
sizing  compounds  (e. g., starch, PVA, CMC or PAA), wax or tallow,
wetting agents, softeners, penetrants, plasticizers,  fungicides,
bacteriostats   and  other  preservatives.   Sizing  formulations
typically exert a high COD and, when starch is the primary sizing
agent, high BODj> also is exerted.  In general,  the  wastes  from
the slashing operation are diluted by nonprocess wastewater, such
as  sanitary  wastewater,  boiler blowdown and noncontact cooling
water generated at these mills.

Water Jet  Weaving   Water  jet  looms  are  a  special  type  of
shuttleless  loom  that  use a jet of water to propel the filling
yarns  during  the  weaving  operation.   Although   not   widely
practiced during 1976 to 1979, water jet weaving is becoming more
popular.   Each  type  of  water  jet  loom  has  different water
requirements and discharges  from  the  different  machines  were
reported  to  range  less than 3,785 I/day (100 gpd) up to 37,850
I/day (1000 gpd).  The water drains from beneath the machines and
may contain sizing chemicals and contaminants collected from  the
fiber.   Chemical  sizing  requirements  are  less with water jet
looms than with conventional looms because the  water  serves  as
the lubricant.  Most of the wastewater from greige mills that use
water jet weaving comes from this process.

Adhesive  Products  Processing  Adhesive products processing (see
Section III) includes operations  such  as .bonding,  laminating,
coating  and  flocking.  In all of these operations, a continuous
adhesive or coating  is  applied  to  the  material  by  padding,
dipping,  saturating  or  similar  means.  Wastewater occurs as  a
result of equipment cleanup, rinsing, overspraying  or  spillage.
PVC  from  coating or latex compounds from bonding, laminating or
flocking are  likely  to  be  the  chief  constituents  of  these
wastewaters.   Latex  wastes  may  be  high   in COD and suspended
solids.  Depending on the plant  operations,  other  contaminants
such  as  oil  and grease and solids also may find their way into
adhesive products processing wastewaters.

Woven Fabric Finishing Subcategory

The wastewater generated from the finishing of  woven  fabric  is
represented  by a broad range of concentration and mass discharge
rates for BOD!>, COD, TSS and  oil  and  grease.   Three  internal
subdivisions  of  this subcategory (simple manufacturing, complex
manufacturing and desizing) have been  identified.  The bases  for
these  subdivisions  are  discussed   in  Section  IV.  A schematic
displaying the typical processes employed is  presented in Section
III.  The  differences  between  the  three   subdivisions  are   a
function   of  the  complexity  of   the  wet  processing.   Mills
classified  in  the  complex  manufacturing   subdivision  perform
simple  manufacturing  plus  one  or  more  additional  major wet
processing steps.  Mills classified  in the  desizing  subdivision
perform  desizing  on  the  majority  of  their   production.  The
typical wastewater discharge and pollutant mass   discharge  rates
                                 86

-------
are  progressively  greater  for  each subsequent subdivision and
generally  reflect  an  increase- in  the  same  basic  pollutant
parameters.

The  wet  processing  used by a woven fabric finishing mill could
include  desizing,  scouring,  bleaching,  mercerizing,   dyeing,
printing   and   functional   finishing.   The  contributions  of
pollutants from these processing operations are discussed below.

Desizinq  Desizing contributes to the organic load, adds some oil
and grease, and is responsible for most of the suspended material
found in woven fabric finishing wastewater.  Natural starch  size
is  high in BODS^ while the synthetic sizing agents, which tend to
be less biodegradable unless exposed to an acclimated  biological
environment, result in constant BOD5_ but result in increased COD.
Over  an  extended  period  (such as the 20 days required for the
BOD2£ test), however, the synthetic sizing  agents  can  exert  a
substantial  biochemical  oxygen demand.  Depending on the fabric
type, desizing can contribute 50 percent or  more  of  the  total
solids resulting from the finishing of woven fabrics (1).  For an
average woven fabric finishing mill processing 100 percent cotton
goods  and  using starch as the sizing agents, the desizing waste
generally  will  constitute  about  16  percent  of   the   total
wastewater  volume,  45  percent  of  the BOD^>, 36 percent of the
total solids and 6 percent of the alkalinity (11).

Synthetic sizing agents such as PVA, CMC and PAA are  soluble  in
water  and  are  removed  from  woven  fabric without difficulty.
Starch is not readily soluble  and  must  be  hydrolyzed  into  a
soluble  from  by the action of special enzymes or acid solutions
before removal.  Enzymatic removal generates starch solids,  fat,
wax,  enzymes,  sodium  chloride  and  wetting agents.  The waste
contains organic and inorganic dissolved solids, suspended solids
and some oil and grease.  It has a pH of 6 to 8 and is  light  in
color.   Sulfuric  acid removal generates starch solids, fat, wax
and sulfuric acid.  The waste also contains organic and inorganic
dissolved solids, suspended solids and some oil and  grease.   It
has  a  pH  of  1  to  2  and  is relatively light in color.  The
desizing subdivision of the woven  fabric  finishing  subcategory
was   established   principally   because   of   the   additional
contribution of pollutants from the desizing operation.

Scouring Scouring of cotton  and  cotton-synthetic  fiber  blends
generates  wastewater  that is strongly alkaline (pH greater than
12), dark in color from cotton impurities and high  in  dissolved
solids  relative to other processes.  The wastewater contains oil
and grease and suspended solids that ate removed as impurities in
the cotton fiber.  Besides sodium hydroxide, of which a 2 percent
solution typically  is  used;  phosphate,  chelating  agents  and
wetting  agents may be used as auxiliary scouring chemicals.  For
the typical finishing mill processing 100 percent  cotton  goods,
the  scouring waste generally constitutes about 19 percent of the
                                87

-------
total wastewater volume,  16 percent of the BOD5.,  43  percent  of
the total solids and 60 percent of the alkalinity (11).

Synthetic  fibers  are  relatively  free of natural impurities so
they require less vigorous scouring.  These  fibers  absorb  very
little  moisture,  so  static electricity can be a problem during
processing.  To minimize this problem, antistatic  materials  are
applied to the yarns; these materials also serve as lubricants in
sizing  compounds.    Commonly  used  compounds  are styrene-based
resins, polyalkylene glycols, gelatin, PAA and polyvinyl acetate.
These compounds become a source of water pollution when they  are
removed  from  the fabrics during scouring.  In general, a milder
sodium carbonate  solution  and  a  surfactant  will  suffice  in
scouring synthetics,

Bleaching   Cotton  bleaching  is accomplished with hypochlorite,
hydrogen peroxide,  chlorine dioxide, sodium perborate,  peracidic
acid  or  other  oxidizing  agents.   Reducing agents also may be
used, although the oxidizing agents usually give a more permanent
white color.  Today, most cotton bleaching uses hydrogen peroxide
or hypochlorite, either  in  kiers  or  on  a  continuous  range;
hydrogen  peroxide  is  the  preferred  oxidizing  agent  and the
continuous range the most efficient bleaching method.

Bleaching of cellulosic regenerated fibers is accomplished  using
the  same  methods as for cotton; however, there is less coloring
matter  to  remove  so  the  strength  of  the  oxidizer  can  be
decreased.   Polyester and polyacrylonitrile fibers are not often
bleached unless part of a cotton-synthetic fiber blend.

Hydrogen peroxide bleaching contributes very  small  waste  loads
relative   to  other  processes,  most  of  which  are  inorganic
dissolved solids (sodium silicate, sodium  hydroxide  and  sodium
phosphate)   and   organic   dissolved  solids  (surfactants  and
chelating agents).   A relatively low level  of  suspended  solids
(fibers  and  natural  impurities)  will  be  present  when goods
containing cotton are bleached.

Mercerization  Mercerization is practiced to increase the tensile
strength of the cotton fiber and to  increase  its  affinity  for
dyes   (see  Section  III).   Essentially,  the process amounts to
saturating the fabric with sodium hydroxide (usually a 25  to  30
percent   solution),   allowing  sufficient  residence  time  for
interaction and washing the fabric to remove the excess caustic.

Mercerization wastewater is predominantly  the  sodium  hydroxide
solution  used in the process, diluted as a result of the washing
step.  The wastewater contains high levels  of  dissolved  solids
and   may   have  a  pH  of  12  to  13.   Depending  on  whether
mercerization is  practiced  before  or  after  bleaching,  small
amounts of foreign material and wax may be removed from the fiber
and  will  appear  as  suspended  solids  and oil and grease.  In
total, mercerization has been found to contribute about 1 percent

-------
of the BOD5_ load generated during the processing of  100  percent
cotton   woven   fabric   (15).    Today,   with  synthetics  and
cotton-synthetic blends  replacing  100  percent  cotton  fabric,
mercerization is practiced less often.  Most of the mills that do
utilize  the  process  have  found  it economically attractive to
recover sodium hydroxide for reuse.  Consequently, the wastewater
contribution from the process has decreased at many mills.

Dyeing Dyeing is without question the most complex of all the wet
finishing operations in the textile industry.  There are 9  basic
classifications    of   dyes   according   to   application   and
approximately 17 types according to use by the  textile  industry
(10).   There  are  thousands of individual dyes.  In addition to
the dyestuff itself, various other chemicals are  added  to  help
deposit the dye or to develop the color.  Chemicals that are used
include   acids,   bases,    salts,  wetting  agents,  retardants,
accelerators,  detergents,  oxidizing  agents,  reducing  agents,
developers  and  stripping  agents.  A detailed discussion of the
various dyes and dyeing methods is provided in Section III.

Woven fabric usually  is  dyed  as  piece  goods  with  batch  or
continuous   dye   equipment.   The  batch  equipment  is  either
atmospheric type or pressure type; continuous  dye  equipment  is
operated  under  atmospheric  pressure  conditions.   Atmospheric
dyeing generally requires greater amounts of auxiliary  chemicals
to  achieve the desired results.  Because most of these chemicals
are not retained in the final product  but  are  discarded  after
they  have  served  their purpose, atmospheric dyeing customarily
results in increased pollutant mass discharge rates.

Depending on the type of fabric,  dye,  equipment  used  and  the
efficiency  of  the  processes, the wastewater from the dyeing of
woven fabric may  contain  many  combinations  of  the  dyes  and
auxiliary  chemicals.   The  process contributes substantially to
the total pollutant mass discharge rate and  is  responsible  for
most of the wastewater flow.  The wastewater from the process may
contain  organic  and  metallic  toxic  pollutants and is high in
dissolved solids relative to other processes.   It  is,  however,
low  in  suspended  solids  relative  to  other  processes.   The
wastewater typically is colored and, if the color is not reduced,
can be aesthetically undersireable for discharge  into  receiving
waters.
For woven fabric finishing mills that process 100 percent cotton,
the BODI3 contribution resulting from the dyeing process was found
to  vary  from  1.5  to  30 percent of the total (15).  Carriers,
which are essential for dyeing polyester, can result in  an  even
greater  BODI3  contribution when cotton/polyester blends and pure
polyesters are being processed.

Printing Printing generally occurs at the  same  stage  in  woven
fabric   finishing  as  dyeing.   The  fabric  goes  through  the
                                 89

-------
preliminary cleaning and conditioning steps and is printed  using
one  of  several  methods.   When  woven  fabric is both dyed and
printed, printing is performed last.  A  complete  discussion  of
the  types  of printing and equipment used is provided in Section
III.  Printing often is referred to as  "localized  dyeing,"  and
the  same  basic dyestuffs are used.  Dyes are applied as liquid,
while a paste is used in printing.  In addition to  the  dyestuff
and  auxiliary chemicals discussed under "Dyeing," a thickener is
used to give the print paste the desired viscosity.   Gums  serve
as  thickeners and those commonly used include locust bean, guar,
alginate, starch and combinations of these.  Urea,  thiourea  and
glycols also are used in many print formulations.

Printing  wastes  are  comparable  in constituents to dye wastes,
although the  volumes  are  much  lower  and  the  concentrations
greater.   The  thickeners  contribute  to the biochemical oxygen
demand and solvents used to prepare pigments  and  clean  pigment
application  equipment often are present.  Printing pigments will
contribute suspended solids when the fabric is  rinsed,  although
much  of  the wastewater from printing comes from the cleaning of
make-up tanks and process equipment.

Functional Finishing  The functional finishes represent  a  large
group  of  chemical  treatments  that  improve  the function of a
fabric by making it resist creasing, water, stains, rot,  mildew,
moths, bacteria and other undesirable items.  They are more often
applied  to  the  natural  fibers (cotton and wool) and are quite
prevalent in  the  finishing  of  woven  fabrics.   As  would  be
expected  from  processes  that provide such diverse effects, the
range of chemicals used is very broad.  For  resin  treatment,  a
urea-formaldehyde-glyoxal compound (DMDHEU), a fatty softener and
a  catalyst (zinc nitrate, magnesium chloride) are used together.
Water repellents include  silicones,  fluorochemicals  and  fatty
materials,  each generally applied with a catalyst.  Soil release
treatments include special acrylic polymers and fluorochemicals.

These finishes generally  are  applied  by  impregnation  of  the
fabric  followed  by  squeezing  to  retain the desired amount of
chemical in the fabric.  The moist material  is  dried  and  then
heat  cured.   The cured fabric is frequently packed for shipment
without rinsing.  Most resin treated goods are precured (fixed by
the application of heat)  during  the  finishing  process.   Some
fabrics  are  postcured (fixed after a garment has been cut, sewn
and pressed).  Wastewater from resin treatment,  water  proofing,
flame  proofing  and soil release are small in volume relative to
other finishing processes because the chemicals  are  applied  by
padding, followed by drying and curing.  Only small quantities of
these  chemicals  enter  the mill's wastewater.  Some finishes do
require rinsing after application, which increases the volume  of
wastewater and quantity of chemicals discharged.
                                 90

-------
Knit Fabric Finishing Subcategory

The  wastewater  generated  from the finishing of knit fabric is,
like that from the finishing of woven fabric,  represented  by  a
broad  range  in concentration and mass discharge rates for BODI3,
COD,  TSS  and  oil  and  grease.   The  concentrations  of  these
pollutants  are  lower  than  those of the woven fabric finishing
subcategory (see Table V-15) and the  variability  from  mill  to
mill   also is somewhat less.  Three internal subdivisions of this
subcategory  (simple  manufacturing,  complex  manufacturing  and
hosiery  products)  have  been  identified.  As with woven fabric
finishing, the  subdivisions  are  based  on  complexity  of  the
operations.   Hosiery  production  requires less water and a less
variable quantity and variety of process  chemicals  than  simple
and   complex   manufacturing.    The   justification   for   the
subdivisions is discussed fully in Section IV,  and  a  schematic
representing   the   typical   processing   sequence   for   each
subdivision, as well as a description of processes, is  presented
in Section III.

The  wet  processing used by a knit fabric finishing mill (simple
manufacturing and complex  manufacturing  subdivisions)  includes
various  combinations  of  the  following  operations:  scouring,
bleaching, dyeing and  printing.   Hosiery  production  typically
uses  scouring,  bleaching and dyeing.  Mills in each subdivision
might apply chemical coatings during the  final  finishing  step,
but  only  a  small amount, if any, of these chemicals enters the
wastewater.   The  impact  of  these  processes   on   wastewater
discharged by knit fabric finishing mills is discussed below.

Sizing,  as  such,  is  not  applied to knitted goods because the
knitting process does not stress the yarn to the same  degree  as
does  weaving.    Lubricants  (generally  mineral  oils, vegetable
oils,  synthetic esters or waxes) are added  during  the  knitting
process and are effectively removed during scouring.

Scouring   Washing or scouring is frequently the first process at
knit fabric finishing mills.  Knit goods are  washed  or  scoured
with   detergents,   soaps  or  solvents  to  remove  natural  or
artificial waxes, oil and other impurities.  The  discharge  from
the  process  is  high  in dissolved solids and color (because of
cotton impurities) and may contain a significant  amount  of  the
lubricants  noted  above.  The scouring or washing of 100 percent
synthetic fabrics results in a waste  contaminated  with  greater
concentrations of lubricating oil and and special scouring agents
such  as ethoxylated phenols and other emulsifiers.

Bleaching   Bleaching  of knit fabrics is similar to bleaching of
woven fabrics.   The bleaching agents used  are  generally  sodium
hypochlorite  or  hydrogen  peroxide.  The previous discussion in
this   section  on  wastewater  characteristics  associated   with
bleaching  woven  fabrics  is  applicable  to  this  subcategory.
Bleaching is generally associated with cotton fabric  and  blends
and is not applied to 100 percent synthetic fabrics.
                                 91

-------
Dyeing   The  dyeing operation is a major source of wastewater in
knit fabric  finishing.   Beck,  beam  and  jet  dyeing  are  all
commonly  employed using either atmospheric or pressure operating
modes.  Paddle, rotary or tub dyeing also may be used, especially
for hosiery.  Jig dyeing and continuous dyeing are  less  common.
The   types  of  dyestuff,  auxiliary  chemicals  and  conditions
employed for dyeing knit goods are essentially the  same  as  for
woven  goods  of  comparable  fiber  composition.  The discussion
previously  presented  in  this  section  concerning   wastewater
characteristics  associated  with  dyeing  woven  fabrics also is
applicable to knit fabric dyeing and is not  repeated  here.   In
knit  fabric  finishing,  rinse  solutions are often mechanically
extracted.  In this step, a centrifugal extractor is used to draw
water out of the fabric.

Printing Printing methods used  in  finishing  knit  fabrics  are
similar  to  the  methods  used  on  woven  fabrics.  Sources and
characteristics of the wastes are  similar  to  those  previously
discussed for the woven fabric finishing subcategory.

Functional  Finishing   The  functional  finishes applied to knit
fabrics are essentially the same as those  previously  noted  for
woven  fabrics.   The methods of application are also similar and
the same variety of constituents  is  likely  to  appear  in  the
waste.

Carpet Finishing Subcateqory

The  total  volume of wastewater discharged from a carpet mill is
typically quite large but, when the discharge is  normalized  for
production,  the  discharge  rate  (I/kg  of  production)   is low
relative to other subcategories (see Table V-l).  This is because
of the specialized nature of carpet manufacturing.  Factors  that
contribute  to  low  discharge  rates per unit of production are:
limited preliminary wet processing such as scouring and bleaching
is required; dyeing that is performed is usually directed at less
then the total weight of the material placed in the  dye  machine
(the  primary  backing is not dyed and often part of the yarn has
been predyed); there is less redyeing  to  try  to  match   shade;
printing  of carpet results in small wastewater flows; and  carpet
is heavier  per  square  yard  than  any  of  the  other  textile
products.

The wet processing at a carpet mill includes various combinations
of   the   following  operations:  scouring,  bleaching,  dyeing,
printing, functional  finishing  and  backing.   Wastewater  from
dyeing  and  printing  are the major contributors to the flows at
these mills, but these processes result in only  moderate   levels
of  the  traditionally monitored conventional and nonconventional
pollutants,  relative   to   other   subcategories.    Functional
finishing  and carpet backing make relatively small contributions
to the total flow; the latter often results in a latex waste that
can be segregated from the rest of the wastewater  discharge  for
                                92

-------
separate  treatment.   The contributions of pollutants from these
processes are discussed below.'

Scouring/Bleaching  Carpets  may  be  scoured   with   soaps   or
detergents  to remove processing oils, waxes and other impurities
and prepare  them  for  dyeing  or  printing.   If  bleaching  is
requiring,  the  bleaching  agents  are added after scouring (5).
Less than 15 percent of the mills that returned detailed  surveys
perform  scouring,  and  at  all of these the percentage of total
production scoured is small (1 to 40 percent with an  average  of
16  percent).   Only  three  mills that returned detailed surveys
perform bleaching; the amount of production on reported  bleached
was  1,  2  and  10  percent,   respectively.   Thus, scouring and
bleaching have only a minor  effect  on  the  characteristics  of
carpet mill wastewaters.

Dyeing   Nearly  all carpet finishing mills perform piece dyeing,
and the wastewaters are greatly influenced by the  dyes  and  dye
machines  employed.   Nylon  is  the major fiber type used in the
manufacture of carpet, although the use  of  polyester  fiber  is
substantial.   Other  fibers  are  used  by  only five mills that
returned detailed  surveys.   Dyeing  is  typically  accomplished
using  atmospheric  dye  becks or, to a lesser extent, continuous
dye ranges.  Only four dye  classifications  were  identified  as
being  used by carpet finishing mills.  Acid dyes, dispersed dyes
and cationic dyes are  most  frequently  used;  relatively  small
quantities of direct dyes are used.

In  addition  to  the  dyestuffs  themselves,  numerous auxiliary
chemicals such as leveling agents,  inorganic  compounds,  acids,
sequestering  agents,  organic  compounds,  dispersing agents and
various carriers may be employed {see Section III).  Because most
of these auxiliary chemicals are used to improve the  quality  of
the  dyeing  operation, they do not remain with the carpet.  As a
result, they are found in the wastewater along with  excess  dyes
and  contribute  to  BODS.,  COD,  dissolved  solids, organics and
color.

Printing  Carpet is generally printed by rotary, flat  bed,  warp
yarn  or  tuft  dyeing  equipment.  Flat bed printing is the most
common method, although even this mode of printing occurs at less
than 10 percent of the carpet mills returning  detailed  surveys.
Spray     printing     techniques,    using    highly    advanced
electronically-controlled machinery, may play an  important  role
in  carpet  printing  in  the  future  but,  at the present time,
wastewater from carpet printing should not  differ  substantially
from woven fabric printing wastewater.

Functional  Finishing  Chemical  agents may be applied to carpets
after dyeing or printing to impart certain  desirable  qualities.
Chemicals  that  increase  the  water repellency, flame or mildew
resistance  and  soil  retardance  sometimes  are  used,  as  are
antistatic  agents  and  softeners.  Because these agents are not
                                93

-------
applied as frequently and are not  as  numerous  as  those  which
might  be used in finishing woven fabric, their effect on the raw
waste load should be less.

Carpet Backing The carpet backing process laminates  a  secondary
backing  (normally  jute  or  propylene)  to  the dyed or printed
carpet.  The adhesive is normally a latex  compound,  although  a
form  backing  of urethane or latex sometimes is used.  The latex
used in both foamed and unfoamed backing is not soluble in  water
but  is  used  in  a highly dispersed form.  Wastewater from this
process will contain suspended solids and COD.

Stock and Yarn Finishing Subcategory

The volume of wastewater discharged by stock and  yarn  finishing
facilities  is  comparable  to that from mills in other finishing
subcategories.   The  wastes  generated  generally  are  not   as
concentrated  as  those  found in the other subcategories and the
components of the wastes depend substantially on whether  natural
fibers, blends or synthetic fibers alone are processed.

The  wet  processing  employed by a stock and yarn finishing mill
includes  various  combinations  of  the  following   operations:
scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, dyeing and printing.  Bleaching
and dyeing are the processes that generate most of the wastewater
in this subcategory.  Scouring, mercerizing and "printing" (space
or   knit-deknit   dyeing)  are  performed  less  frequently,   A
description of stock and yarn processing, as well  as  schematics
of  typical  finishing  operations,  is presented in Section III.
The  contributions  of  pollutants  from   the   wet   processing
operations are discussed below.

Mercerization  Concentrated caustic solution is used to mercerize
cotton yarns at some of  the  mills  in  this  subcategory.   The
resulting  wastewater will contain dissolved solids and have a pH
of 12 to 13.

Bleaching/Scouring Bleaching is performed on either raw stock  or
yarn  to whiten the fibers and remove any natural colors.  Sodium
hypochlorite or hydrogen peroxide are  typically  used  for  this
purpose.    The   contribution   of   bleaching   to   wastewater
characteristics has been discussed previously  for  woven  fabric
finishing.   Scouring  is  employed  less frequently at stock and
yarn finishing mills and also has been discussed previously.

Dyeing/Printing  Stock dyeing usually is performed in  a  vat  or
pressure  kettle.   Yarn  dyeing usually is performed by skein or
package dyeing methods.  A specialty yarn dyeing process, similar
to and sometimes referred to  as  printing,  is  known  as  space
dyeing.   All  these  methods  have  been discussed previously in
Section  III;  a  discussion  of  dyes  and  auxiliary  chemicals
associated  with coloring various fibers also is presented there.
The effect of dyeing on wastewater characteristics  is  presented
                                 94

-------
earlier  in this section under woven fabric finishing.  Virtually
all dye classes are used in stock and yarn dyeing, and the  waste
generated  will be similar to those generated in dyeing fabric or
carpet of the same fiber type.

Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcateqorv

The nature of nonwoven  manufacturing  is  such  that  a  typical
facility  has  a small hydraulic loading and small pollutant mass
discharge rates relative to other subcategories.  The  wastewater
may  contain  latex  and  numerous  other  contaminants  such  as
acrylic, pigments and dirt.  At a few  facilities,  manufacturing
operations  common  to the other subcategories (bleaching, dyeing
or printing  of  fabric)  are  performed  with  resultant  higher
wastewater  discharges.  However, performing these operations are
the exception rather than the  rule.   The  wastewater  generated
during the typical nonwoven manufacturing processes are discussed
below.

Web  Formation  Web  formation is a dry operation unless the "wet
lay" process is used (see Section III).  Because water is used as
a transport medium for the fibers in this method, some wastewater
results from this process.  This waste is generally low in  BOD5.,
COD and TSS, has a pH of 6 to 7 and is slightly milky in color.

Bonding  and  Coloring   Bonding  is  used  to  impart structural
integrity to the nonwoven fabric.  Adhesives  such  as  acrylics,
polyvinyl  acetate  resins  or  other latex compounds are usually
used.  Cleanup of applicator equipment and mixing  tanks  results
in  wastewater  contaminated  with  adhesives.   The  function of
nonwoven fabrics (e.g., commercial  applications  and  disposable
items  such as diapers) may not require adding color.  When color
is required, it is generally applied  in  the  form  of  pigments
added to  the bonding agents.


Functional   Finishing    Chemical  treatments  to  impact  flame
resistance,  water  repellency  or  mildew  resistance  also  are
applied  to nonwovens.  The methods of application and effects on
wastewater  characteristics  are  similar  to  those   previously
described for other subcategories.

Felted Fabric Processing Subcategory

Felted  fabric  processing typically results in a high wastewater
volume,  relative  to  other  subcategories,  and  low  pollutant
concentrations.   The  wet processing operations include felting,
dyeing and functional finishing.  The rinses that follow  felting
(fulling)   and  dyeing,  if  used,  result  in  high  wastewater
discharge  volumes  and  contribute  most  of   the   pollutants.
Functional   finishing  also  may  make  a  contribution  to  the
wastewater.  The contribution of pollutants from the typical  wet
processing steps is discussed below.
                                 95

-------
Felting  (Fulling)  Fulling  of  felted  fabric is similar to the
fulling used in wool finishing.  Detergents, alkalis or acids may
be used.  These constituents, along with auxiliary chemicals, are
discharged  when  the  baths  are   dumped.    In   some   cases,
neutralization  of  the acid absorbed by the fabric is necessary.
The major hydraulic loading comes from the washes or rinses  that
follow  fulling.  Hardening is a mechanical pressure process used
by some mills prior to fulling to cause the wool  to  felt.   The
only  waste  resulting  from  this  step  is  from  steam or mist
condensate that collects on the heavy vibrating metal plates.

Dyeing  Dyeing of felts  is  like  dyeing  other  fabrics.   Dyes
appropriate to the fiber content of the felt are used, along with
appropriate  amounts  of  auxiliary  chemicals.   Together, these
materials contribute to BOD5., COD and dissolved  solids  loadings
in the wastewater.

Functional  Finishing  A  wide variety of functional finishes and
chemical treatments are applied to felts.   These  chemicals  and
the  methods  of  application  have  been  previously  described.
Although  functional  finishing  has  only  a  minor  impact   on
hydraulic  loading, a wide variety of chemicals may be introduced
into the wastewater.

WATER USE

Although there is  some  loss  of  water  by  evaporation  during
textile  processing  and textile wastewater treatment, wastewater
discharge is generally taken to  represent  water  usage  in  the
industry.   A  summary  of the wastewater discharge rates in I/kg
(gal/lb) for each subcategory is presented  in  Table  V-l.   The
values  presented  include  minimum,  median  and  maximum annual
average values for the plants  in  each  subcategory.   As  noted
these data are from the industry surveys.

With   the   exception  of  low  water  use  processing   (general
processing), wool scouring requires the least water per  unit  of
production.  In comparing the values shown, however, it should be
noted  that  raw wool contains between 30 to 70 percent by weight
of nonwool materials such as dirt and grease.

In contrast, wool  finishing  requires  the  greatest  amount  of
water,  principally  because  of  the  numerous  low  temperature
rinsing steps that are required to remove natural contaminants of
the wool and residual process  chemicals  from  the  carbonizing,
scouring  and  bleaching  operations  and  soaps from the fulling
process.  Detailed descriptions of the process water  requirement
are provided in Section III.

Minimum,  median  and maximum wastewater discharge flows for each
subcategory are presented in Table V-2.  The  minimum  flows  are
reported  by  mills  in  the  low  water  use processing  (general
processing) subcategory and the hosiery products  subdivision  of
                                 96

-------
                                                  TABLE  V-l
                           WASTEWATER DISCHARGE RATE - SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL DATA

1.
2.
3.


4.



5.



6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Wastewater Discharge Rate, I/kg (gal/lb) of Product*
Minimum Median Maximum
4
124

0.
19

12
10
5

8
12
5
8
3
2
33
.2
.3

08
.2

.5
.8
.0

.3
.5
.8
.3
.3
.5
.4
(0.5)
(14.9)

(0.01)
(2-3)

(1.5)
(1.3)
(0.6)

(1-0)
(1.5)
(0.7)
(1.0)
(0.4)
(0.3)
(4.0)
11
304

6
86

76
97
105

117
122
75
46
96
40
212
.7
.4

.3
.7

.7
.6
.9

.6
.6
.1
.7
.7
.0
.7
(1.4)
(36.5)

(0.75)
(10.4)

(9.2)
(11-7)
(12.7)

(14.1)
(14.7)
(9.0)
(5.6)
(11.6)
(4.8)
(25.5)
38.
879.

76.
194.

275.
276.
507.

387.
392.
289.
162.
538.
82.
930.
4
0

7
3

2
9
9

8
8
4
6
7
6
7
(4.6)
(105.4)

(9.2)
(23.3)

(33.0)
(33.2)
(60.9)

(46.5)
(47.1)
(34.7)
(19.5)
(64.6)
(9-9)
(111.6)
No. of
Mills
11
15

86
6

40
39
59

57
51
58
37
117
11
11
* Wool scouring flows are per unit of raw wool.
  Wool finishing flows are per unit of product, although effluent limitations are per unit of fiber.

Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980.

-------
                                                       TABLE V-2
                                   WASTEWATER DISCHARGE -  SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL DATA
00

1.
2.
3.


4.



5-



6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Wastewater Discharge, cu m/day (MGD)
Minimum Median Maximum
38
189

4
299

42
170
38

15
11
4
76
45
53
11
(0
(0

(0
(0

(0
(0
.010)
.050)

.001)
.079)

.011)
.045)
(0.010)

(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0

.004)
.003)
.001)
.020)
.012)
.014)
.003)
193
1,207

95
640

678
1,703
3,217

1,438
2,029
182
1,590
946
379
564
(0.
(0-

(0.
(0.

(0.
(0.
(0.

(0.
(0.
(0.
051)
319)

025)
169)

179)
450)
850)

380)
536)
048)
(0.420)
(0.
(0.
(0.
250)
100)
149)
1,919
4,621

1,575
1,158

8,327
28,955
29,845

10,560
13,248
1,537
6,923
9,637
1,893
1,514
(0
(1

(0
(0

(2
(7
(7

(2
(3
(0
(1
(2
(0
(0
.507)
.221)

.416)
.306)

.200)
.650)
.885)

.790)
.500)
.406)
.829)
.546)
.500)
.400)
No. of
Mills
11
15

86
6

40
39
59

57
51
58
37
117
11
11
    Source:  EPA Industry  Surveys,  1977  & 1980.

-------
the  knit fabric finishing subcategory.  This is expected because
process water  requirements  are  lower  in  the  low  water  use
processing  subcategory,  and the mill production is lower in the
hosiery  products  subdivision  than  in   any   of   the   other
subcategories.   Maximum  discharges are reported at mills in the
woven fabric finishing subcategory where complex  processing  and
desizing  operations  are  employed.   This  also  is predictable
because of the high water usage and large production capacity  of
these  mills.   The  median  discharges  tend  to  increase  with
increase in complexity of the processing.

Estimates of the total  flow  of  wastewater  discharged  by  the
industry  are  presented  in Table V-3.  Values are presented for
direct dischargers, indirect dischargers and the total  mills  in
each  subcategory.   These estimates were developed by adding the
known average  discharges  from  the  historical  data  base  and
estimated  average  discharges for mills not reporting flow.  The
greatest amount of flow discharged by direct  dischargers  is  in
the  woven fabric finishing (desizing) subcategory.  For indirect
dischargers, the greatest flow is discharged by the  knit  fabric
finishing   (simple  processing)  subcategory.   Considering  all
dischargers, the greatest flow is discharged by the woven  fabric
finishing  (desizing)  subcategory,  which  accounts  for over 20
percent of the total wastewater flow discharged by the  industry.
Four  industry  segments (wool scouring, low water use processing
(water jet weaving), nonwoven  manufacturing  and  felted  fabric
processing)  each  account for less than one percent of the total
wastewater flow discharged by the industry.  The  total  industry
discharges  an estimated wastewater flow of 1.85 million cu m/day
(490 MGD).

TOXIC POLLUTANTS

Industry Survey Information

Most of the organic toxic pollutants are specific  compounds  and
more  sophisticated laboratory analytical techniques are required
to quantify them than are  required  for  nonspecific  parameters
such  as  solids, COD and alkalinity.  Because the concentrations
of the organic toxics are considerably lower than for most of the
conventional  and  nonconventional  pollutants,  more   elaborate
sample  collection  and  handling methods are necessary to insure
that meaningful and reproducible results are  obtained.   Because
of  this, and the fact that control of the toxic pollutants, with
the exception of total chromium, generally was  not  included  in
previous   permits   requirements,  there  is  relatively  little
historical information about the presence  or  concentrations  of
most  of  the  toxic  pollutants  (especially  the  nonmetals) in
textile mill wastewaters.

One source of  information  utilized  in  developing  information
about  the  toxic  pollutants  in textile wastes was the industry
survey.  The questionnaire used in the survey has been  described
                                 99

-------
                                                  TABLE V-3
                             WASTEWATER DISCHARGE - ESTIMATED SUBCATEGORY TOTALS
     Subcategory
             Estimated Wastewater Discharge, cu m/day (MGD)
Direct Dischargers*      Indirect Dischargers          Total Subcategory
1. Wool Scouring

2. Wool Finishing

3. Low Water Use Processing
  3,849    (1.017)

 41,120   (10.864)
 8,679    (2.293)

30,836    (8.147)
12,528   (3.310)

71,956  (19.011)

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Total Industry
16,775
4,527
65,870
96,650
225,034
66,722
45,216
753
20,378
82,350
2,490
791
672,525
(4
(1
(17
(25
(59
(17
(H
(0
(5
(21
(0
(0
(177
.432)
.196)
.403)
.535)
.454)
.628)
.946)
.199)
.384)
.757)
.658)
.209)
.682)
62
4
131
145
151
238
105
22
87
169
14
7
1,181
,044
,527
,752
,950
,491
,251
,651
,824
,559
,477
,500
,831
,372
(16.
(1-
392)
196)
(34.809)
(38.560)
(40.024)
(62.
(27.
(6.
(23.
(44.
(3.
(2.
(312.
946)
913)
030)
133)
768)
831)
069)
111)
78
9
197
242
376
304
150
23
107
251
16
8
1,853
,819
,054
,622
,600
,525
,973
,867
,577
,937
,827
,990
,622
,897
(20.824)
(2.392)
(52.212)
(64.095)
(99.478)
(80.574)
(39.859)
(6.229)
(28.517)
(66.525)
(4.489)
(2.278)
(489.793)
* Includes wastewater generated and disposed of by zero discharge mills (see Table III-8).
Note:  The estimates were developed by adding the known average discharge values for the mills in each sub-
       category reporting flow data plus estimates of the average discharge for the mills not reporting flow,
       The estimates for mills not reporting values were based on the mill's assignment to a specific model.
       Model assignments were made on the basis of survey information and information about products and
       production equipment published in the 1978 edition of the Davison's Textile Blue Book.
Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980 and Contractor estimates.

-------
 previously.    In  the  questionnaire,   respondents  were asked to
 identify whether each of  123  toxic pollutants* was"known present,"
"suspected absent"or"known absent"in the untreated  wastewater  or
 treated  effluent.    The  agency rated  the responses to Section VI
 as "good," "poor"  and "no response." A "good"  rating was assigned
 if an effort was made by  the  survey responder  to consider each of
 the toxic pollutants listed.   A "poor" rating  was assigned if the
 only response was a single statement   such as  "known  absent,"
 "none  used,"  "none present," or  an "X" through the entire list.
 A "no response"  rating was assigned when  the   question  was  not
 addressed.  In summary, 418 responses  were rated as "good," 65 as
 "poor" and 131  as "no response." The responses for each pollutant
 were  tallied  for  the  mills that provided "good" responses.  A
 summary of the "good" responses is presented  in  Table  V-4  and
 shows that 53 pollutants  are  know  to be present and an additional
 47  are suspected to be present by at  least one mill.   A total of
 69 pollutants are reported known or suspected  present  by  more
 than  two mills; 29 of these  are known to be present by more than
 two mills.

 Field Sampling Program

 Because  of  the  absence  of  historical  data  for  the   toxic
 pollutants  noted  above,  it  was  necessary   to perform a field
 sampling program.   The program was conducted in five  phases  and
 involved  a  total  to 51 textiles  mills.  The first phase was
 conducted in connection with   the   joint  ATMI/EPA  mobile  pilot
 plant   project.    Untreated  wastewater,  biologically  treated
 effluent and, in some cases,  physical/chemical  treated  effluent
 samples were collected at 23  mills during March, April and May of
 1977.   In  the  second phase, during  May, June and July of 1977,
 untreated wastewater and   biologically-treated  effluent  samples
 were  collected  at  eight additional mills and from the various
 physical/chemical treatment modes  of the mobile  pilot  plant  at
 one   previously  sampled  mill.   In   the  third  phase,  during
 September, October and November of 1977, water supply,  untreated
 wastewater,        biologically-treated      effluent      and/or
 physical/chemical-treated effluent samples were collected  at  13
 additional  mills  and from   the   various treatment modes of the
 mobile pilot at one previously sampled mill.  An additional  five
 mills and six previously  sampled mills were sampled in the fourth
 phase  from April to September 1978.  This phase investigated the
 day-to-day  fluctuations   in   untreated  wastewater  and  treated
 effluents    and   the   efficiencies    of  various   full-scale
 *At the time of the survey (March,   1977),   the  toxic  pollutant
 list  contained  only 123 compounds;  shortly thereafter, the list
 was increased to 129 with the addition of  di-n-octyl  phthalate,
 PCB-1221,  PCB-1232, PCB-1248, PCB-1260 and PCB-1016.
                                 101

-------
Toxic Pollutant
                 TABLE V-4
INDUSTRY RESPONSES TO TOXIC POLLUTANTS LIST
           SUMMARY OF ALL MILLS

                          Known    Suspected
                          Present  Present
Known   Suspected
Absent  Absent
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
benzidine
carbon tetrachloride
(tetrachlorome thane)
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexa chlorobenzene
1,2-dichloroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
hexachloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
1,1, 2-trichloroethane
1,1,2 , 2-tetrachloroethane
chloroethane
bis(chloromethyl) ether
bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
2-chloronaphthalene
2,4, 6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform (trichloromethane)
2-chlorophenol
1 , 2-dichlorobenzene
1 , 3-dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-dichlorobenzene
3 , 3-dichlorobenzidine
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
1 , 2-trans-dichloroethylene
2 , 4-dichlorophenol
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
2,4-dimethylphenol
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2 , 6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
6
5
6
1
4
33
1
1
5
1
1
3
2
1
2
2
2
1

2
7
3
26
27
42
9
28
53
5
6
34
1
1
9
2
8
5
3
1
2
7
3
5
8
16
9
8
10
2
2
2
3
3
5
7
1
4
262
264
243
254
236
244
235
182
256
245
233
260
258
254
258
256
246
255
256
263
260
259
249
257
252
259
259
260
267
265
263
263
263
260
261
262
263
256
263
264
43
46
38
40
43
61
44
38
48
50
46
51
53
52
52
48
60
53
54
42
44
47
55
43
40
40
40
41
41
41
43
45
45
45
45
44
39
41
42
41
                                  102

-------
                                TABLE V-4 (Cont.)
Toxic Pollutant
Known    Suspected
Present  Present
Known   Suspected
Absent  Absent
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
methylene chloride
(dichloromethane)
methyl chloride (chloromethane)
methyl bromide (bromomethane)
bromoform (tribromomethane)
dichlo rob romome thane
trichlorofluorome thane
dichlorodifluorome thane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate*
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
1,2 benzanthracene
3 , 4-benzopyrene
3 , 4-benzof luoranthene
1 1 , 12-benzof luoranthene
chrysene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
1 , 12-benzoperylene
fluorene
1
1
3 17
1 2
4
1
5
2
1
7 48
7
2
2
4
2
5
4
2 15
81 48
4
3 2
1 6
7
8 17
5
2
1
1
1
3 2
2 8
2
1 4
266
263
265
242
264
265
266
265
264
263
261
260
265
262
232
260
262
260
257
259
260
261
265
248
161
263
261
261
261
243
260
261
263
262
262
262
256
259
256
43
46
45
41
43
43
44
46
45
45
49
44
43
45
33
42
43
43
43
45
42
42
42
45
38
41
43
42
41
40
41
43
44
45
44
41
41
45
45
                                  103

-------
TABLE V-4 (Cont.)
Toxic
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
Pollutant
phenanthrene
1,2,5 , 6-dibenz anthracene
indeno(l,2,3-cd) pyrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane (technical mixture
and metabolites)
4,4'-DDT
4, 4 '-DDE (p,p'-DDX)
4,4'-DDD (p,p'-TDE)
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC (lindane)
delta-BHC
PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
PCB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)
PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)*
PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)*
PCB-1248 (Arochlor 1248)*
PCB-1260 (Arochlor 1260)*
PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)*
Toxaphene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Asbestos (Fibrous)
Beryllium (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Known
Present
10
8
4
2
1
1
1
1

16
10
3
2
24
117
87
Suspected
Present
3
6
2
19
40
17
5
1
1
1


1
36
6
3
5
17
55
79
Known
Absent
260
258
261
261
242
223
251
253
242
241
242
239
240
240
243
243
244
246
246
246
246
244
245
245
245
244
244
243
208
246
257
257
219
117
146
Suspected
Absent
43
42
46
45
43
43
40
47
78
78
78
82
82
82
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
79
79
77
56
70
65
65
57
38
27
  104

-------
                                TABLE V-4 (Cont.)
Toxic Pollutant
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
Cyanide (Total)
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
2,3,7 , 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
(TCDD)
Known
Present
10
34
19
28
7
12
2
100
Suspected
Present
6
27
15
28
3
4
1
64
1
Known
Absent
240
204
212
208
242
244
251
140
260
Suspected
Absent
72
59
68
53
59
56
59
30
44
  Pollutant not included on original list of 123
Known Present
- The compound has been detected by reasonable analytical
  procedures in the discharge or by reference is known to
  be present in the raw waste load.
Suspected Present- The compound is a raw material in the processes employed,
                   a product, a by-product, catalyst, etc.   Its presence
                   in the raw waste load and discharge is a reasonable
                   technical judgment.

Suspected Absent - No known reason to predict that the compound is present
                   in the discharge.
Known Absent
- The application of reasonable analytical procedures
  designed to detect the material have yielded negative
  results.
Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1976-1977.
                                  105

-------
physical/chemical treatment technologies.  In the last phase, two
additional mills and six previously sampled  mills  were  sampled
from  December  1977  to October 1979, and one previously sampled
mill was sampled in March 1980.

A special sampling  program  was  conducted  during  October  and
November  1979  to  measure  asbestos  levels, which had not been
investigated during previous sampling.  Water  supply,  untreated
wastewater  and  treated  effluent  samples  were collected at 13
previously   sampled   mills.    The   asbestos   analyses   were
subsequently conducted on these samples.

The  scope  of  the  field sampling program is presented in Table
V-5.  The 51 mills  sampled  represent  all  subcategories,  with
greater  emphasis placed on the major subcategories.  Most of the
direct discharging mills provided biological  treatment,  with  a
few providing physical/chemical treatment.  The sample collection
and  handling  procedures and the analytical procedures conformed
to protocols developed by EPA.

The field sampling program was designed to insure that the number
of mills sampled  in  each  subcategory  would  closely  fit  the
distribution  of  mills  in  the  industry.   Because of the wide
diversity within the manufacturing processes used by the  textile
industry,  it  was  recognized  that  the  screening phase should
include more than one mill in each subcategory.

Field Sampling Results - Water Supply

A summary of the analytical results showing the minimum, maximum,
average and median concentrations of all water supply samples for
each pollutant detected, the number of times each  pollutant  was
analyzed  for  and  the number of times detected, is presented in
Table V-6.  Samples were collected for 34 mills, with  two  pairs
of  mills  using the same water supply source.  Thus, 32 separate
water supply samples were collected and  analyzed.   Seven  toxic
organic  pollutants,  9  toxic  metals, asbestos and cyanide were
detected at concentrations greater than 10 ug/1.  Chloroform  and
copper,   detected  at  concentrations  of  1,360  and  781  ug/1
respectively, were the maximum toxic organic  and  maximum  toxic
metal  detected  in the water supplies.  Zinc, toluene and copper
were the most frequently detected pollutants.   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, a compound present in a high percentage of the samples
analyzed  across the industries being studied, may be an anomaly,
its presence  explained  by  the  fact  that  it  is  used  as  a
plasticizer in the plastic tubing used for sample collection.

Field Sampling Results - Untreated Wastewater

The  overall qualitative results of the field sampling program of
textile mill untreated wastewaters are presented  by  subcategory
in  Table  V-7.   Two  toxic  pollutants:  copper  and  zinc were
detected  in  all  nine  subcategories.   An   additional   eight
                                 106

-------
o
-J
                                                    TABLE V-5
                               SUMMARY OF MILL CHARACTERISTICS AND SAMPLE COLLECTION
                                              FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM
         Report
         Number   Mill Type
Typical Processing
Products
       Samples Collected
Water     Raw    Biolog- Physico-
Supply   Waste    ical   chemical
10006
10013
10015
20011
20021
(04935)
(01304)
(90200)
Wool Scouring
Wool Scouring
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Wool Finishing
General
Processing
Water Jet
Weaving
Other
Raw wool scouring, spinning
Raw wool scouring, heavy
scour, carbonizing, bleaching
Raw wool scouring
Heavy scouring, bleaching,
stock & yarn dyeing
Heavy scouring, stock & yarn
dyeing
Low Water Use
Spinning, slashing, weaving
Water jet weaving
Fiberglass extrusion
Wool top & carpet X
yarn
Wool top & wool/ X
polyester fabric
Wool top X
Apparel & X
upholstery fabric
Woven fabric X
Processing
Woven greige goods
Woven greige goods X
Fiberglass yarns X
X X
XXX
XXX*
XXX*
XXX*
X X
X
XXX**
         *  Collected from mobile pilot plant.
        ( )  Represents mill sequence number instead of report number.
         #  Nontextile processing so data, with the exception of water supply, not included in results of
            field sampling program.
        **  Collected from in-place treatment technology.

-------
                                                     TABLE V-5  (Cont.)
         Report
         Number   Mill Type
                           Typical Processing
                                                      Products
                               Samples Collected
                       Water    Raw    Biolog- Physico-
                       Supply   Waste   ical   chemical
o
00
                                              Woven Fabric Finishing
40023  Simple Processing  Piece dyeing

40144  Simple Processing  Printing
40077  Complex Processing Scouring, bleaching,
                          printing, piece dyeing

40135  Complex Processing Slashing, weaving,
                          desizing, bleaching,
                          printing, yarn & piece
                          dyeing

40160  Complex Processing Desizing, scouring,
                          bleaching, mercerizing,
                          printing, piece dyeing
Upholstery fabric

Sheets, blankets,
towels

Finished fabric
                                                           Sheets & towels
        (04742)  Desizing
          40034  Desizing
                          Desizing, scouring,
                          bleaching, mercerizing,
                          piece dyeing

                         Desizing,  scouring,
                         bleaching, mercer-
                         izing, printing, piece
                         dyeing
                                                           Finished fabric
                                                  Finished fabric
                                                  & yarn
                                                  Sheeting
                                                                                     X
                                                                                     X
X      X

X      X


X      X
                                       X
                                                                                                    X*
                                                                                             X
                                           X      X*
             X
         *   Collected  from mobile pilot plant.
        **   Collected  from in-place  treatment technology.
        ( )   Represents mill  sequence number  instead of  report number.

-------
                                              TABLE V-5 (Cont.)
Report
Number  Mill Type
 Typical Processing     Products
    Samples Collected
Water    Raw    Biolog- Physico-
Supply  Waste    ical   chemical
40059   Desizing
40072   Desizing
40081   Desizing
40097   Desizing
40099   Desizing
40103   Desizing
40120   Desizing
Desizing, scouring,     Finished fabric
bleaching, mercerizing,
piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Sheeting & shirting
bleaching, mercerizing,
piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Finished fabric
bleaching, mercerizing,
printing, piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Finished fabric
bleaching, piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Finished fabric
bleaching, mercerizing,
piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Finished fabric
bleaching, mercerizing,
printing, piece dyeing

Desizing, scouring,     Sheeting & apparel
bleaching, mercerizing,
printing, piece dyeing
   X
   X
          X
          X
X
X
          X
          X
        X
        X
X
X
                                                                                                   XJ.
                                                                                                   "
        X
                  X
x**
 * Collected from mobile pilot plant.
 * Collected from in-place treatment technology.

-------
                                              TABLE V-5 (Cont.)
Report
Number  Mill Type
Typical Processing
Products
        Samples Collected
Water    Raw    Biolog- Physico-
Supply  Waste    ical   chemical
40145
40146
40150
40156
50030
50104
50108
50112
50116
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Desizing, scouring,
bleaching , mercerizing ,
yarn & piece dyeing
Slashing , weaving ,
desizing , s couring ,
bleaching, yarn dyeing
Weaving, desizing,
scouring, bleaching,
printing, piece dyeing
Slashing, desizing,
scouring , bleaching ,
yarn & piece dyeing
Knit Fabric
Scouring, piece dyeing
Scouring, printing
piece dyeing
Piece dyeing
Piece dyeing
Scouring, bleaching,
piece dyeing
Finished fabric X
Denim fabric X X
Sheets X
Finished fabric X X
Finishing
Flat goods X X
Finished fabric X X#
Outerwear fabric X
Apparel & auto X X
upholstery fabric
Finished fabric X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X



XJ.
"
X*
"
XJL
"

XJl_X.
""

 * Collected from in-place technology.
 # Pretreatment effluent.
** Collected from in-place technology and mobile pilot plant.

-------
                                             TABLE V-5  (Coat.)
                                                                          Samples Collected
Report
Number
50013
50035
50099
5H012
5H027
5H034
60008
60031
60034
60037
(06443)
Mill Type Typical Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn
Finishing
Scouring,
piece dyeing
Water Raw Biolog-
Products Supply Waste ical
Finished fabric XXX
Scouring, bleaching, Apparel fabric XXX
printing, piece dyeing
Scouring, piece
dyeing
Piece dyeing
Scouring, bleaching,
piece dyeing
Piece dyeing
Tufting, printing,
piece dyeing,
latex backing
Tufting, piece
dyeing latex backing
Tufting, piece
dyeing, latex backing
Tufting, piece dyeing
latex backing
Yarn dyeing
Apparel fabric XX X
Ladies' hosiery X X
Men's hosiery X X
Men's hosiery XXX
Finished carpet X XX
Finished carpet X X
Finished carpet X X
Finished carpet X X
Finished yarn X X
Physico-
chemical
X*
XiAuJL.
«"
x**




X*


X*
"
  *  Collected from in-place technology.
 **  Collected from mobile pilot plant.
( )  Represents mill sequence number instead of report number.

-------
                                                     TABLE V-5 (Cont.)
       Report
       Number
           Mill Type
Typical Processing
 Products
       Samples Collected
Water    Raw    Biolog- Physico-
Supply  Waste    ical   chemical
PO
70009   Stock & Yarn Finishing


70072   Stock & Yarn Finishing

70081   Stock & Yarn Finishing

70087   Stock & Yarn Finishing


70096   Stock & Yarn Finishing


70120   Stock & Yarn Finishing


80008   Nonwoven Manufacturing



80011   Nonwoven Manufacturing


80019   Nonwoven Manufacturing
       80025   Felted Fabric
               Processing
                                       Bleaching, mercerizing,
                                       yarn dyeing

                                       Yarn dyeing

                                       Yarn dyeing

                                       Yarn dyeing
Desizing, scouring,
bleaching

Wool scouring, stock
dyeing, yarn dyeing

Carding, adhesive
bonding, viscose
regeneration

Fiber preparation, wet
lay, adhesive bonding

Carding, adhesive
bonding

Weaving, scouring,
felting
Sewing thread & yarn


Finished yarn

Finished yarn         X

Greige & finished
yarn

Surgical gauze &
cotton

Carpet yarn           X


Finished fabric       X
                                                               Finished fabric
Disposable wiping
towels

Papermaker's felt     X
          X


          X

          X

          X


          X


          X


          X



          X
X


X

X

X


X


X
                                                                       X.-'-
                                                                       "
                                                                                                              XJUJL,
                                                                                                              ft rt
                                                                                              X
         *  Collected from in-place treatment technology.
        **  Collected from polishing pond.
         #  Asbestos analysis only.

-------
                                       TABLE V-6
                             SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                    TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WATER SUPPLY
      Toxic Pollutant
Minimum
       Concentration Observed, ug/1
               Water Supply
Maximum   Average    Median  Analyzed*
Detected*
4.
7.
8.
9.
11.
13.
23.
24.
29.
38.
39.
44.
45.
48.
49.
51.
55.
65.
66.

67.
68.
69.
70.
72.
73.
benzene
chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-trichlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
methylene chloride
methyl chloride
dichlorobromome thane
trichlorofluorome thane
chlorodibromome thane
naphthalene
phenol (GC/MS)
bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
1 ,2-benzoanthracene
3 , 4-benzopyrene
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
4
1
1
4
2
3
6
2
1
1

1
1
1
2
1
1
1
8
2
5
1
2
1
1,360
1
4
6
1
47
9
7
6
2
1
36

140
5
15
2
8
1
1
4
2
4
1
1
1
179
1
4
2
1
16
6
5
6
2
1
10

19
2
3
2
3
1
1
4
2
4

1

30


1
1
14
6
5



6

7
1
2

2


34
34
32
32
34
33
34
31
33
34
29
34
33
33
34
31
32
32

32
32
32
29
32
29
29
10
2
2
1
3
1
11
1
1
8
3
14
2
2
1
1
1
8

25
6
13
1
8
1
1
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.
                                         113

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
Minimum
                                       TABLE V-6 (Cont.)
       Concentration Observed, ug/1
               Water Supply
Maximum   Average    Median  Analyzed*  Detected//
74.
78.
80.
84.
85.
86.
87.
102.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
128.
3 , 4-benzof luoranthene
anthracene
fluorene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
alpba-BHC
antimony (total)
arsenic (total)
asbestos (MFL)
beryllium (total)
cadmium (total)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
cyanide
lead (total)
mercury (total)
nickel (total)
selenium (total)
silver (total)
zinc (total)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
2
6
6
22
8
1
18
1
1
14
1
1
1
1
7
13
6
5
36
72
68
1
29
30
781
22
75
1
150
6
129
418
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
5
23
12
13
1
11
15
86
22
44
1
74
2
32
109

1
1
1
2
2
2

25
4
2

7
13
47

46
1
61
1
19
64
31
32
31
32
34
34
34
23
33
33
7
31
33
33
33
32
33
31
33
31
33
33
1
8
3
3
5
20
8
1
10
9
6
1
5
7
17
1
8
3
10
5
11
24
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Kote:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Program.
                                         114

-------
                                      TABLE V-7
           TOXIC POLLUTANTS DETECTED IN TEXTILE MILL UNTREATED WASTEWATERS
Toxic Pollutant
3a   3b   4a   4b
Subcategory
4c   5a   5b
5c
1.
2.
3.
4.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
13.
15.
17.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25-
26.
27.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexa chlorobenzene
1 , 2-dichloroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
1,1,2, 2-tetrachloroethane
bis(chloromethyl) ether
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
1 , 2-dichlorobenzene
1 , 3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
1, 2-trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1,2-dichloropropane
1 , 3-dichloropropylene
2,4-dimethylphenol



X X
X X
X
X

X X
X




XXX

X
X
X
X
X




X X


XXX
X X
X X
X
X X
X X
X


X X
X
XXX
X
X

X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X X
XXX
X
X X


X X
X
X

X

XXX

X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X X


X X
X X
X


X

X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X

X


X
X

X

-------
                                                   TABLE V-7 (Cont.)
                Toxic Pollutant
3a   3b   4a   4b
Subcategory
4c   5a   5b
5c
CT»
36.
37.
38.
44.
48.
49.
54.
55.
57.
58.
62.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
77.
78.
80.
81.
83.
84.
2 , 6 -dinitro toluene
1 , 2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene X
methylene chloride X
d i chl o r ob r omome thane
trichlorofluoromethane
isophorone X
naphthalene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
pentachlorophenol X
phenol (GC/MS) X
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate X
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate X
di-n-butyl phthalate X
diethyl phthalate X
dimethyl phthalate
acenaphthylene
anthracene
fluorene
phenanthrene
indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
pyrene


X
X



X


X
X
X X
X X

X X

X
X

X

X




XXX
X X

X

X X
X
X
X X
XXX
XX X
X X X X
X
XXX
X
X X
X X

X



X
X
X
XX XXX
XX X
X
X

X X X X X X

X
X
X X
X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X
X X

XX X
X X
X
X
X XX
X
X


-------
                                     TABLE V-7 (Coat.)
Toxic Pollutant
3a   3b   4a   4b
Subcategory
4c   5a   5b
5c
85.
86.
87.
88.
90.
94.
95.
96.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
vinyl chloride
dieldrin
4,4'-DDD(p,p'-TDE)
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC (lindane)
delta-BHC
PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
antimony (total)
arsenic (total)
asbestos
beryllium (total)
cadmium (total)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
cyanide
lead (total)
mercury (total)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X

X
X
X

X
X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X





X
X
X
X X
XXX
XXX
X X
XXX
X X
X
X
X





X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X





X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X


X


X X
X X
X

X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X





X X
X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X





X X
X
X
X X
X
X

-------
                                                    TABLE V-7  (Cont.)
                                                                           Subcategory

124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
Toxic Pollutant
nickel (total)
selenium (total)
silver (total)
thallium (total)
zinc (total)
1
X
X
X
X
X
2
X
X
X

X
3a
X

X

X
3b

X
X

X
4a
X

X
X
X
4b
X

X

X
4c
X
X
X
X
X
5a
X
X
X

X
5b
X

X

X
5c

X
X

X
6
X

X

X
7
X
X
X

X
8
X

X

X
9

X


X
          Source:  EPA Field Sampling Program.
CO

-------
pollutants  were  detected  in  eight  of the nine subcategories.
However, 24 toxic pollutants  were  detected  in  only  a  single
subcategory.   This  reflects  the  wide variety of manufacturing
methods and  process  machinery  in  the  textile  industry,  and
perhaps,  the fluctuating character of textile wastewaters caused
by batch operations and frequent changes in  product  line.   The
quantitative results of the field sampling program are summarized
in   Table  V-8.   Results  are  shown  for  both  the  untreated
wastewater and the biologically-treated  effluent  to  illustrate
the pollutants of most significance in the industry.  The results
from   biological   and  physical/chemical  treatment  units  are
included in Section  VII  to  describe  the  performance  of  the
different technologies.

Table V-7 shows that 80 of the 129 toxic pollutants were detected
in  textile  industry  untreated  wastewaters.   Sixty-five  were
organic pollutants, 13 were metals, one was asbestos  and one was
cyanide.  Seventeen of the pollutants were detected only once.

The results of the  field  sampling  program  are  summarized  by
subcategory  in Table V-9a through V-9n.  The table is similar in
format to Table V-8 and serves to identify the  toxic  pollutants
of most significance in each subcategory.

The   greatest  variety  of  toxic  pollutants  detected  in  the
untreated wastewater at concentrations greater than 10  ug/1  was
found  at  mills  in the woven fabric finishing subcategory where
desizing operations are employed.  (Table V-9g); 27  organics,  9
metals  and  cyanide were detected.  The next greatest number was
in the stock and yarn finishing subcategory {Table v-91) with  20
organics,  9  metals and cyanide detected.  Ten toxic metals were
detected in the wool finishing subcategory (Table  V-9b).   These
three   subcategories  perform  the  most  complex  and  variable
processing steps with a large variety of associated chemicals, as
noted in the general discussion earlier in this section.

The  smallest  variety  of  toxic  pollutants  detected  in   the
untreated  wastewater  at  concentrations  greater  than   10 ug/1
occurred in the water wet weaving subdivision of  the  low  water
use processing subcategory (Table V-9d), with no organic and five
metals  detected;  felted  fabric  processing  subcategory  (Table
V-9n), with four organics and three metals detected; at mills  in
the  knit fabric finishing subcategory where hosiery products are
manufactured (Table V-9j), with seven organics and  three  metals
detected.  These results reflect the fact the these subcategories
perform  the fewest complex processing steps and generally do not
use a great number of processing chemicals.

Field Sampling Results - Biologically-Treated Effluents

The quantitative  results  of  the  field  sampling  program  for
biologically-treated effluents have been previously introduced as
part  of  Table  V-8  for the industry as a whole, and Table V-9a
                                119

-------
ro
o
        Toxic Pollutant
                                        TABLE V-8
                              SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - UNTREATED WASTEWATER AND BIOLOGICALLY TREATED EFFLUENT

                                        Concentration Observed, ug/1
                        Untreated Wastewater                           Biologically Treated Effluent
                                             Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
                Min.   Max.    Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected//
1.
2.
3.
4.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
13.
15.
17.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
29.
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexa chlo r obenzene
1 , 2-dichloroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
1,1,2 , 2-tetrachloroethane
bis(chloromethyl) ether
2 , 4 , 6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
1 , 2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
2
199
90
1
1
28
1
4
2
1
1
6
1
5
1
10
1
10
1
10
273
199
1600
200
296
14000
2
6
1200
14
21
6
94
29
642
131
460
1700
760
84
52
199
845
30
30
2212
2
5
89
7
11
6
29
14
77
71
85
705
188
41
20

845
10
10
315
2
5
16
6
11

20
9
15
71
10
555
11
34
69
66
78
78
73
76
71
70
73
70
68
58
76
76
78
68
76
68
71
72
8
1
2
22
16
15
2
2
21
5
2
1
7
3
34
2
15
4
8
4
1
87
400
1
2
1
1

1
2
5

2
1
2
10
1
13
1
1
2
87
400
64
26
1900
1

130
2
5

21
32
1020
10
20
33
16
44
2
87
400
11
8
407
1

37
2
5

12
8
78
10
4
23
6
15
2


5
4
29
1

10



12
4
7

1
23
5
7
64
62
80
96
69
92
66

67
64
62

94
94
95
65
94
63
66
64
3
1
1
15
5
15
3

6
1
1

2
7
19
1
18
2
6
4
   * Values  represent  the number  of  samples analyzed.
   # Values  represent  the number  of  times pollutant was detected.

   Note:  Concentrations shown  represent detected values  only.

-------
ro
        Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-8 (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
 Untreated Wastewater                           Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed»  tected#
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
36.
37.
38.
39.
44.
45.
48.
49.
51.
54.
55.
57.
58.
62.
63.
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1,2-dichloropropane
1 , 3-dichloropropylene
2,4-dimethylphenol
2 , 6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
methylene chloride
methyl chloride
dichlorob r omome tha ne
trichlorofluorome thane
chlo rod ibromome thane
isophorone
naphthalene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
2
20
2
2
2
54
22
1

3

7
27

111
1
60
65
11

360
41
100
2
190
54
22
19000

2600

7
45

111
2079
60
240
130

66
31
49
2
65
54
22
917

145

7
36

111
222
60
138
69

10
31
46

2


43

10


36


27

110
72

68
71
70
68
68
68
68
78

75

70
76

66
76
68
68
71 l

6
2
4
1
3
1
1
47

22

1
2

1
44
1
3
5

7


1
1


1
1
1
20
2
2
1

1
4


2
7


10
9


3018
1
58
20
10
2138
1

255
4


19
7


6
6


157
1
17
20
6
328
1

25
4


8



6
8


3
1
10

6
10


3



3
62


62
62


95
61
67
64
64
67
62

94
63


94
1


2
3


23
2
16
1
2
7
1

15
1


3
    *  Values  represent  the number  of  samples analyzed.
    #  Values  represent  the number  of  times pollutant was detected.

    Note:   Concentrations shown  represent detected values  only.

-------
                                                            TABLE V-8 (Cont.)
ro
ro
          Toxic Pollutant
Min.
 Untreated Wastewater

Max.   Avg.   Med.
Concentration Observed, ug/1
                          Biologically Treated Effluent
     Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
    lyzed""  tected#  Min.   Max.     Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
77.
78.
80.
81.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo(a)anthracene
benzo (a )pyrene
3 , 4-benzof luoranthene
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3



acenaphthylene 4400
anthracene
fluorene
phenanthrene
indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
310
4930
1449
160
67
10
150
111



4400
12
15
12
2
1
1126
3200
5600
56
165
149
52
17
6
22
26



4400
4
7
7
2
1
178
199
303
31
" 20
32
38
12
6
7
13




1
5
7


11
12
16
76
77
76
71
71
66
71
71



68
71
68
68
66
71
78
78
78
20
57
57
6
20
2
20
7



1
4
3
2
1
1
24
54
24
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1

1

1

1
1
1
1
66
103
760
5
58
1
12
1
2
1
1

4

1

1
370
140
130
21
16
56
2
7
1
4
1
2
1
1

1

1

1
59
13
33
14
10
19
2
4

2
1




1



1
10
4
15
94
95
94
66
66
61
66
66
61
61
63

66

63

65
96
96
94
10
24
75
5
18
1
14
4
1
1
1

9

1

7
19
51
16
    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.
    Note:   Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
ro
to
         Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-8 (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
 Untreated Wastewater                           Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min,   Max.     Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#
88.
90.
94.
95.
96.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
vinyl chloride
dieldrin
4 ,4' -DDK
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma -BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1242
antimony (total)
arsenic (total)
asbestos (MFL)
beryllium (total)
cadmium (total)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
cyanide
11
2
5
1
5
5
1
2
1
5
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
4
11
5
5
1
5
6
1
5
1
5
5
1
515
225
197
3
46
4930
3120
242
11
4
5
1
5
5
1
4
1
5
4
1
41
41
31
3
7
334
292
37

5



5

5
1
5
4

10
11
5
3
5
27
49
10
70
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
65
70
15
58
76
76
76
65
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
5
2
3
2
1
47
35
7
3
25
61
69
24

1



2

1
1
1


1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3

5



2

1
1
5


867
160
391
1
130
1800
323
980

3



2

1
1
3


172
24
139
1
8
97
54
83

3







3


32
6
24

4
35
30
18

50



50

50
50
50


83
64
11
78
96
96
96
91

2



1

1
1
2


65
33
3
1
31
65
82
34
    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

    Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-8 (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
 Untreated Wastewater                           Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.  Max.    Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#
122. lead (total)
123. mercury (total)
124. nickel (total)
125. selenium (total)
126. silver (total)
127. thallium (total)
128. zinc (total)
6
1
6
1
1
1
14
752
4
304
736
130
9
7900
105
1
84
58
31
4
664
55
1
73
8
19
2
224
76
64
75
60
75
64
75
38
12
44
19
33
3
73
1
1
4
1
1
8
25
3500
2
2000
97
500
18
38400
133
1
119
24
42
13
996
44
1
80
10
22
13
185
96
57
94
57
94
57
94
42
7
54
10
44
2
90
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Notes:   Concentrations shown represent detected values only.  Toxic pollutants not listed were not detected in the
        untreated wastewater or biologically treated effluent.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Program.

-------
through V-9n for individual subcategories.  On  an  industry-wide
basis,  68  of  129  toxic pollutants were detected.  Fifty-three
were organic pollutants, 13 were metals, 1 was asbestos and 1  was
cyanide.  Eighteen of the pollutants  were  detected  only  once.
The maximum concentrations of any organic or metal pollutant were
ethylbenzene at 3,018 ug/1 and zinc at 38,400 ug/1.

On  an  individual  subcategory  basis,  the  greatest variety of
organic pollutants detected in the effluent at  greater  than  10
ug/1 was in the woven fabric finishing subcategory where Resizing
operations  are  employed,  with  15  pollutants  detected (Table
V-9g).  The greatest variety of metals detected at  greater  than
10  ug/1 was in the wool scouring (Table V-9a) and wool finishing
(Table V-9b) subcategories  and  in  the  knit  fabric  finishing
subcategory  where simple operations are employed, each with nine
pollutants detected (Table V-9h).

The smallest variety of organics detected was  one  pollutant  in
the   general   processing  subdivision  of  the  low  water  use
processing subcategory (Table V-9c) and  two  pollutants  in  the
felted  fabric processing subcategory (Table V-9n).  The smallest
variety of metals detected was three  pollutants  in  the  felted
fabric  processing  subcategory (Table V-9n), and four pollutants
at mills where hosiery products are manufactured,  (Table  V-9j).
The  data indicates that many of the toxic organic pollutants are
reduced or removed through biological treatment,  while  many  of
the metals are not affected.

Field Sampling Results - Individual Subcateqories

Wool  Scouring  Three  mills in this subcategory were sampled for
toxic pollutants  and  the  results  are  shown  in  Table  V-9a.
Thirteen  organics, eight metals and cyanide were detected in the
untreated wastewater at greater than 10  ug/1,  with  4,930  ug/1
phenol  (GC/MS) the maximum organic concentration and 1, 969 ug/1
zinc the maximum metal  concentration.   These  results  seem  to
reflect  the  presence of phenol in the raw grease wool resulting
from the treatment  of  the  wool  with  branding  compounds  and
insecticides.  The metals may be present in mineral impurities in
the wool.

Five  organics,  nine  metals  and  cyanide  were detected in the
treated  effluent  at  greater  than  10  ug/1,  with   87   ug/1
trichloroethylene  the  maximum  organic  concentration and 3,500
ug/1 lead the maximum metal concentration.

Wool Finishing Two  mills  in  this  subcategory  plus  the  wool
finishing  waste stream from an integrated wool scouring and wool
finishing mill were sampled for toxic pollutants and the  results
of  the sampling are shown in Table V-9b.  Seventeen organics and
ten metals were detected in the untreated wastewater  at  greater
than 10 ug/1, with 14,000 ug/1 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene the maximum
organic  concentration  and  7,500  ug/1  zinc  the maximum metal
                                125

-------
ro
         Toxic Pollutant
                         TABLE V-9a
                SUMMARY OE ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WOOL SCOURING SUBCATEGORY

                          Concentration Observed, ug/1
               Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                               Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
4.
7.
8.
9.
11.
13.
23.
29.
38.
39.
44.
48.
54.
64.
65.
66.

68.
69.
70.
72.
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexa chlorobenzene
1 ,1,1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
chloroform
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
methylene chloride
dichlorobromome thane
isophorone
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
benzo (a ) anthr a cene
10
10

1
7
12
10

1

10

111
24
10

18
10
10
86

19
20

1
52
14
10

23

10

111
24
4930

330
67
10
86

13
16

1
19
13
10

12

10

111
24
1222

123
39
10
86

10
18


10
13
10

12

10



211

20
39



6
6

5
6
6
6

6

6

5
5
6

5
5
5
5

3
3

1
5
2
3

2

3

1
1
6

3
2
1
1

10

32

10

10
10

1
10
10


8

10
10


2
10

32

10

18
10

1
10
10


16

42
10


2
10

32

10
•
14
10

1
10
10


11

20
10


2
8

7

10 8

14 8
8

7
10 8
8


10 8

15 7
10 7


7
1

1

2

2
1

1
3
1


4

4
2


1
    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

    Note:   Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
ro
         Toxic Pollutant
Win.
                 TABLE V-9a (Cont.)

                Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
73.
74.
78.
84.
85.
86.
87.
90.
94.
95.
96.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
114.
115.
117.
benzo(a)pyrene
3,4-benzofluoranthene
anthracene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
dieldrin
4,4'-DDD (p,p'-TDE)
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma -BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
antimony
arsenic
beryllium


10
10
13
2
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
3
1
2
162
2


10
62
13
5
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
5
1
4
225
3


10
31 27
13
4 5
5
1
5
1
5 5
1
5
4 4
1
3 4
193 192
3 3


6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
, 5
5
4
5


1
4
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
3
3
1
1
2
1
10
1
87
1




1

5


21
4

1
1
2
1
10
10
87
5




1

5


540
160

1
1
2
1
10
7
87
3




1

5


153
37

7
7
7
7
10 8
10 8
8
3 6




6

6


26 6
6 6

1
1
1
1
3
5
1
2




1

1


4
6

    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

    Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
         Toxic Pollutant
ro
CO
Min,
                 TABLE V-9a (Cont.)

                Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
9
12
23
10
18
1
54
6
1
1
190
13
269
430
39
752
1
304
8
65
1
1969
11
199
131
21
435
1
134
7
17
1
832
11
240
66
15
477

99
7
2

665
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
3
5
1
5
2
4
1
5
3
3
2
20
57
1
28
2
1

25
130
80
320
980
3500
1
2000
4
500

1500
26
42
75
313
929
1
452
3
130

299
5
48
16
200
79

60
3
49

72
7
7
7
5
7
5
7
4
7

7
6
6
5
5
4
1
5
2
5

7
    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

    Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

    Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 10006,  10013, and 10015.

-------
ro
10
       Toxic Pollutant
                          TABLE V-9b
                SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WOOL FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

                          Concentration Observed, ug/1
               Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                               Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected//
4.
7.
8.
11.
22.
23.
25.
26.
27.
29.
30.
34.
38.
39.
44.
49.
55.
62.
64.
65.
.66.
68.
70.
71.
78.
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
1 ,1 ,1-trichloroethane
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1 , 3-dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
2 , 4-dimethylphenol
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
methylene chloride
trichlorofluorome thane
naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
anthracene
5
8
90
9

10
10
10
10
10
10

6

4

1
110
29
1
1
10
1
3
12
10
10
14000
80

11
460
1700
760
10
10

1770

10

35
130
71
47
160
10
10
3
12
8
9
4195
26

10
160
705
299
10
10

267

8

17
120
50
18
51
10
7
3
12
8
10
960
10

10
11
555
215

10

10

10

17
120
50
11
10

10


8
8
8
8

8
8
8
8
8
6

8

8

8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
4
4
7
5

5
7
4
5
1
3

7

5

7
2
2
7
5
1
5
1
1
4
2
46
1
4
2
1
13
1


8
1
1
6
3
1

1

6
1
1
1
1
5
2
1900
1
5
3
20
33
16


8
75
1
46
3
1

2

760
1
9
1
1
5
2
1257
1
5
3
7
23
7


8
21
1
21
3
1

2

204
1
5
1
1
5

1541

5
3
6
23
5



4

12

1

2

56

5

1
8
6
8
6
8
8
8
6
6


5
7
4
6
6
8

8

8
6
6
6
6
2
1
4
1
2
2
7
2
4


1
4
1
3
1
2

2

8
1
2
1
2
   * Values  represent  the number  of  samples  analyzed.
   // Values  represent  the number  of  times pollutant was  detected.

   Note:   Concentrations shown  represent detected values only.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-9b (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.   Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#
81.
84.
85.
86.
87.
100.
102.
104.
114.
115-
116.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
128.
phenanthrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
heptachlor
alpha -BHC
gamma-BHC (lindane)
antimony
arsenic
asbestos (MFL)
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
12

2
6
2
5
2
5
1
2
3
4
63
3
5
84
1
9
4
1
51
12

1126
44
187
6
5
5
43
200
3
46
880
70
5
133
4
100
18
47
7500
12

193
15
39
5
4
5
28
37
3
13
310
28
5
109
2
50
9
24
1307


10
10
10
5
5
5
34
5

5
175
21

109
1
41
5
24
385
8

8
8
8
5
5
5
7
8
1
8
8
8
5
8
7
8
7
8
8
1

6
6
6
3
3
2
6
6
1
5
8
8
1
2
4
3
3
2
8
1
1
1
1
2
2


2
2
24
6
116
8
15
30

30
2
6
320
1
1
5
31
4
2


32
60
24
6
1800
30
15
200

140
15
140
38400
1
1
3
11
3
2


22
17
24
6
363
20
15
115

72
9
73
6833


3
7
3



23
3


164
23

115

58
9
73
1073
6
6
8
8
8
4


8
6
1
8
8
8
8
8

8
8
8
8
1
1
2
6
2
1


7
4
1
1
8
7
1
2

4
2
2
8
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 20011, 20021, and 10013 (Finishing Waste).

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                                          TABLE V-9c
                                SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - LOW WATER USE PROCESSING (GENERAL PROCESSING) SUBCATEGORY

                                          Concentration Observed, ug/1
                               Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                               Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
                  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
23.
65.
66.

68.
86.
87.
116.
118.
119.
120.
122.
124.
126.
128.
chloroform
phenol (GC/MS)
bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
toluene
trichloroethylene
asbestos (MFL)
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
nickel
silver
zinc
48
23

26
61

42
1
4
11
39
43
110
46
120
48
23

26
61

42
1
4
11
39
43
110
46
120
48
23

26
61

42
1 1
4
11
39
43
110
46
120
1
1

1
1

1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1

1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10


3

3


5
12
37
84
120
50
2300
10


3

3


5
12
37
84
120
50
2300
10


3

3


5
12
37
84
120
50
2300
1


1

1


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


1

1


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 04935 (sequence number) and 40023 (Weave Mill Waste).

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                                         TABLE V-9d
                               SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - LOW WATER USE PROCESSING (WATER-JET WEAVING) SUBCATEGORY

                                         Concentration Observed, ug/1
                              Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                              Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
                 Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
65.
66.

114.
119.
120.
121.
122.
125.
126.
128.
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
antimony
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
selenium
silver
zinc
1

10
38
4
10
10
22
50
14
63
1

10
38
4
10
10
22
50
14
63
1

10
38
4
10
10
22
50
14
63
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1 Not Sampled
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plant 01304 (sequence number).

-------
CO
CJ
       Toxic Pollutant
                                       TABLE V-9e
                              SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (SIMPLE PROCESSING) SUBCATEGORY

                                        Concentration Observed, ug/1
                             Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                             Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
                Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
1.
4.
8.
9.
10.
11.
23.
25.
38.
. 44.
55.
64.
65.
66.

68.
71.
78.
86.
87.
114.
acenaphthene
benzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexa chlo r obenz ene
1,2-dichloroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroe thane
chloroform
1,2-dichlorobenzene
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
naphthalene
peritachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
anthracene
toluene
trichloroethylene
antimony
9
32
28
2
6
17
11
5
47
87
32
40

5
13
13

8


9
32
28
2
6
17
11
460
47
410
42
147

860
13
13

620


9
32
28
2
6
17
11
233
47
249
37
94

382
13
13

216




233

249
37
94

280
13


20


3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
^3
3

3


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2

3
2
1

3



1

24

15
12

10
6

1
1
1
4

1

24

66
24

10
6

1
140
76
28

1

24

41
18

10
6

1
48
39
18





41
18

10



2
39
21

6

4

6
6

6
4

4
6
6
4

1

1

2
2

2
1

1
3
2
3
  * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
  # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

  Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
CO
-p*
        Toxic Pollutant
Min.    Max.
           TABLE V-9e (Cont.)

           Concentration Observed, ug/1
Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
 Avg.   Med.   lyzed«  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
115.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
126.
127.
128.
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
silver
thallium
zinc

5
4
230
6
13
1
54
6
9
48

5
12
329
6
15
1
54
6
9
460

5
8 8
292 317
6
14 14
1
54
6
9
254 254

3
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2

1
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
4

3
48
3
25
1
11
7
8
195
4

6
170
23
38
1
54
12
18
340
4

4
87
14
32
1
37
10
13
248


4
82
18
32

46
10
13
229
2

6
6
6
6
4
6
6
4
6
1

4
6
5
2
1
3
2
2
4
   * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
   # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

   Note:   Concentrations shown represent statistics of detected values only.

   Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 40023 and 40144.

-------
to
CJ1
                                                           TABLE V-9f
                                                SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (COMPLEX PROCESSING) SUBCATEGORY
Concentration Observed, ug/1
Untreated Wastewater Biologically Treated Effluent
Ana- De- Ana-

4.
7.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
29.
38.
45.
55.
62.
64.
65.
66.

67.
-68.
70.
71.
84.
Toxic Pollutant
benzene
chlorobenzene
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
p-chloro-m-cresol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethylene
ethylbenzene
methyl chloride
naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
pyrene
Min.
31
42
20

33
131


18


11
20


9

7
3
12
1
Max.
31
296
20

33
131


2835


11
20


138

7
3
12
1
Avg . Med .
31
169 169
20

33
131


960 26


11
20


90 123

7
3
12
1
lyzed*
3
3
3

3
3


3


3
3


3

3
3
3
3
tected#
1
2
1

1
1


3


1
1


3

1
1
1
1
Min.
6
2
21
32
18
10
1
4
1
20
1

56
1

1
5
4
2

1
Max.
64
26
21
32
18
10
1
4
29
20
5

56
103

24
5
4
2

1
Avg . Med .
28 13
11 4
21
32
18
10
1
4
11 7
20
3 3

56
38 10

15 18
5
4
2

1
lyzed"
6
6
6
6
6
4
6
4
6
4
6

6
6

6
4
4
4

4
De-
tected#
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
2

1
6

6
1
1
1

1
  * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
  # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

  Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
GO
        Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-9f (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
85.
86.
87.
103.
114.
115.
116.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
128.
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
beta-BHC
antimony
arsenic
asbestos (MFL)
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
6
28
52


120
197
2
16
86

25
1
50

22
240
15
303
52


120
197
2
67
510

49
1
77

22
1080
11 11
204 281
52


120
197
2
42 42
239 120

37 37
1
64 64

22
537 290
3
3
3


3
1
3
3
3

3
2
3

3
3
2
3
1


1
1
1
2
3

2
1
2

1
3
3
1
1
1
50
3
391
2
13
37
6
22

4
2
23
80
3
33
1
1
54
3
391
4
140
290
11
44

110
2
44
390
3
15
1
1
52
3
391
3
92
120
9
33

75
2
29
188

13


53


3
102
111
10
33

86

25
167
6
6
6
3
5
4
1
6
6
6
6
6

6
3
6
6
1
4
1
1
3
1
1
2
5
6
3
2

5
1
4
6
   * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
   // Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

   Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

   Source: Compilation of field sampling data for plants 40077, 40135, and 40160.

-------
                                                       TABLE V-9g
                                              SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                    TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (DESIZING)  SUBCATEGORY
Concentration Observed, ug/1
Untreated Wastewater Biologically Treated Effluent
Ana- De- Ana-
Toxic Pollutant Min.
1.
4.
7.
8.
10.
11.
13.
21.
22.
23.
25.
27.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
38.
44.
48.
acenaphthene
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
1,2-dichloroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
1 , 2-trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1 , 2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
d ichlo rob romome thane
2
1
1
45
4
16
4
1
5
3
1
2
39
2
41
36

1
3

Max.
27
170
1
156
4
306
4
94
9
32
62
2
84
360
41
100

19000
120

Avg.
15
49
1
101
4
79
4
44
7
18
17
2
62
181
41
68

1692
53

Med.
15
30
1
101

24

37
7
20
2

62
181

68

112
42

lyzed*
21
28
23
26
20
23
20
26
26
28
26
21
22
20
21
20

28
25

tected#
2
6
2
2
1
5
1
3
2
9
4
1
2
2
1
2

19
8

Min.
1
1
4
2

4


1
2
1
1
44



1
1
5
2
Max.
1
33
4
10

4


1
58
1
9
44



1
3018
58
2
Avg.
1
17
4
6

4


1
21
1
5
44



1
440
22
2
Med. lyzed*
21
17 23
21
6 23

21


23
12 23
1 23
5 21
18



18
2 23
7 21
18
De-
tec ted#
1
2
1
2

1


1
4
2
2
1



1
7
5
1
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
C*>
CD
        Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-9g (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
49.
51.
55.
57.
58.
62.
64.
65.
66.

67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
78.
84.
85.
86.
87.
104.
trichlorofluorome thane
chlorodlbromome thane
naphthalene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
anthracene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
gamma-BBC (lindane)
27

1
60
65
72
2
1

5
1
1
1
1

1

1
2
1

27

2079
60
110
72
310
295

1449
66
28
1
69

1

26
3200
5600

27

468
60
88
72
75
58

210
24
13
1
15

1

15
490
812



80

88

46
26

63
4
14

6

1

16
34
18

26

26
18
18
21
26
26

26
21
21
18
21

21

28
28
28

1

17
1
2
1
12
21

22
3
9
1
7

2

4
18
7

89
1
1



7
1

2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2138
1
22



16
31

231
2
58
1
3
1
4
1
51
111
130
1
1114
1
12



'10
15

44
2
10
1
2
1
2
1
14
16
42
1
1114

12



7
12

14
2
4

2
1
1
1
3
7
5

21
18
23



23
23

23
21
21
18
21
21
21
21
23
23
23
16
2
1
2



3
6

16
3
8
1
6
2
3
2
4
14
5
1
   * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
   # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

   Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
CO
IO
         Toxic  Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-9g (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
114.
115.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
antimony
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
1
1
3
4
8
4
8
1
6
1
6
2
56
180
77
6
4930
3120
242
120
1
280
80
130
2
7900
17
22
5
787
656
71
57
1
70
17
33
2
999
7
15
5
35
98
8
55
1
40
1
17

274
25
24
26
26
26
22
26
22
26
20
26
22
26
23
16
4
19
24
7
12
2
17
5
10
1
24
1
1
1

5
5
11
1
40
1
11

27
96
71
6

100
212
120
1
140
1
80

5100
21
31
2

32
75
50
1
79
1
28

502
12
23
2

29
27
43

81

16

210
19
21
23

23
20
23
18
23
16
23

23
17
13
6

21
10
8
1
10
1
7

23
    * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was  detected.

    Note:   Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

    Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 04742  (sequence number),  40034,  40059,  40072,  40081,  40097,  40099,
            40103, 40120, 40145, 40146,  40150, and 40156.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                                        TABLE V-9h
                              SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (SIMPLE PROCESSING) SUBCATEGORY

                                      Concentration Observed, ug/1
                           Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                           Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
              Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
1.
2.
3.
4.
8.
11.
13.
23.
25.
27.
29.
32.
33.
34.
38.
44.
49.
55.
57.
64.
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
chloroform
1 ,2-dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-dichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethylene
1 , 2-dichloropropane
1 , 3-dichloropropylene
2 , 4-dimethylphenol
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
trichlorofluorome thane
naphthalene
2-nitrophenol
penta chlo ropheno 1
12
199
90
20
120
8
1
22
1
7
29
2
2

2
30
45
1

2
53
199
90
20
2700
1200
6
498
35
7
29
2
2

2600
2600
45
51

2
33
199
90
20
1045
406
4
260
18
7
29
2
2

711
1315
45
32

2
33



315
11
4
260
18





369
1315

45


6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

6
6
6
6

6
2
1
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1

5
2
1
3

1

87


6
69
2
2


1

10
9
3
28
2

4


87


6
130
2
2


1

10
9
4
28
2

4


87


6
100 100
2
2 2


1

10
9
4 4
28
2

4


7


8
6
6
8


6

6
6
8
6
6

6


1


1
2
1
2


1

1
1
2
1
1

1

* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:   Concentrations shown represents detected values only.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
Mia.
                   TABLE V-9h (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max .   Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected//  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
65.
66.

70.
71.
80.
85.
86.
87.
114.
115.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
128.
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
fluorene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
antimony
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
1

1
34

15
9
4
5
1
1
4
6
17
8
32

36
3
12
34
55

430
34

15
1108
140
840
186
100
10
210
590
10
99

130
15
100
343
17

157
34

15
438
45
322
59
35
6
53
156
9
61

89
9
41
163
8

41



317
12
121
13
4
5
14
64
8
60

100
9
19
144
6

6
6

6
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6

6
5
6
6
5

3
1

1
4
5
3
5
3
4
5
6
3
5

5
2
5
6


5

1

8
1
37
1
3
2
4
7
6
1
1
54
20
13
47


50

1

27
1
41
684
70
10
150
130
17
48
1
150
62
80
570


20

1

17
1
39
230
27
5
63
65
11
36
1
79
41
33
154


17



17
1
39
83
7
4
32
70
9
42

64
41
17
68


8

6

8
8
8
7
6
9
9
9
9
9
6
9
5
9
9


6

1

3
2
2
7
3
3
6
9
3
6
1
5
2
6
9
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed,
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:   Concentrations shown represents detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 50030, 50104, 50108, 50112, and 50116.

-------
-F*
ro
        Toxic Pollutant
                                       TABLE V-9i
                              SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (COMPLEX PROCESSING) SUBCATEGORY

                                        Concentration Observed, ug/1
                             Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                             Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
                Min.    Max.    Avg.   Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#
1.
4.
7.
8.
11.
15.
23.
25.
30.

34.
38.
44.
55.
63.

65.
66.

67.
68.
70.
71.
acenaphthene
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2 , 2-tetrachloroethane
chloroform
1 ,2-dichlorobenzene
1,2-trans-dichloro-
ethylene
2,4-dimethylphenol
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
naphthalene
N-nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate

1
14
190
3
21
17


5
2
852
8
2


2

30
160
3
2
12

1
25
190
3
21
71


5
2
1209
8
210


7

135
160
10
150
12

1
20 20
190
3
21
44 44


5
2
1031 1031
8
118 143


5 5

83 83
160
7 7
76 76
12

3
3
3
3
3
3


3
3
3
3
3


3

3
3
3
3
3

1
2
1
1
1
2


1
1
2
1
3


2

2
1
2
2
1
2
1

1

5
3
1

7
1
1
1
2

3
1

6

2
1

2
15

916

5
1020
1

7
1
278
6
255

19
1

109

4
1

2
6

237

5
221
1

7
1
78
4
87

11
1

34

3
1


5

15


44
1



2
4
3

11
1

27

3


5
22

21

5
21
21

5
5
22
5
21

21
21

21

5
5

1
5

4

1
6
4

1
1
5
2
3

2
3

18

3
1

   * Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
   # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

   Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
OJ
         Toxic Pollutant
Min.   Max.
            TABLE V-9i (Cont.)

           Concentration Observed, ug/1
Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
 Avg.   Med.   lyzed"  tected#  Min.   Max.    Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
77.
78.
85.
86.
87.
103.
114.
115.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
126.
128.
acenaphthylene
anthracene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
beta-BHC
antimony
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
silver
zinc
4400

39
3
3
1
57
4

1
40
7
13

100
11
75
4400

890
61
3
1
515
5

4
44
190
62

126
30
200
4400

465
33
3
1
286
5

3
42
70
38

113
21
132


465
36


286
5

3
42
12
38

113
21
120
3

3
3
3
1
3
3

3
3
3
3

3
3
3
1

2
3
1
1
2
2

3
2
3
2

2
2
3

1
1
1
3

31
2
2
4
7
3
11
1
40
8
42

1
370
22
47

867
2
6
98
323
140
82
2
187
73
5160

1
194
6
25

452
2
4
28
42
72
42
2
107
26
614


270
3
24

478

4
9
22
72
45
2
104
21
115

5
22
22
22

22
5
22
22
22
22
22
5
22
22
22

1
5
11
3

17
1
9
9
17
2
13
2
17
14
20
    " Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
    # Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

    Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

    Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 50013, 50035, and 50099.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                                    TABLE V-9j
                             SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (HOSIERY PRODUCTS) SUBCATEGORY

                                       Concentration Observed, ug/1
                            Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                            Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
               Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected//
3.
4.
21.
23.
55.
62.
65.
66.

85.
86.
114.
115.
116.
119.
120.
121.
125.
126.
128.
acrylonitrile 1600
benzene 1
2,4,6-trichlorophenol 27
chloroform
naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
antimony
arsenic
asbestos (MFL)
chromium
copper
cyanide
selenium
silver
zinc
* Values represent the number of
# Values represent the number of
Note
140
7
20
3

22
2
1
6
2
6
8
5
10
38
10
40
1600 1600
3 2
27 27
642
9
20
59

22
16
3
10
2
6
656
5
10
736
10
1420
391
8
20
39

22
9
2
8
2
6
226
5
10
275
10
611
2
391
8

54


9
2
8


14


50

491
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
1 400 400 400
2
1
2
2 111
1
3 14 14 14

1 172 172 172
2
3 222
2
1
1
3 199 199 199
1 14 14 14
1
3 97 97 97
1
4 112 112 112
1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1



1 1
1 1

1 1

1 1
samples analyzed.
times
: Concentrations shown represent
pollutant was
detected
values
detected
only.
•





Source: Compilation of field sampling data for plants 5H012, 5H027, and 5H034.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                         TABLE V-9k
                 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - CARPET FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

                           Concentration Observed, ug/1
                Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
   Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected//
1.
7.
9.
11.
23.
37.
38.
48.
55.
65.
66.

70.
80.
86.
114.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
acenaphthene
chlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
chloroform
1 , 2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
dichlo rob romome thane
naphthalene
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
diethyl phthalate
fluorene
toluene
antimony
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
273
7

2
5
22
43
7
95
1

19

5

52
2
4
3
6
6
273
7

2
280
22
43
7
260
68

400

5

52
2
75
63
40
33
273
7

2
143 143
22
43
7
198 240
40 54

121 33

5

52
2
35 30
28 16
23 23
20 20
5
4

4
4
5
4
4
5
5

5

5

2
5
5
5
4
5
1
1

1
2
1
1
1
3
5

4

1

1
1
4
5
2
2
2

1






2

10
11

1
11
4
3
28
3
25
2

1






50

27
11

1
105
4
411
46
12
25
2

1






30 39

18 18
11

1
58 58
4
221 235
37 37
7 6
25
4

4






4

4
4

4
2
4
4
4
4
4
1

1






3

4
1

1
2
1
4
2
3
1
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
     Toxic .Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-9k (Cont.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed"  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected//
123. mercury
124. nickel
126. silver
128. zinc
1
28
9
17
1
98
42
450
1
63
.26
121
1
63
26
36
4
5
5
5
2
2
2
5

13
33
130

79
33
260

46
33
195

46

195

2
2
2

2
1
2
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:   Compilation of field sampling data for plants 60008, 60031, 60034, and 60037

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                             TABLE V-91
                    SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - STOCK & YARN FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

                              Concentration Observed, ug/1
                   Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                   Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
      Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed"  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed»  tected#
1.
4.
7.
8.
9.
15.
17.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
27.
31.
32.
34.
36.
38.
44.
49.
acenaphthene
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-trichlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
bis (chloromethyl)ether
2,4, 6-trichlorophenol
p-chloro-m-cresol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-dichlorobenzene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1 , 2-dichloropropane
2,4-dimethylphenol
2 , 6-dinitrotoluene
ethylbenzene
methylene chloride
trichlorofluorome thane
13
1
1
270

1
6
9
29
1
10
1
1
20
56
2
54
1
4

30
1
2
270

1
6
16
29
410
10
56
. 1
20
56
190
54
6
9

22 22
1
2 2
270

1
6
13 13
29
86 3
10
29 29
1
20
56
96 96
54
3 2
7 7

7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

2
1
2
1

1
1
2
1
5
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
5
2


1

19
1


2
2
5

1





3
9
3

1

43
1


2
7
5

5





3
9
48

1

27
1


2
4
5

3





3
9
20

1 8

19 8
1 6


8
4 8
8

2 8





8
6
10 6

2

3
2


1
3
1

3





1
1
3
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

-------
45*
CO
        Toxic Pollutant
                        TABLE V-91 (Cont.)

                        Concentration Observed, ug/1
             Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                             Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.   Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
55.
58.
63.
64.
65.
66.

67.
68.
70.
71.
78.
80.
81.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
114.
115.
naphthalene
4-nitrophenol
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol (GC/MS)
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
anthracene
fluorene
phenanthrene
indeno (l,2,3-c,d) pyrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
antimony
arsenic
1
240


2

3

3
3
14
1
1
1
2

1
2
1
5
3
41
240


19

490

24
15
111
1
1
1
2

310
12
229
200
19
14
240


10

90

14
8
48
1
1
1
2

156
5
80
94
9
6



10

22

14
5
18





156
4
10
86
6
7
7


7

7

7
7
7
7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
5
1


3

7

2
3
3
1
1
1
1

2
6
3
4
3
1

2
13
3

2
1
5
3

1



1
3
1

3
2
13

2
23
3

340
1
7
12

1



1
3
38

177
9
6

2
18
3

89
1
7
7

1



1
3
18

95
6
6


18


58

7
7





1

15

141
6
8

8
8
8

8
6
6
6

6



6
8
8

8
8
4

1
2
1

8
1
2
3

1



2
1
3

5
4
   * Values  represent the number of  samples analyzed.
   # Values  represent the number of  times pollutant was detected.

   Note:  Concentrations shown  represent detected values only.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
Min.
                 TABLE V-91 (Coat.)

                 Concentration Observed, ug/1
      Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                      Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
Max.   Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected#
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
128.
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc

1
3
36
17
36
1
12
3
51
130

6
650
300
17
160
1
200
32
68
1000

4
125
91
17
86
1
103
18
60
418

4
25
49

63

100
18
60
300

7
7
7
7
7
6
7
6
7
7

3
6
7
1
3
1
4
2
2
7
1
3
1
10
29
35
1
35

6
91
1
7
290
132
172
160
1
160

57
865
1
5
70
86
101
77
1
98

32
337

5
49
110
101
36

98

32
233
6
8
8
8
8
8
5
8

8
8
1
2
8
7
2
3
1
2

2
8
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
if Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 06443 (sequence number),  70009,  70072,  70081,  70087,  70096,  and
         70120.

-------
     Toxic Pollutant
                           TABLE V-9m
                    SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - NONWOVEN MANUFACTURING SUBCATEGORY

                           Concentration Observed, ug/1
                Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
   Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#  Min.    Max.    Avg.    Med.   lyzed*  tected#
4.
23.
38.
55.
64.
benzene
chloroform
ethylbenzene
naphthalene
pentachlorophenol
65a. phenol (4-AAP)
66.

67.
86.
116.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
124.
126.
128.
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
toluene
asbestos (MFL)
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
nickel
silver
zinc
5
160
42
29
1
8

14
10
3
8
5
4
11
4
78
37
48
14
200
160
42
44
1
44

14
73
83
8
5
10
41
4
78
120
48
116
103
160
42
37
1
28

14
42
43
8
5
7
26
4
78
79
48
68
103


37

33


42
43


7
26


79

73
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
2
1
3

1
2 Not Sampled
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Concentrations shown represent detected values only.

Source:  Compilation of field sampling data for plants 80008, 80011, and 80019.

-------
Toxic Pollutant
                              TABLE V-9n
                     SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING PROGRAM - FELTED FABRIC PROCESSING SUBCATEGORY

                               Concentration Observed, ug/1
                    Untreated Wastewater                 Biologically Treated Effluent
                                    Ana-     De-                                 Ana-     De-
       Min.    Max.    Avg.   Med.   lyzed*  tected//  Min.    Max.   Avg.    Med.    lyzed*  tected#
55. naphthalene
65. phenol (GC/MS)
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
85 . tetrachloroethylene
86. toluene
87 . trichloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
116. asbestos (MFL)
119. chromium
120. copper
125. selenium
128. zinc
* Values represent the number
# Values represent the number
85
26
5
2
32
11
5

12
57
31
85 85
26 26
5 5
2 2
32 32
11 11
5 5

12 12
57 57
31 31
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
56 56 56
1 222
1 18 18 18
1
1
1
1
1 111
35 35 35
1
1 32 32 32
1 45 45 45
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1

1 1
1 1
of samples analyzed.
of times pollutant was detected.
Note: Concentrations shown represent
Source: Compilation of field
sampling
detected values only.
data for plant 80025.




-------
concentration.  The results seem to reflect the use  of  metallic
catalysts in fulling and the presence of a variety of organics in
the wool stock and processing agents.

Eight  organics,  nine metals, asbestos and cyanide were detected
in the treated effluent at greater than 10 ug/1, with 1,900  ug/1
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene  the  maximum  organic  concentration  and
38,400 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.  The high  zinc
concentration  does  not  appear  to  be representative of normal
treatment in the wool  finishing  subcategory  because  no  other
treated  effluent  sample  exceeded  6,402  ug/1.   In  fact, the
maximum zinc concentration in the untreated wastewaters  of  this
subcategory was only 7,500 ug/1, as noted above.

Low  Water  Use  Processing  Two  mills  in this subcategory were
sampled, one each in the general processing and water jet weaving
subdivisions.  Five organics and eight metals were detected above
10 ug/1 in untreated wastewater.

     Low Water Use Processing (General Processing) - One mill  in
this subdivision was sampled for toxic pollutants and the results
are  shown  in  Table  V-9c.   Five  organic  and six metals were
detected   in   the   untreated   wastewater,   with   61    ug/1
di-n-butylphthalate  the  maximum  organic  concentration and 120
ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.

No organics and six metals were detected in the treated effluent,
with 2,300 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal  concentration.   The  low
concentrations  of  toxic pollutants detected in this subcategory
reflect the fact that few chemicals are used.

     Low Water Use Processing (Water Jet Weaving) - One  mill  in
this subdivision was sampled for toxic pollutants and the results
are  shown  in Table V-9d.  Five metals detected in the untreated
wastewater, with 63 ug/1 zinc  the  maximum  concentration.   The
mill  is  an  indirect discharger, so no treated effluent samples
were collected.  As with the general processing  subdivision  the
low  concentrations of toxic pollutants detected reflect the fact
that usually, few chemicals are used.

Woven Fabric Finishing Eighteen mills in  this  subcategory  were
sampled.  Thirty organics, nine metals, asbestos and cyanide were
detected above 10 ug/1 in untreated wastewater.  A summary of the
analytical   results,   by   subdivision   (simple,  complex  and
desizing), is presented below.


     Woven Fabric Finishing  (Simple Manufacturing  Operations)  -
Two  mills  in this subdivision were sampled for toxic pollutants
and the results are shown in Table V-9e.  Thirteen  organics  and
five  metals  were detected  in the untreated wastewater, with 620
ug/1 toluene the maximum organic concentration and 460 ug/1  zinc
the maximum metal concentration.
                                 152

-------
Five  organics,  seven  metals  and  cyanide were detected in the
treated effluent, with  140  ug/1  toluene  the  maximum  organic
concentration and 340 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.

     Woven  Fabric Finishing (Complex Manufacturing Operations) -
Three mills in this subdivision were sampled for toxic pollutants
and the results are shown  in  Table  V-9f.   Thirteen  organics,
seven   metals  and  asbestos  were  detected  in  the  untreated
wastewater, with 2,835  ug/1  ethylbenzene  the  maximum  organic
concentration   and   1,080   ug/1   zinc   the   maximum   metal
concentration.

Eleven organics, seven metals, asbestos and cyanide were detected
in the treated effluent,  with 103 ug/1 phenol the maximum organic
concentration and 390 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal  concentration.
Asbestos  was  detected  in  the  untreated wastewater at 197 MFL
(million fibers per liter) and in the  treated  effluent  at  391
MFL;  however,  the results are based on data from a single plant
only.

     Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizinq) - Thirteen mills  in  this
subdivision were sampled for toxic pollutants and the results are
shown  in  Table  V-9g.   As stated earlier, 27 organics, 9 metals
and cyanide were detected in the untreated wastewater.  It should
be noted that more woven fabric finishing mills where desizing is
employed were sampled than any other, which  may  partly  account
for  why more pollutants were detected.  Ethylbenzene detected at
19,000 ug/1  was  the  maximum  organic  concentration  and  zinc
detected at 7,900 ug/1 the maximum metal concentration.

Fourteen  organics, eight metals and cyanide were detected in the
treated  effluent,  with  3,018  ug/1  ethylbenzene  the  maximum
organic  concentration  and  5,100  ug/1  zinc  the maximum metal
concentration.

The results for the woven fabric  finishing  subcategory  reflect
the overall trends for toxics in the industry and demonstrate the
effect  of  increasing  the  complexity of processing on both the
variety and the concentrations of the pollutants found.

Knit Fabric Finishing  Eleven  mills  in  this  subcategory  were
sampled.   29  organics,  9 metals and cyanide were detected above
10 ug/1 in untreated wastewaters.  A summary  of  the  analytical
results,   by  subdivision  (simple,  complex  and  hosiery),  is
presented below.

     Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple  Manufacturing  Operations)  -
Five  mills in this subdivision were sampled for toxic pollutants
and the results are shown in Table  V-9h.   Twenty  organics  and
nine metals were detected in the untreated wastewater, with 2,700
ug/1 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene the maximum organic concentration and
590 ug/1 copper the maximum metal concentration.
                                 153

-------
Six  organics,  nine  metals,  and  cyanide  were detected in the
treated effluent, with 130 ug/1 1, V,1-trichloroethane the maximum
organic concentration and 684 ug/1  antimony  the  maximum  metal
concentration.

     Knit  Fabric  Finishing (Complex Manufacturing Operations) -
Three mills in this subdivision were sampled for toxic pollutants
and the results are shown in Table V-9i.  Thirteen organics,  six
metals  and  cyanide  were  detected in the untreated wastewater,
with 4,400 ug/1 acenaphthylene the maximum organic  concentration
and 515 ug/1 antimony the maximum metal concentration.

Ten  organics,  seven  metals  and  cyanide  were detected in the
treated effluent, with 1,020 ug/1 chloroform the maximum  organic
concentration   and   5,160   ug/1   zinc   the   maximum   metal
concentration,

     Knit Fabric Finishing (Hosiery Products) -  Three  mills  in
this  subdivision  were  sampled  for  toxic  pollutants  and the
results are shown in Table V-9j.  Seven organics and three metals
were detected  in  the  untreated  wastewater,  with  1,600  ug/1
acrylonitrile  the  maximum  organic concentration and 1,420 ug/1
zinc the maximum toxic metal concentration.

Three organics and four  metals  were  detected  in  the  treated
effluent,   with  400  ug/1  acrylonitrile  the  maximum  organic
concentration  and  199   ug/1   chromium   the   maximum   metal
concentration.

The  results  for  the knit fabric finishing subcategory are less
clear then the results for the woven fabric finishing subcategory
with regard to a relationship between  complexity  of  processing
and variety and concentration of pollutants found.  The number of
pollutants is greater where simple processing is employed but the
concentrations are higher where complex processing is employed.

Carpet  Finishing Four mills in this subcategory were sampled for
toxic pollutants and the results are shown in Table V-9k.   Seven
organics, seven metals and cyanide were detected in the untreated
wastewater,   with   280  ug/1  chloroform  the  maximum  organic
concentration and 450 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.

Three organics, seven metals and cyanide  were  detected  in  the
treated  effluent, with the maximum organic concentration and 411
ug/1 chromium the maximum metal concentration.

The variety and concentrations of toxic  pollutants  detected  in
this  subcategory  are  reflective of the less complex processing
involved,  particularly  the  relative   absence   of   scouring,
bleaching and functional finishing.

Stock  and  Yarn  Finishing  Seven mills in this subcategory were
sampled for toxic pollutants and the results are shown  in  Table
                                 154

-------
V-91.   Twenty organics, nine metals and cyanide were detected in
the untreated wastewater, with 410 ug/1  chloroform  the  maximum
organic  concentration  and  1,000  ug/1  zinc  the maximum metal
concentration.

Seven organics, seven metals and cyanide  were  detected  in  the
treated  effluent,  with  50  ug/1  phenol  the  maximum  organic
concentration and 865 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.

The variety of toxic pollutants detected in this  subcategory  is
extensive,  although  the  concentrations are somewhat lower than
those  found  in  the  woven  and  the  knit   fabric   finishing
subcategories.

Nonwoven  Manufacturing  Three  mills  in  this  subcategory were
sampled for toxic pollutants and the results are shown  in  Table
V-9m.   Seven  organics  and  five  metals  were  detected in the
untreated wastewater, with 200 ug/1 benzene the  maximum  organic
concentration   and   120   ug/1   nickel   the   maximum   metal
concentration.    Because   these   mills   were   all   indirect
dischargers,  treated  effluent  samples  could  not be obtained.
These results reflect the less  complex  processing  involved  in
this  subcategory,  most  particularly  the absence of dyeing and
printing.

Felted Fabric Processing One mill in this subcategory was sampled
for toxic pollutants, and the results are shown  in  Table  V-9n.
Four  organics  and  three  metals were detected in the untreated
wastewater, with 85 ug/1 phenol the maximum organic concentration
and 57 ug/1 selenium the maximum metal concentration.

Two organics and  three  metals  were  detected  in  the  treated
effluent,   with   56   ug/1   naphthalene  the  maximum  organic
concentration and 45 ug/1 zinc the maximum metal concentration.

Other Sources of Information

Various chemical and textile industry publications were  reviewed
to  obtain  general  information  about  the use of the 129 toxic
pollutants in the textile industry.  These sources  are  included
in  the  bibliography.   The  most  useful  sources  included the
Condensed Chemical Dictionary, the  Merck  Index  and  the  Color
Index.  Background information on the use of the toxic pollutants
also was compiled for all industrial segments from groups such as
the  National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the
EPA Environmental Research Laboratory.  In addition,  specialists
within  the  textile  industry  were asked to provide information
about certain toxic pollutants.  In some cases, the results  were
opinions  from  chemists,  engineers and others and were based on
the individual's  experience.   In  other  cases,  special  study
committees  were  established  by  trade  associations  to gather
information about certain toxic pollutants.  Except for  some  of
the  metals,  the  findings  of these committees were qualitative
                               155

-------
because of the absence of  quantitative  historical  information.
Two  committees,  one  from  the  American  Textile Manufacturers
Institute  (ATMI)  and  one  from  the  Dyes  Environmental   and
Toxicology  Organization  (DETO),  were  particularly  helpful in
providing useful information.

ATMI  organized  a  special  Task  Group  on   Priority   (Toxic)
Pollutants  that reviewed in detail a list of 52 toxic pollutants
that were neither clearly present nor clearly absent  in  textile
mill wastewaters.  This list was based on the literature and some
early  results  of  the  field sampling program.  Information was
requested about the likelihood of each  pollutant  being  present
and,  if so, information about potential sources.  The Task Group
classified each pollutant  as  "probable,"  "possible,"  or  "not
likely."

A pollutant was classified as "probable" if it was established as
present  in  a product or process.  A pollutant was classified as
"possible" if it was known or suspected to be an intermediate  or
contaminant  of  products  and processes being used.  Many of the
pollutants in this category could be entering  the  waste  in  an
auxiliary  manner such as a component of maintenance products and
as agricultural contaminants in process water.  A  pollutant  was
classified  as  "not likely*' if the task group was unable to find
data to support its probable presence.

For each "probable" or "potential"  pollutant,  possible  sources
were   suggested.    This  information  is  incorporated  in  the
discussions of the sources of the individual toxic pollutants  in
Section VI.

The  other industry-related group was the Ecology Committe of the
Dyes Environmental  and  Toxicology  Organization,  Inc.  (DETO).
DETO  comprises  18  member companies that, in aggregate, produce
over 90 percent of the dyes manufactured in  the  United  States.
The  committee  carried  out  a  survey of the DETO membership to
determine which of the toxic  pollutants  in  textile  wastewater
might  originate in dyes.  The list of pollutants was narrowed to
40 that the committee  believed  could  possibly  be  present  in
commercial  dye  products.   The committe focused on dye products
for which domestic sales (1976) exceeded 90,000 kg  (approximately
200,000 pounds) per year and for which there are  more  than  two
producers.   The  list  of dyes numbered 70.  Questionnaires were
sent to all 18 member companies and, in addition to the 70 listed
dyes, responses were received for an additional 81  dyes,  for   a
total  of  151  dye  products  representing  55.3  percent of the
113,380 metric tons (approximately 250 million  pounds)  sold  in
1976.  Six toxic pollutants  (chromium, copper, pentachlorophenol,
parachlorometacresol,   phenol   and  zinc)  were   classified  as
"believed present in  (some) commercial dyes at greater than 0.1%"
and  19 additional pollutants were classified as  "believed present
in  (some) commerical dyes at less than 0.1%." The results of  the
                                 156

-------
DETO survey are presented in more detail in the discussion of the
sources of the individual pollutant parameters in Section VI.

TRADITIONALLY-MONITORED POLLUTANTS

As a result of past regulatory efforts and studies certain toxic,
nonconventional  and  conventional  pollutants have traditionally
been  monitored  in  the  textile  industry.   These   pollutants
include:

Conventional

     Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODJ5)
     Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
     Oil & Grease
     pH

Nonconventional

     Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
     Total Phenols
     Sulfide
     Color

Toxic

     Total Chromium

Even though the above parameters are recognized as significant in
textile mill wastewater, monitoring practices across the industry
differ  significantly.   National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits specify the parameters to be monitored  by
these  facilities.   Im  many  cases,  permit  requirements  were
developed  prior  to  promulgation  of  BPT  and  the  monitoring
requirements at the time of the survey did not include all of the
regulated pollutants.  For mills discharging wastewater to POTWs,
monitoring  requirements  range  from  none, which is the typical
case, to  very  extensive  requirements.   The  majority  of  the
indirect dischargers pay for wastewater disposal based on a local
surcharge  factor  per  unit  of water consumption; monitoring of
wastewater constituents is not regularly conducted.

In order to obtain the  best  possible  characterization  of  the
wastewater  from each subcategory of the industry, mills believed
to  be  potential  dischargers  of  wastewater   were   contacted
regarding  the  availability  of  historical  data.  Based on the
contacts, 637 mills were sent a detailed  questionnaire  in  1977
that  requested  that the mills provide representative monitoring
results or information about where such data could  be  obtained.
The  Agency  specifically  requested  data  for  1976 in order to
obtain a consistent and up-to-date data base.
                                157

-------
Data  considered  useful  in  developing   untreated   wastewater
characteristics were received for 506 wet processing mills and 92
low water use processing mills.  In addition, field sampling data
were collected on the traditionally-monitored nonconventional and
conventional  pollutants  in  textile  mill  water  supplies  and
untreated wastewater and are presented to confirm,  and  in  some
cases, supplement the historical data.

Characterization of_ Mill Water Supply

The field sampling results for water supply for the traditionally
monitored   conventional   and   nonconventional  pollutants  are
summarized in Table V-10.

The concentrations of these pollutants in the  water  supply  are
shown   to  be  generally  at  insignificant  levels  across  the
industry.  Thus, the levels that are present in textile untreated
wastewaters primarily are caused by the raw  materials  used  and
the manufacturing processes.

Characterization of_ Untreated Wastewaters

The  raw  wastewater  concentrations  and  mass  discharge  rates
reported in the  mill  surveys  for  the  traditionally-monitored
nonconventional  pollutant  parameters  are presented by mill and
subcategory in Table V-l1.  The summaries  provide  the  minimum,
maximum,  average, median and standard deviation of the values as
well as the number of mills represented  for  each  parameter  in
each  subcategory.   The  values represent averages for mills for
which historical data were obtained.  The  range  in*  these  data
demonstrates  the  degree  of variability that is inherent in the
industry.    Untreated   wastewater   concentrations   for    the
traditionally-monitored    nonconventional    and    conventional
pollutant parameters are summarized for each subcategory in Table
V-l2.  Values are included for each parameter for which three  or
more  mills  are  available.   The  values are the medians of the
reported values.

Wastewater concentrations are of primary importance in predicting
the treatability of a particular waste stream  and  are  used  to
design,  monitor  and control the operation of treatment systems.
But concentration alone does not provide a  complete  picture  of
the  relative  pollutant contributions of each subcategory.  Mass
discharge  rates,  which  relate  pollutant  concentrations   and
wastewater   discharge  to  production  levels,  provide  a  more
suitable means of regulating wastewater discharges by  preventing
dilution of wastewater to meet concentration limits.  Median mass
discharge  rates  for  the  appropriate  pollutant parameters are
presented in Table V-l3.  Again, values  are  reported  for  each
parameter for which three or more mills are available.

The  nonconventional and conventional pollutant data collected in
conjunction with the field sampling program helped develop a more
                                 158

-------
                               TABLE V-10
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND
                       NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                  FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM - WATER SUPPLY
Pollutant
Parameter Minimum
BOD (mg/1) 1
COD (mg/1) 2
TSS (mg/1) 1
Oil & Grease (mg/1) 1
Total Phenols (ug/1) 1
Sulfide (ug/1) 3
Color (APHA Units) 15
Color (ADMI pH 7.6) 5
Maximum
1
95
38
38
1020
100
15
276
Average
1
25
7
16
51
64
15
40
Median
1
20
5
15
10
100

16
Analyzed*
10
28
28
15
26
23
2
22
Detected*
10
22
18
11
26
9
1
17
* Values represent the number of samples analyzed.
# Values represent the number of times pollutant was detected.

Note:  Statistical values based on detected values only.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Program.
                                  159

-------
                                                                     TABLB V-ll

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                              WOOL SCOURING SDBCATEGORY
Report
10014
10012
100O4
10005
10011
10008
10015
10006
10002
10001
10013
Dis-*
Charge
I
D
D
D
I
X
D
D
1
D
D
VASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOO-5 COD TSS
(gal/lb) («g/l) (kg/kk«) («g/l) (ka/kkg) («g/l) (kg/kka)
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
.7
2.2
4.6
1.5
1.9
.5
4.6
2270
4000
364
6678
313
1825
4578
413
—
1606
28.41
44.32
3.80
41.79
6.01
67.22
57.93
6.58
—
61.71
—
—
1136
7692
17831
2020
•
6895
—
—
20.10
334.44
225-66
32.21
—
263.92
2742
4800
480
13190
217
2655
82.17
120
—
2958
34.32
51.89
5.01
82.55
4.18
114.48
103.99
1.91
—
113.69
0
<•*/!)
2825
308
158
5000
580
942
—
80
—
—
TOTAL
& G pffiNOLS TOT-CR SOLFIDE
(kg/kkg) (iig/l) (a/kk*) (ug/l) (g/kkg) (ug/l) (g/kkg)
35.35
3.59 	
1.64
31.29
10.26
29.70 	
—
1-27
—
—
COLOR**
UNITS
—
—
—
—
—
—
__
—
Minimi*               .5    313     3.80   1136    20.10    120     1-91      80    1.27
Maxima              4.6   6676    67.22  17831   334.44  13190   114.48    5000   35-35
Average              1.9   2449    35-30   7114   175.26   3931    56.89    1413   16.15
Median               1.4   1825    41.79   6895   225 -66   2742    51.89     580   10.26
Standard Deviation   1.4   2208    25.18   6650   141-66   4316    48.01    1841   15.30
Nunber                11      9        95        59        977
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APRA color units.
*I - indicates indirect discharger.
 0 - indicates direct discharger.

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                        FELTED FABRIC PROCESSING SUBCATEGORY

                 WASTEWATER
              A   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             O & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SULFIDE      COLOR**
  No.    Charge   (gal/Ib) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/l) (kg/kkg) (•*/!) (kg/kkg) Qpg/l) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1)  (g/fckg)  UNITS
60027
80013
80024
80021
80006
80023
80017
80010
80020
80025
80018
Minimum
Max! mum
Average
Medi an
Standard
Number
D
I
I
D
I
I
1
I
I
D
I




Deviation

28.1
15.1
24.8
4.0
25.5
16.6
33.3
49.7
9.8
111.6
31.8
4.0
111.6
31.8
25.5
29.2
11
136
—
—
—
—
—
55
271
—
376
—
55
376
209
203
142
4
31.89
—
—
—
—
—
15.43
108.57
—
309.97
—
15.43
309.97
116.46
70.23
135.23
4
521
—
—
—
—
—
230
586
—
2091
--
230
2091
857
553
837
4
122.19
—
—
—
—
—
63.97
249 . 77
—
2379-96
—
63.97
2379.96
703.97
185.98
1120.02
4
68
—
—
—
—
—
149
285
—
66
—
68
285
147
117
98
4
15,94
—
—
—
—
—
41.44
119.72
—
86.79
—
15,94
119.72
65.97
64,11
46.28
4
_„
—
—
—
—
—
8
28
—
156
—
8
156
64
28
80
3
	
—
—
—
—
—
2.36
11.15
—
126.40
—
2.36
126.40
46.63
11.15
69.21
3
70
—
—
—
—
—
—
575
—
1097
--
70
1097
580
575
513
3
16,41
—
—
—
—
—
—
247.35
—
1497.56
—
16.41
1497.56
587.11
247 . 35
796.89
3
50
—
—
—
—
—
500
—
—
—
—
50
500
275
275
318
2
11.72
—
—
—
—
—
139.07
—
—
~
—
11.72
139.07
75.39
75.39
90.04
2
500
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_.
—
500
500
500
500
—
1
117.27
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
117.27
117.27
117.27
117.27
—
1
300
—
—
—
—
—
—
__
—
—
—
300
300
300
300
—
1
Source; EPA Industry 308 Survey.
£* - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                             WOOL FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
Report
No.
20015
20005
20020
20021
20012
20017
20008
20009
20011
20007
20010
20006
20004
20018
20022
Minimum
!_, Maximum
Ch Average
1X3 Median
Standard
Number
WASTEWATER
^ DISCHARGE
Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD
Charae (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkR) (»g/l) (kR/kkE)
I
D
D
I
I
0
I
D
D
I
1
I
I
I
I




Deviation

78,8
61.4
32.1
42.6
33.9
105.4
34.0
27.2
36.5
40.0
41.6
27-9
18.6
50.0
14.9
14.9
105-4
42.9
36.5
23-5
15
66
89
466
—
94
—
150
247
—
183
—
150
232
—
66
466
186
150
122
9
43.41
22.36
160.47
—
83.47
—
34.13
85.76
—
63.62
—
24.80
96.79
—
22.36
J60.47
68.31
63.62
44.23
9
—
592
1336
—
341
—
900
653
—
280
—
—
—
1328
280
1336
775
653
431
7
—
148.84
448.27
—
3O0.60
—
204.81
212.35
—
97.35
—
—
—
166.22
97.35
448.27
225.49
204.81
116.67
7
TSS
(mg/1) (kg/kkg)
17
66
128
—
32

175
51
—
51
—
59
24
—
17
175
67
51
51
9
11.18
14.97
43.57
—
28.68
—
39.82
16.26

17.73
—
9.53
10.01
—
9.53
43.57
21.30
16.26
12.94
9
0
(mg/1)
—
—
70
—
~
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
70
70
70
70
—
1
& G
(kg/kkg)

—
9.16
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
9.16
9.16
9.16
9.16
—
1
TOTAL
PHENOLS
(ug/D (g/kkg)

—
8
—
—
—
50
187
—
—
—
—
—
—
8
187
81
50
93
3
—
—
2-90
—
--
—
11.37
82.74
—
—
—
—
—
—
2.90
82.74
32.33
11.37
43-85
3
TOT-CR
(ug/D (g/kkg)
100
—
107
—
—
—
—
456
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
456
221
107
203
3
65.77
—
38.89
—
—
—
—
194.14
—
—
—
—
—
—
38.89
194.14
99.60
65.77
82.96
3
SULFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kkR)

—
73
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
73
73
73
73
—
1
—
—
26.05
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
26.05
26.05
26.05
26.05
—
1
COLOR**
UNITS
—
—
—
—
—
—
1550
—
—
—
—

—
—
1500
1500
1500
1500
—
1
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
£* - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                              TABU V-ll  (continued)

                                                             RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                  LOW WATER USE PROCESSING  (GENERAL) SUBCATEGORY
Report
No.
G3034
G3055
G3035
G3111
G3075
G3076
G3077
G3027
G3033
G3061
G3031
G3048
G3060
G3067
63001
G3003
G3017
G3107
G3054
G3065
G3078
G3116
G3118
G3106
G3040
38001
G3025
G3079
G3016
G3080
G3058
G3092
G3004
G3011
G3036
G3086
G3084
G3081
G3062
G3082
*
Dis-.
Charge
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
I
D
D
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
I
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE TOTAL
RATE BOD-5 COD TSS 0 & G PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
(sal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (»«/!) (ka/kkg) (»g/l) (ks/kkji) (BUE/I) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkn) (ug/1) (g/kkg)
2.0
4.4
.07
.05 — — — — — -- — . --
2.8 37 .87 — — 70 1.60 -- -- 91 2.34 97 3.42 180 3.78
.7 ~ — — -- — -- — — 	 -
5.7 — -- — — -- -- -- ~ 	
1.2
9.2
.1
.3
2.3
.9
.1
.8
i.o
.2
.01
.3 450 1.37 -- -- 372 1.13
.6
1.1
.1
.1
.07 — — — « -- — ~ -- 	
.4 -- — — — — ~ ~ — 	
.06 450 .21
2.5
1.3
1.0 795 6.98 2955 25.95 216 1.90
.3
4.2 — -- — — ~ -- — -- 	
8__ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ _ __ __ __
8—-. _** __ _. -.— __ __ _— _ __ __ __
5O -. .. _ _ __ __ " — — __ _.. __ — __ __ «_
• J
• 1 """ """ ™~ ^"* '"'*" *** ™~ ~~ ~~ "*"" "" ~~ "^ **"*
2 A «« «^ __ __ ^-« «_ __ _« __ ^_ __ ~~
. y
43
1-3 *** *™ ~™ ""* *~* ™~ ™~ ™~ "* ** ~™ ~~ "*~ ™*
1^0
1 " " 	 ' 	 "
COLOR**
UNITS
„_
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— '
—
—
—
—
—~
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey,
£* ~ Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                   LOW WATER USE PROCESSING (GENERAL) SUBCATEGORY

                 WASTEWATER
              ^   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             0 & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SULFIDE      COLOR**
  No.    Charge   (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/i) (kg/kkg) (ag/1) (kg/kkg) («g/l) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)  (ug/1) (g/kkg)   UNITS
G3066
G3013
G3010
G3009
34007
G3005
G3085
G3030
38004
G3059
G3039
G3090
G3028
G3026
G3049
G3023
G3072
G3045
G3029
G3022
G3050
G3064
G3083
G3073
G3057
G3108
G3021
G3019
G3070
G3056
G3071
G3041
G3042
G3046
G3020
G3024
G3053
G3113
G3015
G3119
G3063
G3052
G3032
G3069
G3007
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
D
D
I
I
I
D
I
J
I
I
I
I
1
I
D
I
D
D
I
I
D
I
.8
1.0
.4
.5
.0
.4
3.4
.6
-4
1.3
1.0
1.1
.9
.2
.7
.09
.1
3.0
2.0
.4
.7
2.5
.3
.6
.8
.5
.5
.4
2.7
.2
1.3
.5
.4
4.0
.9
.6
.4
.2
1.2
.8
.2
.04
1.0
1.4
2.4
—
—
650
—
497
—
—
—
—
—
—
275
—
__
—
—
209
—
—
—
-"-
—
—
293
—
317
—
--
—
—
—
~
—
.77
—
8.65 788
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.32
—
__
—
—
2.41 595
—
—
__
—
—
—
.70 1063
—
2.31 1069
—
__
—
—
— —
__
—
235
—
13.70 92
—
—
—
—
—
—
220
—
_-
—
—
6.87 187
—
—
__
—
—
—
2.74 183
—
7.72 532
—
._
—
—
— —
--
—
.33
—
1.59
—
—
—
—
—
—
1-05
—
__
—
—
2.16
—
—
„
—
—
—
,44
—
4.02
—
„
—
—
__ — — — — _*- — — .»*. — — — — — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

"
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APHA color units.

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                   LOW WATER USE PROCESSING (GENERAL) SUBCATECORY

                 WASTEWATER
              A   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             0 & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SULTIDE      COLOR**
  No.     Charge   (gal/lb) (rog/l) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/l) (kg/kkg) (ng/1) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)   UNITS
G3018 D
G3068 D
Hinimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
.2
1.1
.01
9.2
1.22
.75
1.54
86
„_
—
37
795
397
383
219
10
__
—
.21
8.65
2.55
1.34
2.88
10
„
—
595
2955
1294
1063
949
5
._
—
2.74
25.95
11.39
7.72
9.02
5
„
—
70
532
234
216
141
9
•*
—
.33
4.02
1.58
1.59
1.10
9
__ __ __
—
91
91
91
91
__
— 0 1
_—
—
2.34
2.34
2.34
2.34
—
1
__
—
97
97
97
97
--
1
„
—
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
—
1
_—
—
180
180
180
180
—
1
	
—
3.78
3.78
3.78
3.78
—
1
**
—
—
—
--
—
—
~~
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
£* - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                                    TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                                   RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                   LOW WATER USE PROCESSING (WATER JET WEAVING) SUBCATEGORY

                      WASTEWATER
                   4   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
     Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             0 & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SOLFIDE      COLOR**
       No.    Charge   (gal/Ib) («g/l) (ke/kkg) («g/l) (kg/kkg) (,K/1) (kg/kkg) (•g/1) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/tfcg) (ug/1)  (g/kkg)   UNITS
G3117
G3012
G3014
C3115
G3114
G3038
Minima
HaxinuQ
Average
Median
Standard
Nunber
D
I
I
I
D
D




Deviation

15.3
6.5
2.3
9.0
11.8
23.3
2.3
23.3
11.3
10.4
7.3
6
119
—
—
55
204
—
55
204
126
119
74
3
15.95
—
—
4.33
20.41
—
4.33
20.41
13.56
15-95
8.30
3
137
—
—
247
183
—
137
247
189
183
55
3
18.19
—
—
19.20
17.57
—
17.57
19.20
18.32
18.19
.82
3
26
—
—
26
28
—
26
28
26
26
1
3
3.40
—
—
2.05
2.69
—
2.05
3.40
2.71
2.69
.67
3
5
—
—
15
8
—
5
15
9
8
5
0 « 0 3
.50
—
—
1.46
.63
—
.50
1.46
.86
.63
.52
3 — 0
__.
—
—

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— -*
     Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
     ^* - Color units are APHA color units.
      I - indicates indirect discharger
      D - indicates direct discharger
CTi

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll  (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE  CHARACTERISTICS
                                                     WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING  (SIMPLE) SUBCATEG08Y
Report
No.
40147
40001
40063
40045
40086
40108
40138
40019
40152
40013
40116
40123
40021
40101
40124
40055
40029
40127
40143
40035
40113
40057
40110
40088
40144
40009
40005
40080
40027
40098
40071
40036
40023
40100
40076
40050
40070
40128
40066
40109
*
Dis-
charge
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
D
D
D
I
D
D
D
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOD-5 COD
(Kal/lb) (.ng/l) (kg/kkjt) OoR/l) (ks/kkg)
6.1
3.2
10.0
1.5
3-3
24.0
9-5
5.2
22-1
4.0
26.3
33-0
8-5
9-4
8.5
12.1
5.1
2-7
14.4
28.0
.0
7.5
28.2
18.4
2.3
15.7
2.7
30.5
24.9
28.8
4.2
3.8
23.8
9.0
3.2
14.5
21.3
4-7
3-1
17.1
213
747
383
2048
212
611
30
305
877
322
188
133
66
915
69
298
300
660
89
143
136
—
616
19
232
—
142
—
—
—
486
10.89
62.88
29.06
90.42
38.70
20.85
6.69
22.13
69.52
23.00
22.29
30.49
4.16
215.35
10.80
5.73
39.33
15.42
23.76
29.93
28.84
—
19.96
3.77
18.02
—
17.21
—
—
—
69.56
1801
5020
1266
1396
218
862
2277
1985
659
472
203
1856
644
1230
1400
317
472
384
—
940
218
567
—
767
—
—
—
999
92.11
221.64
239.82
47.65
47.92
60.51
180.54
141.81
52.06
114.04
12.70
436.82
99.46
161.39
32.71
84.64
98.51
78.90
—
30.43
43.31
43.02
—
92.70
—
—
—
143.00
TSS
(rag/I) (kg/kkg)
16
590
258
53
345
29
31
289
460
28
34
24
54
64
262
75
60
28
—
192
890
36
—
35
—
—
—
— —
.81
49.66
11.39
9.55
11.77
6.41
2.16
22.93
32.86
3.28
7.73
5.64
8.19
8.49
6.12
20.02
12.67
6.73
.
6.22
176.82
2.75
—
4.28
—
—
—
~~
TOTAL
O S G PHENOLS
(fflg/D (kg/kkR) (UR/I) (8/kkR)
153 6.75 40
67 12.54
50
286 21.69 600
782 61.99
154 11.00
29
6 .86
350
—
32 .74 410
36 9.08 205
9 1.87 47
—
—
—
10
48
—
—
—
—
—
— — — — •"—
1.76
11.01
45.51
1.84
6.73
—
9.57
51.21
9.85
—
—
—
1.98
3.50
—
—
—
—
—
~™
TOT-CR SULFIDE
(ug/D (R/kkn) (ug/1) (R/kkg)
100
530
30
1
40
40
24
150
10
50
37
—
—
37
22
—
—
—
—
—
_._
5.11
18.09
6.55 580 128.21
.07
2.50 55 3.44
.77
3.14
3.50 25 .58
2.31 90 22.07
10.43 50 10.43
9.93
—
—
7.35
1.66
—
—
—
—
—
—- — —
COLOR**
UNITS
10000
3795
800
800
—
5000
1283
503
—
—
—
424
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                                   TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                                  RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                         WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (SIMPLE) SUBCATEGORY
WASTEWATER
 DISCHARGE
                                                                                                   TOTAL
Report Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD
No. Charge (gal/lb) (ng/1) (kg/kkR) («K/1) (kg/kkR)
40032 0
Minima
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
2.4
1.5
33.0
12.5
9.2
9.7
40
313
19
Z048
390
298
418
27
6.05
3.77
215.35
34.62
22.29
42.29
27
1411
203
5020
1140
901
1022
24
28.31
12.70
436.82
107.66
88.37
93.04
24
TSS
(«g/l) (kg/kkR)
135
16
890'
173
60
221
23
2.50
.81
176.82
18.21
7.73
36.34
23
0
C-8/1)

6
782
169
67
247
9
& G
(kg/kkg)
—
.74
61.99
14.05
9.08
19.18
9
PHENOLS
(ug/1) (g/kkg)
—
10
600
178
49
206
10
—
1.76
51.21
14.29
8.15
18.34
10
TOT-CR
(uR/1) (g/kkg)
--
1
530
82
37
140
13
--
-07
18.09
5.49
3.50
5.02
13
SULFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kkg)
—
25
5&0
160
55
235
5
—
.58
12&.21
32.94
10.43
53.89
5
COLOR**
UNITS
—
424
10000
2825
1041
3357
&
    Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
    ** - Color units are APHA color units,
     I - indicates indirect discharger
     D - indicates direct discharger
CO

-------
                                                                   TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                                  RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS *
                                                        WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (COMPLEX) SUBCATEGORY
ID
Report
No.
40046
40008
40106
40078
40020
40102
40122
40011
40119
40132
40094
40036
40134
40082
40139
40091
40067
40135
40115
40154
40131
40133
40163
40041
40i48
40022
40040
40090
40077
40125
40160
40024
40033
40111
40026
40025
40117
40114
40126
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard
dumber
WASTEWATER
* DISCHARGE
Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD
Charge (gal/Ib) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (ing/l) (fcg/fckg)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
D
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
D




Deviation

20.4
1.3
9.8
14.9
11.9
4.9
8.7
12.6
2.9
7.1
29.4
6.2
4.4
16.6
6.6
9.3
8.6
9.7
3.9
23.5
10.4
8.2
22.0
25.0
11.9
33.2
2.4
3.5
12.7
24.9
11.7
27.0
19.8
17.7
15.7
29.6
5.9
18.4
3.9
1.3
33.2
13.2
11.7
8.6
39
106
—
853
450
780
—
—
—
630
201
—
—
97
144
—
356
106
399
350
337
471
—
—
—
328
83
2164
281
389
119
461
—
219
288
—
—
1125
565
—
83
2164
452
350
439
25
18.79
—
70.31
56.32
78.10
—
—
—
15.77
12.03
—
—
3.59
20.15
—
27.92
9.19
33.15
11.67
62.24
41.28
—
—
—
32.74
23.11
44.08
8.44
41.27
24.99
53.34
—
36.28
42.71
—
—
57.09 •
87.03
—
3.59
87.03
36.46
33.15
22.89
25
__
1850
—
3100
—
244
—
—
--
864
—

—
~
—
—
—
—
—
—
1076
—
—
—
1168
308
5138
1886
—
—
1442
—
726
934
—
—
—
1174
—
244
5136
1531
1168
1316
13
„
21.30
—
388.01
—
10. IS
—
—
_.
51.72
—
—
—
—
—
.
—
—
—
—
94.23
—
—
—
116.37
85.68
104.88
56.66
—
—
142.64
—
119.29
138.51
—
—
—
180.84
—
10.18
388.01
116.17
104.88
95.20
13
TSS
(mg/1) (kft/kke)
55
425
—
136
616
—
—
—
78
74
—
—
—
136
—
56
40
—
61
47
55
—
—
—
220
43
866
185
41
48
165
—
182
—
—
—
155
—
—
40
866
175
78
212
21
9.14
4.89
—
17.02
61.68
—
—
—
1.95
4.43
—
—
—
19.01
—
4.35
3.18
—
2.05
9.29
4.84
—
—
—
21.97
12.05
17.75
5.55
4.39
10.13
16.73
—
30.15
—
-
—
7.87
—
—
1.95
61.68
12.78
9.14
13.49
21
O
— —
5
—
48
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_-
—
—
—
34
—
—
—
44
—
158
—
—
—
—
—
86
—
—
—
44
—
—
5
158
59
44
49
7
& G
(kg/kkg)

.05
—
6.00
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
__
—
—
~
—
—
—
2.97
—
—
—
4.45
—
3.24
—
—
—
—
—
14.24
—
—
—
2.24
—
—
.05
14.24
4.74
3.24
4.57
7
TOTAL
PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
(iiR/1) 6*/kkg) (ug/lj (s/kkg) (uK/1) (8/kks)

1500
—
62
—
600
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
„
—
—
—
10
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
298
—
—
—
46
—
—
—
—
—
—
10
1500
419
180
574
6

17.32
—
7.76
—
25,03
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
.91
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
31.63
—
—
—
7.62
—
—
—
--
—
—
.91
31.63
15.04
12.54
11.72
6
„
100
—
19
—
1180
—
—
100
—
—
—

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
30
—
—
—
—
157
125
110
133
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
19
1180
217
110
363
9

1.15
—
2.37
—
49.23
—
—
2.50
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
2.62
—
—
—
—
44.68
2.54
3.30
14.13
—
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.15
49.23
13.61
2.62
19.32
9
„
100
—
100
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
~
—
—
—
.-
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
5840
—
—
—
120
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
5840
1252
100
2564
5
„
1.15
—
12.51
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
7.84
__
—
—
—
~
—
'
—
—
—
—
—
619.21
—
—
—
19.88
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.15
619.21
132.11
12.51
272.37
5
COLOR**
UNITS

500
—
700
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
317
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
..
—
—
—
~
—
—
317
700
505
500
191
3
      I  -  indicates  indirect  discharger
      D  -  indicates  direct  discharger
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APHA color units.

-------
                                              TABtE V-ll (continued)

                                             RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                   WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (DESIZING) SUBCATEGORY
WASTEWATER
 DISCHARGE
TOTAL
Report
No.
40075
40120
40146
40031
40121
40089
40083
40010
40018
40093
40141
40047
40104
40060
40130
40064
40012
40118
40072
40028
40053
40015
40043
40049
40052
40073
40054
40056
40081
40065
40097
40058
40037
40042
40007
40004
40068
40155
40016
40074
Dis-
charge
I
D
D
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
D
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
D
I
D
D
I
I
D
D
D
D
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
RATE BOD-5 COD TSS
(gal/lb) (rag/1) (kg/kkR) (rag/1) (kg/kkR) (»g/l) (kg/kkE)
32.4
9.5
11-7
10.7
17.8
.0
15.8
25.0
13.2
60.9
23.0
16.5
4.3
16.8
15.7
8.6
6.8
25.2
10.3
10.8
3.3
2.5
30.5
20.0
7.9
3.1
6.6
4.3
21.5
.6
7.0
17.1
14.0
32.1
13,9
9,8
12,1
7.5
14.5
23,4
222
908
523
295
—
—
164
422
281
506
311
195
204
200
640
494
125
366
231
2604
—
435
193
712
242
1011
395
—
—
195
311
—
—
690
1110
—
240
668
972
60.20
72.67
46.97
44.04

—
34.21
46.76
142-97
97.24
42.93
7-16
28.75
26.33
45-50
28.27
26.30
31.64
20.98
63.68
—
109.02
33-16
47.52
5-90
56.71
14.42
—
—
11.56
44.48
—
—
80.63
98.30
—
15.15
81.28
188.51
2355
1708
997
—
—
372
883
1569
—
834
836
716
845
—
—
574
—
746
—
—
—
800
1837
—
2778
1316
—
—
1845
--
—
—
—
2120
—
1580
2488
—
181.59
153.13
148.94
—
—
77.60
97.88
798.32
"
114.85
30.62
100.68
111.25
—
—
120.80
—
67.42
—
—
—
130.55
122.63
—
153.04
48.04
—
—
107.24
~
—
—
—
194,95
—
99.80
302 . 74
—
309
—
86
—
—
1
56
147
246
—
33
64
82
—
—
213
78
131
1260
—
121
162
239
97
434
~
—
—
—
135
—
—
904
2442
—
155
311
186
24,01
—
12,90
—
—
.20
6,25
74,79
47.27
—
1.20
9.07
10.79
—
—
44.82
6.80
11.82
34.76
—
31.31
23.31
15.95
2.43
24.38
—
—
—
—
19.31
—
—
105.69
222.11
—
9.79
37.84
40.06
0
—
—
100
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
18
—
31
—
—
—
—
—
84
—
—
—
68
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1444
—
—
—
—
& G
(kg/kkR)
~
—
14.93
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.65
—
4.08
—
—
—
—
—
2.22
—
—
—
4.53
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
151.25
—
—
—
—
PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
(ug/l) (g/kkK) (uR/1) (g/kks) (uR/n (g/kkg)
—
—
1000 149.32 100
—
—
100
1215 134.71
—
—
317
4
260
151 19.88 30
—
—
-_
—
—
_-
—
1851
—
14 .93 7070
—
—
__
—
—
—
35 5.00 555
—
—
—
—
—
250
— 1250O
—
__
—
14.93
—
—
20.86
—
—
—
43.76
-14 130 4.76
36.57
3.95
—
—
__
—
—
—
—
480.56
—
471.96 4400 293.72
—
—
__
—
—
—
79.39 110 15.73
—
—
—
—
—
15.79
1521.01
—
COLOR**
UHITS
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
20
—
—
—
—
~
—
—
—
—
—
—
™
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

-------
                                                               TABLE V-II (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                    WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING  CDESIZING) SUBCATEGORY

                 WASTEWATER
              ...   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-"     RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             0  &  G          PHENOLS          TOT-CR         SULFIDE      COLOR**
  No.     Charge   (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kk«) (mfi/I) (kg/kkg)  (mg/1)  (kg/kkg)  (mg/1)  (kg/kke)  (ug/1)  (g/kkg)  (ug/I) (g/kkg) (ug/l) (g/kkg)   UNITS
40092 I
40140 D
40079 D
40002 I
40014 D
40069 D
40017 D
40151 D
40145 D
40099 D
40153 D
40150 D
40103 D
40034 I
40059 D
4006 1 D
4008 7 D
40003 D
40142 D
40030 D
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
4.0
5.2
1.8
5.5
51.3
4.9
4.0
8.7
21.8
15.8
17.5
9.6
10.5
14.2
14.5
12.7
7.6
18.3
14.7
20.9
.6
60.9
14.4
12.7
10.9
59
640
441
713
355
533
897
411
273
788
366
178
125
2604
510
403
421
42
28.33
17.86
51.89
46.96
77.97
79.12
49.13
33.14
119.96
44.74
30.52
5.90
188.51
53.16
45.12
37.80
42
1240
1562
2408
846
918
1026
1400
1899
1527
853
1763
835
1092
372
2778
1350
1240
617
33
54.15
61.30
175.14
154.11
121.99
151.47
113.10
167.51
181,57
103.56
266.85
103.22
185.01
30.62
798.32
151.54
121.97
129.65
33
173
310
60
78
168
127
196
548
--
1
2442
298
158
467
32
7.63
12.26
7.88
11.44
13.57
11.20
23.27
83.50
—
.20
222.11
30.86
14.76
42.63
32
5
--
5
1444
250
68
527
7
.36
—
.36
151.25
25.43
4.08
55.69
7
142
—
14
1215
426
146
534
6
6-33
—
.93
149.32
52-69
13.10
69.63
5
14
40
20
—
4
12500
1650
175
3638
14
.57
2.90
2.63
—
.14
1521.01
192.50
18.32
416.84
14
—
—
110
4400
1546
130
2471
3
—
—
4.76
293.72
104.73
15.73
163.75
3
—
--
20
20
20
20
—
1
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
•£* - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
          TABLE V--11 (continued)

         RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (SIMPLE) SUBCATEGOBY
Report
No.
50008
50001
50025
50038
50088
50120
50081
50117
50020
50005
50043
50017
50073
50110
50022
50067
50044
50042
50010
50077
50118
50028
50002
50087
50080
50121
50103
50102
50104
50070
50014
50122
50057
50108
50116
50093
50040
50119
50112
54060
*
Dis-
charge
D
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
D
D
D
I
I
I
D
I
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOD-5 COD TSS
(gal/lb) (-8/1) (kg/kkg) (•«/!) (kg/kkg) (as/l) (kg/kk«)
20.4
17.4
28.4
2.6
2.1
20.0
6.0
5.8
12.4
20.0
27.9
11.0
1.0
31.5
16.6
19.0
46.5
31.1
3.2
16.3
4.8
24.3
14.8
14.7
13.5
12.9
9.4
13.8
4.8
20.6
14.0
10.8
12.4
16.1
8.8
19.9
20.0
6.4
18.2
39.2
__
303
—
—
550
—
181
91
130
—
318
—
1860
—
—
—
—
164
—
—
—
338
304
161
—
—
—
157
327
—
—
—
380
115
181
209
—
—
279
158
— ^
44.27
—
—
9.86
—
8.97
4.44
13.46
—
77.47

16.33
—
—
—
—
42.57
—
—
—
69,51
36.61
19.78
—
—
—
17.83
13.18
—
—
—
40.48
15.47
13.34
34.87
—
—
42.75
51.79
__
—
727
—
4000
—
369
—
452
—
1522
522
194000
—
—
—
—
529
—
728
—
1762
1300
535
—
—
—
—
1261
—
—
—
—
429
—
947
—
—
934
—
*•
—
172.54
—
71.76
—
17.90
—
46.81
—
372.39
48.06
170.40
—
—

—
137.41
—
99.22
—
306.98
159.40
65.73
—
—
—
—
50.80
—
—
—
—
57.53
—
158.04
—
—
143.96
—
__
—
83
—
355
—
95
—
77
—
42
122
216O
—
—
—
—
57
—
—
—
—
58
30
—
—
—
38
119
—
—
—
31
21
18
25
—
—
41
61
«—
—
19.91
—
6.36
—
5.46
—
7.97
—
9.96
11.23
18.97
—
—
—
—
14.90
—
—
—
—
7.17
3.68
—
—
—
4.69
4.88
__
—
— •
3.22
2.91
1.32
4.17
—
—
6.33
20.16
0
(•8/1)

—
195
—
30
—
—
—
—
—
14
204
455
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
93
& G
(kg/kkg)

—
46.43
—
.53
—
—
—
—
—
3.52
18.78
3.99
—
—
—
—
~
.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
'
—
—
30.48
TOTAL
PHENOLS
(us/1) (a/kkg)

—
1675 397.35
—
—
—
—
—
1 .10
—
22 5.35
10 .92
__

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
--_
—
—
126 4.18
—
. —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
106 34.74
TOT-CR SULFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kka) (us/1) (a/kka)

—
15
—
—
—
13
—
—
—
26
—
—
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
600
80
—
—
—
171
58
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
- —
78
„
—
3.55 55 13.04
—
—
—
.64
—
—
—
6.21
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
85.25
9.82
—
—
—
25.90
2.35
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
25.56
COLOR**
UNITS

—
380
—
—
—
—
—
170
—
366
—
—
—
—
—
—
718
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
454
~

-------
                                                               TABLE V-11 (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                     KMT FABRIC FINISHING (SIMPLE) SUBCATEGORY














h- •
-•J
CO


Report
No.
50030
50059
50011
50046
50037
50101
50007
50047
50054
50082
50015
50094
50048
50098
50106
50113
50026
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard
Number
WASTEWATER
A DISCHARGE
Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD TSS
Charge (gal/lb) (n.R/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kk*) (ag/1) (kg/kkR)
D
I
D
I
D
I
I
D
I
D
D
I
I
D
I
D
D




Deviation

8.2
4.0
6.5
29.4
17.2
8.8
1.8
16.6
18.7
13.5
27.6
19.7
12.9
8.2
35.4
12.2
14.1
1.0
46.5
15.6
14.1
9.7
57
334
505
196
158
139
60
205
—
209
256
412
119
198
—
60
1860
290
205
313
31
23.13
17.19
28.76
13.74
20.34
9.38
23.39
—
34.68
27.74
29.76
35.30
20.35
—
4.44
77.47
27.57
23.13
17.36
31
1265
982
664
344
536
—
873
1087
790
342
745
—
342
19400
1655
767
3691
26
87.60
33.44
81.11
53.82
60.49
—
144.33
117.79
55.66
101.29
76.75
—
17.90
372.39
111.20
84.35
81.51
26
168
70
93
60
32
31
--_
37
383
163
42
49
—
18
2160
157
58
395
29
5.72
10.43
6.95
5.89
5.00
3.42
—
6.14
41.50
11.40
12.59
5.08
—
1.32
41.50
9.22
6.33
8.02
29
O
—
—
17
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
14
455
144
93
158
7
& G
(kg/kka)
--
' —
2.65
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.53
46.43
15.19
3.99
17.58
7
TOTAL
PHENOLS
(«8/l) (g/kkg)
_-
—
110 17.21
_-
—
—
1000 108.36
—
—
—
—
1 .10
1675 397.35
381 71.02
108 11.28
619 136.70
8 8
TOT-CR
(UR/I) (R/kkR)
—
—
50
103
—
—
30
—
—
--
—
13
600
111
58
168
11
—
—
7.82
11.33
—
—
3.25
—
—
—

.64
85.25
16.51
7.82
24.38
11
SULFIDE
i (UK/!) (g/kk«)
—
—
20
—
—
—
7100
—
—
—
—
20
7100
2391
55
4077
3
—
—
3.12
_-
—
—
769.42
—
—
—
—
3.12
769.42
261.86
13.04
439.58
3
COLOR**
UNITS
1462
198
—
400
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
170
1462
518
390
416
8
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
*/*•" - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (cootimied)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                     KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (COMPLEX) SUBCATEGORY
Report
No.
50065
50107
50090
50062
50086
50024
50032
50035
50021
50072
50034
50074
50066
50111
50006
50029
50065
50009
50061
50031
50039
50079
50100
50069
50099
50071
50105
50056
50109
50123
50068
50097
50027
50016
50012
50063
50018
50115
50076
50092
A-
Dis-
Charge
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
0
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOD-5 COD
(gal/lb) (mg/1) (kjt/kkg) («R/1) (kg/kkR)
21.4
10.0
19.9
27.7
30.0
26.6
45.3
17.7
18.5
8.9
4.6
8.1
5.1
8.9
1.5
5.7
14.1
19.1
11.7
11.6
11.7
27.9
19.6
34.2
14.7
20.2
10.0
24.2
16.6
2.8
6.3
21.7
16.9
25.7
9.1
26.7
6.8
47.1
11.1
4.3
._
—
—
167
550
123
—
150
151
266
—
275
187
261
—
—
264
500
—
—
—
—
519
—
—
—
—
272
—
869
166
229
—
—
250
200
503
173
—
277
	
—
—
36.70
137.69
27.36
—
22.10
23.31
20.59
—
18.69
8.04
19.60
—
—
31.25
79.86
—
—
—
—
85.06
«
—
—
—
53,56
—
20,67
8.33
38.61
—
—
19.12
44.57
26.82
67-91
—
10.15
	
—
760
—
—
—
—
614
514
791
—
—
—
1905
—
—
1057
3149
—
—
—
—
2311
—
—
—
—
694
—
—
—
1114
—
—
976
545
—
—
—
1348

—
126.83
—
—
—
—
88.56
79.34
60.34
—
—
—
143.06
—
—
124.76
503.01
—
—
—
—
378.79
—
—
—
—
135.93
—
—
—
199.07
—
—
74.65
121.46
—
—
—
49.43
TSS
(»g/D (kg/kkg)

—
127
—
430
38
—
742
35
31
—
32
53
164
—
—
46
46
—
—
—
—
35
—
—
—
—
28
—
656
133
48
—
—
108
50
—
45
—
88
__
—
21.19
—
107.65
8.45
—
110.04
.5.40
2.38
—
2.17
2.28
12.31
—
—
5.52
7.34
—
—
—
—
5.73
—
—
—
—
5,72
—
15.69
6.65
9.16
—
—
8.26
11.14
—
18.07
—
3-22
0
(•8/D
..
—
107
—
—
—
—
—
—
38
—
—
23
6
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
20
—
—
83
—
—
—
—
113
& G
(kg/kkg)

—
17.85
—
—
~
—
—
—
2.94
—
—
.98
.45
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.63
—
—
6.34
—
—
—
—
4.14
PHENOL
(ug/1) (R/kkg)

—
72 12.01
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
80 3.42
160 12.01
—
—
—
230 36.73
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
100 19.10
—
—
—
—
—
—
114 8.71
—
—
—
—
__ __
10T-CR SULFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)

—
10
—
100
__
—
—
230
—
—
20
80
80
—
—
65
10
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
—
—
—
—
~~

—
1.66 50 8.34
—
25.03
__
—
—
35.50
—
—
1.35
3.42 210 8.98
6.00 1470 110.39
— -
—
7.66
1.59
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-^
—
19.10 100 19.10
—
—
—
—
—
—
7.64
—
—
—
—
__ -_ —
COLOR**
UNITS

—
—
—
—
750
—
—
—
—
—
829
937
37
—
—
—
777
—
—
—
—
781
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
640
—
—
—
417
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
i* - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                             TABLE  V-ll  (continued)

                                                            RAW WASTE  CHARACTERISTICS
                                                   KNIT FABRIC  FINISHING (COMPLEX) SUBCATEGORY
WASTEHATER
A DISCHARGE
Report Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD
No. Charge (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (*g/l) (kR/kk«)
50019 D
50051 I
50H4 I
50083 I
50023 I
50052 D
50078 I
50084 I
50045 I
50013 0
50091 I
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
"""•* • 4* - Color units are
12.9
8.5
7.7
16.2
7.6
20.4
15.2
11.8
32.2
8.0
23.3
1.5
47.1
16.4
14.7
10.1
51
280
223
123
869
298
261
176
23
28.11
43.51
8.04
137.69
38.07
28.11
30.26
23
834
593
514
3149
1147
834
753
15
79.86
115.45
49.43
503.01
152.03
121.46
125.42
15
TSS
(rag/1) (kjj/kkjt)
108
60
28
742
141
51
200
22
10.69
11.66
2.17
110.04
17-76
8.35
29.90
22
0
66
—
6
113
57
52
41
8
f f*
(kg/kkR)
6.73
—
.45
17.85
5-38
3.88
5.50
8
TOTAL
PHENOLS
(ug/D (g/kkg)
—
—
72
230
126
107
59
6
—
—
3.42
36.73
15.33
12.01
11.66
6
TOT-CR SUtFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)

180
10
230
88
80
68
11
—
35.04
1.35
35-50
13.09
7.64
13.29
11
—
—
50
1470
457
155
678
4
—
—
8.34
110.39
36.70
14.04
49.37
4
COLOR**
UNITS
~
—
37
937
646
763
289
8
APHA color units
CJl • *
! I - indicates indirect
discharger














D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                     KHIT FABRIC FINISHING (HOSIERY) SUBCATEGORY
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
Report
No.
5H044
5H012
5H059
5H043
5H038
5H001
5H023
SHOOS
5H056
5H052
5H009
5H018
5H032
5H045
5H051
5H034
5H054
5H002
5H020
5H008
511014
5H050
5H031
5H026
5H040
5H021
5H039
5HQ24
5H025
5H029
5H028
5H027
5H049
5H030
5H058
5HOS7
5H055
5H048
5H007
5H013
Dis-
charge
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
T
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
ft
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RATE
(gal/lb)
2-Q
3.4
10.8
7.6
4.0
4.9
15.1
31.1
14.8
12.5
22.6
6.9
1.1
11. 1
26.4
8.3
4.0
1.3
5.9
.8
15.0
24.5
5.9
11.2
5.4
10.7
3.7
6.6
9.7
7.5
4.7
5.6
8.3
12.6
7.0
11.1
13.7
.7
13.4
8.0
BOD-5
fmg/I)
..
176
—
202
--
—
—
235
792
533
351
323
280
190
166
—
540
—
503
740
221
675
557
487
390
803
506
477
283
195
57
—
—
—
—
174
176
—
320
""-
(kg/kks)
„
5.01
—
12.92
—
—
—
60.83
98.39
55.92
65.31
18.91
2.73
17,66
36,65
—
18,04
—
25.20
5.48
27.81
138.33
27.48
45.78
17.70
74.50
14.35
26.56
23-55
12.20
2.27
—
—
—
—
16.50
21.00
—
36.04
—
(mg/1
._^_
1371
—
1015
—
—
—
—
1568
1397
3302
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
705
4980
694
1699
1770
2254
1225
1671
1846
1083
802
503
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
950
—
COD
.) (kg/kkg)
^___
38.91
—
64.93
—
—
—
—
194.80
146.59
625.76
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
35-33
36.93
67-33
34S.Q2
87.27
211-64
55.92
155.10
50.21
60.27
63.13
31.50
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
107.01
—
TSS
Jss/il
„
—
—
24
—
—
—
66
61
57
94
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
134
182
—
115
82
113
63
45
118
125
22
—
119
—
—
—
—
110
78
—
34
—
_UE&A*E>J

—
—
1.53
—
—
—
16. 84
7.57
5.98
18.43
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
6.73
1.34
—
23.59
4.08
10.65
2.92
3.95
3.41
6.98
1.86
—
4.78
—
—
—
—
9.74
9.03
—
3-83
-~
TOTAI.

0 & G PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
[•*/!) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkR) (ug/1)

—
—
79 5,05
—
—
—
583 151.59 983
49 6.08 -- ~ &0
250
144 27.74
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
55 2.75 45
195 J.44 — — 50
—
145
205
—
144
191
—
210
38
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
69 7.77 30
— — — -- —
(8/kkg) (UB/1) (s/kkg)

— .
—
_-
—
—
—
265.63 675 1B0.10
9.93
26,23
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2.25
.37
—
29.69
10.10
—
6.61
16.67
—
11.68
2.75
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.37
*** ~~ — **

COLOR**
UNITS

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
--
—
1062
407
533
241
—
—
—
40
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
™~
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.  -
** - Color units are APHA color units.
 I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                     KNIT FABRIC FINISHING (HOSIERY) SUBCATEGORY

                 WASTEWATER
              ^   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             O & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SULFIDE      COLOR**
  No-    Charge   (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (ug/1)  (g/kkg)  (ug/1)  (g/kkg)  (ug/1)  (g/kkg)   UNITS
5H046
5H003
5H042
5H010
5H035
5H015
5H016
5H036
5H041
5H037
5H053
5H047
5H006
5H013
5H022
5H019
5H017
5H004
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard
Number
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I




Deviation

8.3
9.9
10.2
6.3
9.9
24.1
6.0
34.7
17.7
14.3
33.3
4.2
11.2
3.1
12.2
5.0
10.0
23.7
.7
34.7
10.7
9.0
8.0
58
385
527
253
312
486
324
—
444
233
225
95
220
400
523
—
490
—
117
57
803
366
323
188
42
26.77
44.01
21.54
16.52
40.61
65.25
—
125.78
34.27
27.06
26.42
7.85
37.55
13.96
—
20.65
—
23.20
2.27
138.33
34.25
25.81
30.16
42
1702
2125
1049
1107
2167
659
—
—
1114
—
450
730
990
1507
—
1542
—
—
450
4980
1465
1298
905
30
118.38
177.31
89.38
58.52
180.84
132.84
—
—
161.99
—
125.16
26.05
92.93
40.25
—
59.25
—
—
26.05
625 . 76
122.11
88.35
118.38
30
87
124
72
58
—
—
—
55
93
89
14
9
54
—
—
179
—
44
9
182
81
78
43.
31
6.04
10.34
6.13
3.08
—
—
—
16.06
12.85
10.78
3.89
32
5.06
—
—
7.09
—
8.72
.32
23.59
7.53
6.13
5.44
31
142
79
297
43
—
—
—
—
136
—
27
99
—
—
—
275
—
15
15
275
113
99
76
13
9.90
6.63
16.81
2.27
—
—
—
—
19.60
—
7.51
3.53
—
—
—
9.54
—
2.97
1.44
27.74
9.15
6.63
7.77
13
26
41
—
47
—
—
—
—
—
—
90
82
—
—
—
160
—
30
26
583
118
62
167
10
1.84
3.46
—
2.51
—
—
—
—
—
—
25.03
2.92
—
—
—
5.00
—
5.95
1.84
151.59
20.88
4.23
46.43
10
170
1200
—
21
—
—
—
—
—
—
21
10
—
—
—
142
—
30
10
1200
208
142
322
19
11.82
100.13
—
1.10
—
—
—
—
—
—
5.84
.35
—
—
—
6.38
—
5.95
.35
265.63
27.20
6.61
61.92
19
—
—
450
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
10
10
675
378
450
338
3
—
—
23.78
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.98
1.98
180.10
68,62
23.78
97.16
3
—
—
312
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
500
—
—
940
—
—
40
1062
504
453
344
8
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APHA color units.
*I - indicates indirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                                     TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                                    RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                                  CARPET FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
00
Report
No.
60008
60021
60018
60010
60024
60028
60027
60023
60035
60QH
60005
60006
60036
60025
60026
60032
60013
60016
60029
60022
60007
60037
60012
60014
60015
60030
60004
60001
6001?
60020
60031
60034
60009
60002
60038
60003
60039
*
Dis-
charge
I
D
D
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
D
1
I
I
I
I
D
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
D
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOD- 5 COD
(gal/lb) (rag/1) (kg/kkg) (mR/l) (kg/kkg)
2.3
8.0
4.6
4.7
11.7
5.4
9.3
4.1
11.5
11.2
4.0
5.9
6.0
5.0
5.4
6.1
3.8
3.3
6.3
3.3
6.5
5.6
8.5
8.2
6.6
4.0
2.1
5.7
17.4
2.0
4.4
7.5
5.3
4.4
1.0
19.5
14.6
—
—
—
—
—
—
421
—
—
342
—
561
—
569
—
506
—
—
—
—
458
411
—
—
—
—
188
—
—
217
483
—
—
-.-
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
40.78
—
—
17.03
—
23.52
—
29.23
—
14.20
—
—
—
—
32.75
28.11
~-
—
—
—
27.63
—
—
13.73
21.66
—
—
—
~~
—
2117
905
745
281
—
1390
—
—
869
—
1997
—
1564
—
986
—
—
—
—
1886
1402
—
—
—
—
621
—
—
474
1646
—
—
—
— -
—
84.15
B7.27
33.74
21.88
—
134.62
—
—
42.48
—
83.73
—
80.92
—
27.67
—
—
—
—
134.89
95.94
—
—
—
—
91.00
—
—
41.39
73.84
—
—
—
""•
TSS
(mg/1) (kg/kkg)
—
208
96
75
44
—
55
—
—
95
—
37
—
42
—
59
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
58
—
—
101
102
—
—
—
"""
—
8.26
9.27
3.39
3.49
—
5.35
—
—
4.76
—
1.55
—
2.17
—
1.65
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
8.37
—
—
6.40
4.57
—
—
—
~~
0 & G
(mg/1) (kg/kkR)
,-
27 1.08
93 9.37
18 .81
3 .23
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
-'_
—
—
—
10 1.58
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
__ ^—
TOTAL
PHENOLS
(Ug/1) (R/kkg)

—
115
40O
10
—
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
1138
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
314
—
—
130
—
—
—
—
~~
—
—
11.34
18.11
.77
—
—
—
—
.04
—
—
—
58.91
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
_-
—
45.86
—
—
8.05
—
—
—
—
""
TOT-CR SULFIDE
(uR/D (8/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)
—
300
30
250
30
—
—

—
44
—
—
—
20

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
40
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
"
—
11.92
3.44 50 5.27
11.32 300 13.58
2.33 10 .77
—
—
—
—
.22 450 22.00
—
- —
—
1.07
—
— -
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
6.35
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
_. ..
COLOR**
UNITS
—
190O
590
—
-65
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— -
—
—
—
—
—
383
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
"
      Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
      ** - Color units are APHA color units.
      *I - indicates indirect discharger
       D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                               TABLE V~ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                            CARPET FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

                 WASTEWATER
              ^   DISCHARGE                                                                    TOTAL
Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5           COD             TSS             0 & G         PHENOLS         TOT-CR         SULFIDE      COLOR**
  No.    Charge   (gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (ag/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg)  (ng/1) (g/kkg)  (ug/1)  (g/kkg)  (ug/1)  (g/kkg)   UNITS
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
1.0
19.5
6.6
5.6
4.0
37
188
565
415
439
131
10
13.73
40.78
24.86
25.57
8.58
10
281
2117
1205
1188
589
14
21.88
134.89
73.82
82.32
36.28
14
37
208
81
67
46
12
1.55
9.27
4.93
4.66
2.67
12
3
93
30
18
36
5
.23
9.37
2.61
1.08
3.80
5
1 .04
1138 58.91
301 20.44
130 11.34
397 22.98
7 7
4
300
96
30
123
7
.22
11.92
5.23
3.44
4.78
7
10
450
202
175
209
4
.77
22.00
10.40
9.42
9.37
' 4
65
1900
734
486
806
4

-------
                                                               TABLE V-ll (continued)

                                                              RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                        STOCK AND YARN FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
Report
No.
70045
70026
70042
70010
70043
70005
70108
70037
70092
70039
70057
70041
70072
70118
70087
70121
70067
_ 70120
00 70077
0 70035
70106
70113
70102
70095
70107
70109
70119
70038
70029
70069
70125
70096
70016
70079
70061
70027
70011
70012
70052
70054
i
Dis-
charge
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
D
D
D
I
I
D
I
D
D
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
RATE BOD-5 COD
(gal/Ib) (mK/D (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkg)
19.9
5.5
2,3
19.0
5.9
1.3
10.0
24.6
12.0
6.2
6.2
4.1
6.6
6.1
6.7
5.7
1.0
7.5
13.4
53.7
3.9
33.8
4.0
7.3
7.1
39.9
13.6
51.9
16.6
5.9
16.6
6.7
6.2
3.0
10.3
8.3
37.1
5.4
10.0
1.8
450
—
210
—
286
—
116
150
—
252
—
327
—
296
306
—
—
—
180
924
102
—
—
633
48
—
108
—
77
180
—
167
—
46
235
154
484
—
1631
76.18
—
33.37
—
3.18
—
23.95
15.08
—
13.14
—
18.13
—
16.85
14.79
—
—
—
80.91
31.00
28.97

—
37.60
16.11
—
47.30
—
3.90
25.03
—
8.74
—
3.19
16.37
46.75
22.02
—
24.95
554
—
485
—
1147
—
282
880
—
556
—
1572
—
386
945
—
—
190
845
2431
250
—
—
1217
224
—
—
—
887
390
—
—
—
—
805
—
—
—
4756
25.69
—
77-08
—
12.77
—
58.08
88.47
—
29.00
—
86.98
—
21.59
45.60
—
—
21-40
380.40
109.97
70.68
—
—
72.30
74.86
—
—
—
43.27
54.23
—
__
—
—
56.03
—
—
—
72.76
TSS
(mK/l) (kg/kkR)
104
80
—
27
—
192
—
44
58
—
—
—
26
—
33
163
—
—
35
56
309
10
—
—
64
24
—
21
—
138
30
—
47
—
18
27
38
2
—
136
15.00
3.70
—
4.37
—
2.13
—
9.06
5.83
—
—
—
1.44
—
1.89
7.88
—
—
3.94
25.88
10.09
2.82
—
—
3.80
8.05
—
9.12
—
6.85
4.17
—
2.46
—
1.28
1.93
11.72
.09
—
2.09
TOTAL
0 & G PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
Gng/1) Ckg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (us/1) (g/kkg) (UR/I) (g/kk«)
35 1 . 62
—
200
—
—
—
9 1.99 180
—
—
—
—
1 .05
—
—
52 2.53 519
—
—
5
—
—
—
—
—
144 8.55 40
8 2.81 175
—
—
—
__
600
—
__
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — —
—
—
31.86
—
—
—
37.07
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
25.05
—
—
.56
—
—
—
—
—
2.37
58.45
—
—
—
—
83.44
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
223
—
100
—
—
—
860
60
—
—
—
—
—
16
36
—
—
100
—
—
—
—
—
1400
1087
—
—
—
60
600
—
--
—
—
34
—
—
—
-~
10.35
—
15.97
—
—
—
177.12 293 60.41
6.03
—
—
—
—
—
.86
1.76
—
—
11.26
—
—
—
—
—
83.17
362.86
—
—
—
2.97
83.44 200 27.81
—
__
—
—
2.36
— -
—
—
— — —
COLOR**
UNITS
57
—
—
—
—
--
—
2300
—
—
—
—
—
—
566
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
228
—
—
—
—
—
Source: EPA Industry 308 Survey.
** - Color units are APHA color units.
*I - indicates iodirect discharger
 D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                                    TABLE V-ll (contiaued)
00
Report
No.
70066
70071
70065
70028
70006
70101
70082
70098
70073
70046
70058
70070
70112
70062
70030
70021
70086
70114
70115
70117
70104
70008
70056
70124
70048
70116
70032
70015
70033
70004
70023
70111
70064
70009
.70080
70089
70014
70123
70047
70094
70127
70003
70018
70002
70074
*
Dis-
charge
I
D
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
STOCK AND YARN FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE TOTAL
RATE BOD-5 COD TSS 0 & G PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE! COLOR**
(gal/lb) (mg/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kR/kkg) (rag/1) (kg/kkg) (rag/1) (kg/kkg) (ug/1) fg/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (og/1) (g/fcfcjt) UNITS
10.7
18.5
11.3
2.3
1.0
7.8
13.6
9.9
3.5
17.0
13.3
8.0
32.8
9.9
10.1
12.5
11.4
15.2
42.5
11.0
25.8
64.6
36.3
5.3
10.1
14.5
13.3
15.3
24.9
7.3
15.3
23.8
12.6
19.3
20.5
41.7
7.2
8.2
12.5
51.4
.4
22.5
21.3
17.6
6.0
171
156
375
1120
. —
990
199
—
—
102
190
105
464
180
302
285
—
—
—
90
67
—
—
200
—
—
890
283
258
—
—
—
83
229
141
—
—
—
—
180
—
368
—
—
26.53
15.08
7.23
9.75
—
112.77
16.65
—
—
10.89
12.77
29.00
38.75
15.27
31.75
27.22
—
—
—
19.32
36.15
—
—
16.93
—
—
113.00
59.19
15.93
—
—
—
13.51
39.29
49.30
—
—
—
—
.75
—
65.70
—
—
—
—
3809
—
1400
3669
—
—
420
923
—
—
—
792
619
—
--
—
333
406
—
—
—
—
—
1994
686
980
—
—
—
366
852
—
—
—
—
—
591
—
—
—
—
—
—
33-16
—
159.48
306.22
—
—
45.21
62.12
—
—
—
83.30
59.03
—
—
—
71-75
219.07
—
—
—
—
—
25A.65
143.26
60.51
—
—
—
59.34
146.08
—
—
—
—
—
2.46
—
—
—
~-
223
24
985 -
140
—
4200
58
—
—
11
11
—
77
—
17
118
—
—
—
32
42
—
—
25
—
—
52
8
—
—
—
—
38
49
47
—
—
—
—
31
—
12
—
—
34.53
2.17
18.87
1.21
—
478.45
4.87
—
—
1.11
-75
—
6.48
—
1.78
11.33
—
—
—
6.91
22.66
—
—
2.11
—
—
6.48
1.66
_.
—
—
—
6.20
8.50
16.40
—
—
—
—
.13
—
2.22
—
--..
—
—
30
—
—
~
—
—
57
24
—
8
8
15
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
24
—
—
—
—
38
_.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
~—
—
—
.26
—
—
—
—
—
6.11
1.64
—
.74
.67
1.65
—
—
~
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.48
—
—
—
__
6.54
~
—
—
—
'
—
—
--
—
"
129 19.97
120 12.14 250 19.75 700 66.68
4437 85.37 1835
—
—
—
66
—
—
—
—
583
—
—
__
—
—
--
—
—
3000
—
—
2000 169.30
—
—
—
57 11.99
50 3.08 30 1.S5 80 4.93
—
—
—
__
228
__
—
—
—
—
621 2.59 200 .83
—
—
—
__ __ __ __ __ __ — _
      Source.1 EPA Industry 308 Survey.
      ** - Color units are APHA color units.
      *I - indicates indirect discharger
       D - indicates direct discharger

-------
                                                                     TABLE V-ll  (continued)

                                                                    RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
                                                              STOCK AND YARN FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
ro
Report
No.
70075
70022
70025
70031
70034
70019
70100
70020
70110
70007
70053
70090
70063
70036
70078
70076
70088
70024
70085
70122
70097
70084
70081
70059
70093
70017
70105
70103
70044
70099
70126
70013
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard
Number
WASTEWATER
^ DISCHARGE
Dis- RATE BOD-5 COD TSS
Charge (gal/lb) (ms/1) (kg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/kkji) (fflg/1) (kg/kkg)
D
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
D
I
I
I
I
D
D
I
I
I
D
D
D
I
D
I




Deviation

8.2
22.2
12.0
10.6
10.7
2.2
13.4
2.2
13-3
60.6
18.7
21.4
5-8
25.0
48.9
30.6
22.8
14.9
14.3
11.6
4.5
10.3
22.9
12.6
2.1
45.0
17-6
28.8
33.6
.6
11.6
5.0
.4
64.6
15-6
11.6
13.4
117
151
196
160
148
160
101
—
160
—
—
127
—
—
105
346
—
—
285
21 B
300
—
—
60
—
—
—
—
~
46
1631
283
190
285
61
10.22
19.46
14.45
12.32
18.04
11.36
—
28.62
—
—
57.44
—
—
13.24
41.44
—
—
24.72
41.72
31.65
—
—
8.86
—
--
—
—
—
.75
113.00
28.25
19.46
23.43
61
546
505
683
201
—
1460
—
—
—
—
—
313
1349
—
—
716
800
600
—
—
331
—
—
—
—
—
190
4756
981
686
968
45
31.25
45.24
76.74
22.54
—
261.24
—
—
—
—
—
39.29
161.42
—
—
61.55
151.75
63.31
—
—
48.88
—
—
—
—
—
2.46
380.40
90.44
62.12
81.08
45
68
36
16
24
41
—
25
—
—
31
—
—
32
70
—
—
55
12
45
—
—
31
—
—
—
—
—
2
4200
144
38
558
58
5.04
3.20
1.47
2.76
4.65
—
4.47
—
—
12.90
—
—
4.00
8.39
—
—
5.22
2.43
4.74
—
—
4.57
—
—
—
—
—
.09
478.45
14.55
4.52
62.32
58
0
Cng/l)
—
—
18
—
—
—
—
—
—
180
—
—
—
—
3
—
—
—
—
~
—
—
—
1
180
38
24
49
17
& G
(kg/kkg)

—
3-22
—
—
—
—
—
—
21.52
—
—
—
—
.31
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.05
21.52
3-62
1.65
5.19
17
TOTAL
PHENOLS TOT-CR SULFIDE
(ug/1) (g/kk«) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)
—
—
3
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
170
—
—
~
—
—
—
—
—
3
621
223
172
226
12
—
—
.53
—
—
—
—
-^
—
—
—
—
—
—
17.93
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
.53
83.44
22.92
15.03
26.25
12
68
650
—
1600
—
—
32
—
—
—
—
—
—
679
26
310
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
16
1600
358
114
461
24
7.63
72.68
—
286.29
—
—
14.15
—
—
—
—
—
—
56.91
4.89
32.71
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
.83
362.86
53.65
13.07
93.51
24
—
—
10
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
100
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
10
4437
977
246
1543
8
—
—
1.78
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
19.11
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
1.78
169.30
54.42
44.11
55.44
8
COLOR**
UNITS
--
—
760
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
500
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
57
3000
989
574
1022
10
      Source:  EPA Industry 308 Survey.
      ** - Color units  are APHA color units.
      *I - indicates  indirect discharger
       D - indicates  direct discharger

-------
                                                                      TABLE  V-ll  (continued)

                                                                    RAW WASTE  CHARACTERISTICS
                                                                NONWOVEN MANUFACTURING SUBCATEGORV
00
                       WASTEWATER
                    A   DISCHARGE                                                                     TOTAL
      Report    Dis-      RATE        BOD-5            COD              TSS             0 & G         PHEHOLS         TOT-CR         SUUIDE      COLOR**
        No.    Charge   Cgal/lb) (mg/ij  (kg/kkg)  frag/l)  (kg/kkg)  (mg/1?  Qcg/kkg) (mg/1) (kg/itkg) (u»/l) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg) (ug/1) (g/kkg)   UNITS
80008 I
80012 I
80016 D
80014 I
80026 I
80011 I
80015 D
80005 I
80019 I
80009 I
80002 I
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Median
Standard Deviation
Number
5.6
.3
4.8
.6
.5
6.0
9.9
1.3
1.6
6.4
5.0
.3
9.9
3.8
4.8
3.1
11
64
195
633
158
64
633
262
176
253
4
3.27
16.14
6.73
6.65
3.27
16.14
8.19
6.69
5.53
4
205
3945
2360
205
3945
2170
2360
1877
3
10.38
38.39
99.44
10.38
99.44
49.40
38.39
45.53
3
83
74
179
59
—
59
179
98
78
54
4
.24
3.75
14.81
.63
—
.24
14.81
4.85
2.19
6.81
4
—
81
81
81
81
ei
—
1
—
3.41
3.41
3.41
3.41
3.41
—
1
21
—
21
21
21
21
—
1
.19
—
.19
.19
.19
.19
—
1
10
50
370
10
370
143
50
197
3
.50
.43
15.59
.43
15.59
5.50
.50
8.73
3
10
—
10
10
10
10
—
1
.50
—
.50
.50
.50
.50
—
1
—
28
28
28
28
28
—
1
      ** - Color units are APHA color units
      *I - indicates indirect discharger
       D - indicates direct discharger

-------
CO
-fh
                                                     TABLE V-12
                                        UNTREATED WASTEWATER CONCENTRATIONS
                       TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                          HISTORICAL DATA - MEDIAN VALUES

1.
2.
3.


4.



5.



6.
7.
8.
9.
Sub category
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. De sizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(mg/1)
1830
150

380
120

300
350
405

205
260
325
440
190
175
205
COD
(mg/D
6900
650

1060
180

900
1170
1240

765
835
1300
1190
685
2360
555
TSS
(mg/1)
2740
50

220
25

60
80
160

60
50
80
65
40
80
115
0 & G
(mg/D
580
//

#
#

65
45
70

95
50
100
20
25
#
30
Sulfide
(ug/D
#
#

#
#

55
100
130

55
155
560
175
245
#
#
Total Phenols
(ug/1)
#
50

#
#

49
180
146

108
107
62
130
172
#
575
Color
(APHA Units)
#
#

#
$

1000
500
#

390
760
450
490
570
#
#
     # Insufficient data to report value.

     Source:  308 Survey Data, Table V-ll.

-------
00
                                                TABLE V-13
                              MASS DISCHARGE RATES FOR UNTREATED WASTEWATER
                  TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                     HISTORICAL DATA - MEDIAN VALUES

1.
2.
3-
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9-
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. De sizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BOD5

41.8
63.6
1.3
16.0
22.3
33.2
45.1
23.1
28.1
25.8
25.6
19.5
6.7
70.2
COD

225.7
204.8
7.7
18.2
88.4
104.9
122.0
84.4
121.5
88.4
82.3
62.1
38.4
186.0
TSS
(kg/kkg)

51.9
16.3
1.6
2.7
7.7
9.1
14.8
6.3
8.4
6.1
4.7
4.5
2.2
64.1
0 & G

10.3
#
#
#
9.1
3.2
4.1
4.0
3.9
6.6
1.1
1.7
#
11.2
Sulfide
(g/kkg)
#
#
#
#
10.4
12.5
15.7
13.0
14.0
23.8
9.4
44.1
#
#
Total Phenols
(g/kkg)
#
11.4
#
#
8.2
12.5
13.1
11.3
7.6
6.6
11.3
15.0
#
247.4
        # Insufficient data to report value.

        Source:  308 Survey Data, Table V-ll.

-------
complete characterization of the  typical  wastewater  from  each
subcategory.   Average data for each mill sampled is presented by
mill in Table v-14.  These results are summarized by  subcategory
in Table V-15, which presents the median values of the individual
mill  averages.   With  the exception of oil and grease, the data
are for composite  samples.   The  samples  were  collected  with
automatic  sampling equipment over either 8 or 24 hour periods or
by combining  individual grab samples collected at  representative
intervals  over  8 or 24 hour periods.  Although somewhat limited
in scope compared to the historical data base, the field sampling
data are useful to confirm  or  supplement  the  historical  data
base.

Mass  discharge  rates  for the traditionally-monitored pollutant
data from the field sampling program are  presented  by  mill  in
Table  V-16.  The wastewater discharge rates shown are calculated
on the basis of average discharges and productions, and the  mass
discharge rates are calculated on the basis of the average of the
daily  concentrations,  as  presented in Table V-15.  The results
are summarized by subcategory in Table V-17, which  presents  the
median  values  from  the  individual  mill averages.  Again, the
values are useful to confirm or supplement  the  historical  data
base.

Typical    untreated    wastewater    concentrations    for   the
traditionally-monitored pollutant parameters, based on  both  the
historical  data and the field sampling results, are presented in
Table V-18.   The values are representative of the typical mill in
each subcategory and are those used in developing  the  treatment
options   and   costs   in   subsequent  sections.   For  several
subcategory and parameter combinations, typical values could  not
be established with sufficient confidence and are not presented.

Typical  mass  discharge  rates  for  the traditionally-monitored
pollutants, based on both the historical data and field  sampling
results,   are   presented   in   Table  V-19.   The  values  are
representative of the typical mill in each subcategory.
                                 186

-------
                                             TABLE V-14
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS - RAW WASTE CONCENTRATIONS
                     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS - FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM

Report
Number
10006
10013
10015
20011
20021
10013*

_ (04935)
S3 (01304)

40023
40144
40077
40135
40160
(04742)
40034
40059
40072
40081
40097
40099
Note:


Mill Type
Wool Scouring
Wool Scouring
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Wool Finishing
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
General Processing
Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
A dash indicates that analyses

BOD5
(mg/1)
5000
6300
1900
330
480
360

-
-

53
400
500
-
450
71
210
450
560
-
470
290
were not

COD
(mg/1)
24000
14000
6100
1100
2400
860

1900
720

-
1100
500
2000
1700
220
810
800
1700
2100
2100
320
performed

TSS
(mg/1)
87000
4900
2300
68
370
24

-
14

54
200
28
-
87
16
1
49
69
400
100
39


0 & G Sulfide
(mg/1) (ug/1)
1100
1300
500
1100
500 1600
68 ND

ND
83 ND

ND
ND
7600
ND
ND
ND
1800
5200
ND
ND
52 2800
ND

Total
Phenols
(ug/1)
_
2800
670
160
82
120

82
23

18
92
73
150
280
24
63
74
67
190
50
47

Color
APHA ADMI
(Units) (Units, pH 7.6)
_ _
110
2200
1000
2000 390
110 320

-
12

500
— -
1300
-
1500
1900
1900
2600
40000
210
3200 250
1300

 ND Indicates  "Not Detected."
  * Represents finishing stream from Report 10013.
( ) Indicates  sequence number  instead of report number.

-------
                                                  TABLE V-14 (Cont.)
CO
CO

Report
Number
40103
40120
40145
40146
40150
40156

50030
50108
50112
50116
50104*
50013
50035
50099
5H012
5H027
5H034
60008
60031
60034
60037
Note:


Mill Type
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
A dash indicates that analyses

BODS
(mg/1)
830
1500
350
420
18
-

360
190
240
-
-
-
220
680
-
-
-
180
-
-
200
were not

COD
(mg/1)
2300
-
810
990
2700
770

700
580
780
730
1700
2400
560
170
2900
820
880
740
-
940
1300
performed.

TSS
(mg/1)
210
500
20
90
52
1

150
23
20
-
200
100
25
6
95
24
17
21
-
-
37


0 & G
(rag/1)
_
21
-
-
-
-

72
-
320
-
-
-
-
-
630
340
190
-
-
-
™


Sulfide
(ug/1)
ND
-
2500
-
ND
1000

270
2100
380
ND
50
ND
9200
6200
ND
ND
1800
-
-
ND
ND

Total
Phenols
(ug/1)
37
-
560
-
69
42

180
740
520
1
-
48
110
230
110
170
190
-
5
10
28

Color
APHA
(Units)
1000
-
500
-
250
-

750
150
1200
-
-
-
250
300
-
-
—
-
-
-
300

ADMI
(Units, pH 7.6)
_
-
-
-
-
380

-
-
280
-
160
120
-
-
270
220
820
-
-
-
"

           ND Indicates "Not Detected".
            * Represents pretreatment effluent.
          ( ) Indicates sequence number instead of report number.

-------
                                                       TABLE V-14 (Cont.)
CO

Report
Number
(06443)
70009
70072
70081
70087
70096
70120
80008
80011
80019
80025
Note:


Mill Type
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
A dash indicates that analyses

BODS
(fflg/D
_
120
-
-
380
1100
-
-
-
-
-
were not

COB
(mg/D
740
460
-
230
1100
1300
640
220
480
340
1100
performed.

TSS
(mg/D
58
33
-
25
19
32
130
36
16
-
40


0 & G
(mg/1)
_
-
-
-
-
-
210
26
97
-
260


Sulfide
(ug/1)
420
ND
-
44
4500
1400
ND
ND
ND
ND
1200

Total
Phenols
(ug/1)
_
64
-
810
38
42
—
33
8
44
160

Color
APHA
(Units)
_
10000
-
-
1300
1400
—
•
-
—
-

ADMI
(Units, pH 7.6)
110
-
-
130 v
-
-
310
140
34
-
190

           ND Indicates "Not Detected".
           ( ) Indicates sequence number instead of report number.

-------
                                                TABLE V-15
                                   UNTREATED WASTEWATER CONCENTRATIONS
                  TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                   FIELD SAMPLING DATA - MEDIAN VALUES

                                                                                 Total
Color

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BOD5
(mg/1)
5000
360
#
#
230
480
420
240
450
#
190
380
//
#
COD
(mg/1)
14000
1100
1900
720
1100
1700
900
730
560
880
940
690
340
1100
TSS
(mg/D
4900
68
#
14
130
58
52
87
25
24
29
33
26
40
0 & G
(mg/1)
1200
280
#
83
#
#
37
200
#
340
#
210
62
260
Sulfide
(ug/1)
500
1100
ND
ND
ND
3800
ND
270
6200
900
ND
230
ND
1200
Phenols
(ug/1)
1740
120
82
23
55
150
67
350
110
170
10
40
33
160
APHA
(units)
1200
1000
#
#
500
1400
1900
750
280
#
300
1400
#
#
ADMI
(units pH 7.6)
#
360
#
12
#
#
250
220
120
270
#
130
87
190
 # No data.
ND Indicates "Not Detected."

Source:   Field Sampling Program, Table V-14.

-------
                                             TABLE V-16
                                      RAW WASTE MASS DISCHARGE
                                TRADITIONALLY MONITORED  POLLUTANTS
                                      FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM
Report
Number

10006
10013
10015
20011
20021
Mill

Wool
Wool
Wool
Wool
Wool
Type

Scouring
Scouring
Scouring
Finishing
Finishing
Wastewater
Discharge
Rate BODS
(gal/lb)

1
4
4
36
42

.5
.6
.6
.5
.6

62.6
241.7
72.9
100.5
170.4
COD TSS
(fcg/kkg)

300.2
537.1
234.0
334.8
852.5

1088.4
188.0
88.3
20.7
131.4
0 & G

13.8
49.9
-
-
177.8
Sulfide
(g/kkg)

_
-
19
334
568



.2
.8
.5
Total
Phenols
g/kkg

_
108.0
25.7
48.8
29.2
10013*   Wool Finishing
         Low Water Use Processing
(04935)
(01304)

40023
40144
40077
40135
40160
(04742)
40034
40059
40072
40081
40097
40099
Note:
General Processing
Water- Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
A dash indicates that analyses
0.03

23.8
2.3
12.7
9.7
11.7
50.5
14.2
14.5
10.3
21.5
7.0
15.8
were
-

10.5
7.7
53.0
-
43.9
29.9
24.9
54.4
48.1
-
27.4
38.2
0.48

-
21.1
53-0
161.8
165.9
92.7
95.9
96.7
146.0
376.6
122.6
42.2
not performed, or
-

10.7
3.8
3.0
-
8.5
6.7
0.1
5.9
5.9
71.7
5-8
5.1
that loads
ND

ND
ND
805.0
ND
ND
ND
213.2
628.8
ND
ND
3.0 163.5
ND
0.02

3.6
0.44
7.7
12.2
27.3
10.1
7.5
9.0
5.8
34.4
2.9
6.2
were not calculable
          (no water use data).
      ( ) Indicates sequence number instead of report number.
       ND Indicates "Not Detected."
        * Represents finishing stream from Report 10013-

-------
                                                     TABLE V-16 (Cont.)
ro
Report
Number

40103
40120
40145
40146
4015Q
40156

50030
50108
50112
50116
50104*
50013
50035
50099
5H012
5H027
5H034
60008
60031
60034
60037
Note:
Wastewater
Discharge
Rate BODS
Mill Type (gal/lb)

Desizing
De sizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Simple Processing
SijHple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Simple Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Complex Processing
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
Carpet Finishing
A dash indicates that analyses

10.5
9.5
21.8
11.7
9.6
-

8.2
16.1
18.2
8.8
4.8
8.0
17.7
14.7
3.4
5.6
8.3
2.3
4.4
7.5
5.6
were

72.7
118.8
63.6
41.0
1.4
-

24.6
25.5
36.4
-
-
-
32.5
83.4
-
-
-
3.4
-
-
9-3
COD TSS 0 & G
(kg/kkg)

201.4
-
147.3
96.6
216.2
-

47.9
77.9
118.4
53.6
68.1
160.1
82.7
20.8
82.2
38.3
60.9
14.2
-
58.8
60.7
not performed, or

18.4
39.6 1.66
3.6
8.8
4.2
-

10.3 4.9
3.1
3.0 48.6
-
8.0
6.7
3.7
0.7
2.7 17.9
1.1 15.9
1.2 13.2
0.4
-
-
1.7
that loads were
Sulfide
(g/kkg)

ND
-
454.5
-
ND
-

18.5
282.0
57.7
ND
2.0
ND
1358.0
760.1
ND
ND
124.6
-
-
ND
ND
Total
Phenols
g/kkg

3.2
-
102.0
-
5.5
-

12.3
99.6
78.8
0.007
-
3.2
16.2
28.2
3-1
8.0
13.2
-
0.18
0.62
1.3
not calculable
                  (no water use data).
              ( ) Indicates sequence number instead of report number.
               ND Indicates "Not Detected."
                * Represents pretreatment effluent.

-------
TABLE V-16 (Cont.)
Wastewater

Report
Number

(06443)
70009
70072
70081
70087
70096
70120
80008
80011
80019
80025
Note:


Mill Type

Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Discharge
Rate
(gal/lb)

0.8
19.3
6.6
22.9
6.7
6.7
7.5
5.6
6.0
1.6
111.6
A dash indicates that analyses were

BOD5 COD

TSS 0 & G
(kg/kkg)

4.9
19.3 74.0
-
43.9
21.2 61.5
61.5 72.6
40.0
10.3
24.0
4.5
1023.8
not performed.

0.4
5.3
-
4.8
1.1
1.8
8.1 13.1
1.7 1.2
0.8 4.8
- -
37.2 242.0


Sulfide
(g/kkg)

2.8
ND
-
8.4
251.5
78.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
1116.9

Total
Phenols
g/kkg

_
10.3
-
155.0
2.1
2.4
-
1.5
0.40
0.59
149.0

( )  Indicates sequence number instead  of  report number.
 ND  Indicates "Not Detected."

-------
10
                                                      TABLE V-17
                                    MASS DISCHARGE RATES FOR UNTREATED WASTEWATER
                        TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                         FIELD SAMPLING DATA - MEDIAN VALUES

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BOD5

72.9
135.5
i
9.1
48.5
41.0
25.5
58.0
6.4
21.2
#
*
COD TSS
(kg/kkg)

300.2
593.7
0.5
21.1
161.8
122.6
68.1
82.7
60.9
58.8
52.7
10.3
1023.8

188.0
76.1
I
7.3
5.7
5.9
5.6
3.7
1.2
1.1
3.3
1.2
37.2
0 & G

31.9
177.8
i
#
2.4
26.8
#
15.9
#
13.1
3.0
242.0
Sulfide
(g/kkg)
19.2
451.7
ND
#
ND
402.5
ND
18.5
760.1
62.3
ND
5.6
ND
1116.9
Total Phenols
g/kkg
66.9
39.0
0.02
#
2.0
12.2
6.8
45.6
16.2
8.0
0.62
6.3
0.59
149.0
         # No data.
        ND Indicates "Not Detected."


        Source:   Field Sampling Program, Table V-16.

-------
                                                      TABLE V-18
                                     TYPICAL UNTREATED WASTEWATER CONCENTRATIONS
                        TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                    SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND FIELD SAMPLING DATA
10
en

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(mg/1)
1800
150
380
120
300
350
400
210
260
320
440
190
180
200
COD
(mg/1)
6900
650
1100
180
900
1200
1200
770
830
1300
1200
690
2400
550
TSS
(mg/1)
2700
50
220
30
60
80
160
60
50
80
70
40
80
120
O&G
(mg/1)
580
(280)
(80)
70
50
70
90
50
100
20
20
(60)
30
Sulfide
(ug/1)
(500)
(1100)
(ND)
60
100
130
60
160
560
180
250
(ND)
(1200)
Phenols
ug/1
(1700)
(120)
(80)
(20)
50
180
150
110
110
60
130
170
(30)
580
APHA
(units)
(1200)
(1000)
i
1000
500
(1900)
390
760
450
490
570
#
*
ADMI
(units pH 7.6)
*
(360)
(10)
(250)
(220)
(120)
(270)
#
(130)
(90)
(190)
        # Insufficient data to report value.
      ( ) Median of field sampling results.
       ND Indicates "Not Detected."

      Source:  Tables V-12 and V-15.

-------
                                                      TABLE V-19
                                TYPICAL MASS DISCHARGE RATES FOR UNTREATED WASTEWATER
                         TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENIONAL POLLUTANTS
                           SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL AND FIELD SAMPLING DATA - MEDIAN VALUES
10

1.
2.
3.
4.
5-
6.
7.
8.
9.
Subcategory
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BOD5

41.8
63.6
1.3
16.0
22.3
33.2
45.1
23.1
28.1
25.8
25.6
19.5
6.7
70.2
COD TSS
(kg/kkg)

225.7
204.8
7.7
18.2
88.4
104.9
122.0
84.4
121.5
88.4
82.3
62.1
38.4
186.0

51.9
16.3
1.6
2.7
7.7
9.1
14.8
6.3
8.4
6.1
4.7
4.5
2.2
64.1
0 & G

10.3
(177.8)
#
#
9.1
3.2
4.1
4.0
3.9
6.6
1.1
1.7
(3.0)
11.2
Sulfide
(g/kkg)
(19.2)
(451.7)
(ND)
#
10.4
12.5
15.7
13.0
14.0
23.8
9.4
44.1
(ND)
(1116.9)
Total Phenols
g/kkg
(66.9)
11.4
(0.02)
#
8.2
12.5
13.1
11.3
7.6
6.6
11.3
15.0
(0.59)
247.4
        ( ) Median of field sampling results.
          # Insufficient data to report value.
         ND Indicates "Not Detected."

        Source:   Tables V-13 and V-17.

-------
                           SECTION VI

               SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE

The  Agency  has  conducted  a  thorough  study  of  the  textile
industry,   the   purpose  of  which  is  to  establish  effluent
limitations reflecting the best  practicable  control  technology
currently   available   (BPT),   the  best  available  technology
economically achievable (BAT), new source  performance  standards
(NSPS)  and  pretreatment  standards  for  new  and  for existing
sources (PSNS  and  PSES).   After  completion  of  a  review  of
existing  regulations,  a  review  of available literature and an
evaluation of data obtained during  sampling  at  51  mills,  the
following pollutants or pollutant parameters have been identified
as  present  in  textile  wastewaters  and  should  be subject to
limitation under BPT, BAT and NSPS as appropriate.
     Conventional Pollutants:

     Toxic Pollutants:
                              BOD5, TSS and pH.

                              Total Chromium.
     Nonconventional Pollutants:   COD, Phenols and Sulfide.

In plant specific situations the amounts  and  concentrations  of
individual  pollutants,  either  the pollutants discussed in this
section or other pollutants, may not be insignificant and  should
be  regulated.   Permit-issuing authorities may find it necessary
to collect information, analyze for, or conduct bioassay  testing
prior  to  issuing  a  NPDES  permit.  Specific pollutants may be
limited on a case-by-case basis when limitations are necessary to
carry out the purposes of the Act.

Presented below  are  the  reasons  that  pollutants  present  in
textile wastewater have been excluded from national regulations.
Conventional Pollutants
1.
2.
The pollutant is  indirectly  measured
another parameter.
by  measurement  for
The pollutant  is  indirectly  controlled  when  a
parameter is controlled.
            selected
Toxic Pollutants
Paragraph  8  of  the  Settlement  Agreement in Natural Resources
Defense Council,  Inc.  v.  Train,  8  ERC  2120  (D.D.C~1976),
modified,  12  ERC  1833  (D.D.C. 1979), provides guidance to the
Agency on exclusions of specific toxic pollutants,  subcategories
                                197

-------
or  categories  from  regulation  under  the effluent limitations
guidelines, standards of performance and pretreatment standards:

     "8(a) The Administrator may exclude  from  regulation  under
     the   effluent  limitations  and  guidelines,  standards  of
     performance, and/or pretreatment standards  contemplated  by
     this   Agreement   a   specific  pollutant  or  category  or
     subcategory of  point  sources  for  any  of  the  following
     reasons, based upon information available to him:

     (i)  For a specific pollutant or a subcategory or  category,
     equally  or more stringent protection is already provided by
     an  effluent,  new  source  performance,   or   pretreatment
     standard   or   by  an  effluent  limitation  and  guideline
     promulgated pursuant to Section(s) 301,  304,  306,  307(a),
     307(b) or 307(c) of the Act;

     (ii) For  a  specific  pollutant,  except  for  pretreatment
     standards, the specific pollutant is present in the effluent
     discharge  solely  as  a  result  of  its presence in intake
     waters taken from the same body of water into  which  it   is
     discharged  and,  for  pretreatment  standards, the specific
     pollutant is present in the  effluent  which  is  introduced
     into  treatment works {as defined in Section 212 of the Act)
     which are publicly owned solely as a result of its  presence
     in  the point source's intake waters, provided however, that
     such point source may be subject to an appropriate  effluent
     limitation  for  such pollutant pursuant to the requirements
     of Section 307;

     (iii)  For  a  specific  pollutant,  the  pollutant  is  not
     detectable   (with  the  use  of  analytical methods approved
     pursuant to  304(h)  of  the  Act,  or  in  instances  where
     approved  methods  do  not exist, with the use of analytical
     methods which represent state-of-the-art capability) in  the
     direct  discharges  or in the effluents which are introduced
     into publicly-owned treatment works from sources within  the
     subcategory  or  category;  or is detectable in the effluent
     from only a small number of sources within  the  subcategory
     and  the pollutant is uniquely related to only those sources;
     or   the  pollutant  is  present only in trace amounts and  is
     neither causing nor likely to cause  toxic  effects;  or   is
     present  in  amounts  too small to be effectively reduced  by
     technologies known to the Administrator;  or  the  pollutant
     will  be  effectively  controlled  by  the technologies upon
     which are based other effluent limitations  and  guidelines,
     standards of performance, or pretreatment standards; or

     (iv)  For  a  category  or  subcategory,  the amount and the
     toxicity of each pollutant  in the discharge does not justify
     developing  national  regulations  in  accordance  with  the
     schedule contained in Paragraph  7(b).
                                 198

-------
     (b)  The Administrator may exclude from regulation under the
     pretreatment standards contemplated by  this  Agreement  all
     point sources within a point source category or point source
     subcategory:

     (i)  if 95 percent or more of all point sources in the point
     source category  or  subcategory  introduce  into  treatment
     works  (as  defined  in  Section  212  of the Act) which are
     publicly owned, only pollutants  which  are  susceptible  to
     treatment by such treatment works and which do not interfere
     with, do not pass through, or are not otherwise incompatible
     with such treatment works; or

     (ii)   if  the  toxicity  and  amount  of  the  incompatible
     pollutants (taken together) introduced by such point sources
     into treatment works (as defined in Section 212 of the  Act)
     that  are  publicly  owned  is  so  insiginficant  as not to
     justify developing a pretreatment regulation..."

Nonconventional Pollutants

1.   The pollutant is  indirectly  measured  by  measurement  for
     another parameter.
2.
3.
The pollutant  is  indirectly  controlled  when
parameter is controlled.
selected
The pollutant is not of uniform national concern (i.e.,  the
pollutant  is  present at only a small number of sources and
is  uniquely  related  to  those  sources)  and  should   be
regulated on a case-by-case basis, as appropriate.
4.
The pollutant is present but cannot be  effectively
by technologies known to the Administrator.
 reduced
Summary of Previous Regulations

Toxic  nonconventional  and  conventional  pollutants  have  been
limited under promulgated  effluent  limitations  guidelines  and
standards  applicable  to  wastewater discharges from the textile
mills point source category.  Table VI-1 presents  a  summary  of
the  pollutants  that  have  been  regulated  in  previous Agency
rulemaking for each of the subcategories of the industry.

SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN

Toxic Pollutants

In addition to the pollutants controlled by existing regulations,
the Agency has investigated the potential for discharge of  other
toxic  pollutants as a part of EPA's ongoing studies.  A total of
129 specific toxic pollutants have been the subject of  extensive
study  (see  Section  II).  A sampling program has been conducted
                                199

-------
                                                                              TABLE VI-I

                                                                  SUMMARY OF POLLUTANTS CONTROLLED BY
                                                               PREVIOUS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
O
O
Subcategory

Wool Scouring

Wool Finishing

Low Water Use Processing

Woven Fabric Finishing

Knit Fabric Finishing

Carpet Finishing

Stock and Yarn Finishing

Nonwoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Finishing
                                                Conventional Pollutants
                                         BODS     TSS     pH     Oil and Grease
                                          (New subcategory, no previous regulation.)

                                          (New subcategory, no previous regulation.)
                                                                                     Toxic Pollutant
                                                                                     Total Chreunion
       Nonconventional Pollutants
COD     Sulfide     Phenols     Color*
         * Color was regulated only under previously promulgated BAT.

-------
that has led to the exclusion of many specific  toxic  pollutants
from  regulation based on the guidance provided in Paragraph 8 of
the Settlement Agreement.

A summary of toxic pollutants detected in textile mill  untreated
wastewaters  is  presented in Table V-7.   A summary of analytical
results for  the  individual  pollutants  detected  in  untreated
wastewater  and  biologically  treated  effluents is presented in
Table V-8.  Table V-9 (a through n) presents a summary  of  toxic
pollutant analyses by subcategory.

On  December  18,  1980,  EPA submitted an affidavit to the court
explaining that the Agency decided not to regulate 102 of the 129
toxic pollutants under the authority of  Paragraph  8(a)(iii)  of
the modified Settlement Agreement.  The Agency excluded 65 of the
toxic pollutants from regulation because "they are not detectable
by  Section  304(h)  analytical methods or other state-of-the-art
methods;" 22 pollutants because "they  are  detected  at  only  a
small  number  of  sources  within a subcategory and are uniquely
related to those sources;" and 15 because "they are present  only
in  trace amounts and neither cause nor are likely to cause toxic
effects." These 102 pollutants are listed in Table VI-2.

The remaining 27 toxic pollutants have been assessed to  identify
those  pollutants  of  potential  concern and to determine if any
should be subject to limitation  through  the  implementation  of
uniform   national  standards.   Table  VI-3  presents  projected
treatability levels for the 27 compounds not previously  excluded
from  regulation.   Analytical  results  for  each  compound were
compared to the treatability levels to  determine  the  frequency
and   extent  that  these  compounds  were  found  in  excess  of
anticipated treatability.

A summary of pollutants that were found in excess of treatability
in  either  raw  or  biologically  treated   effluent   in   each
subcategory  is  presented  in Table VI-4.  A summary of the data
assessment  including  number  of  samples  analyzed,  number  of
samples  in  excess  of  treatability,  concentration  range, and
average concentrations is presented in Table VI-5.

Based on the results of the  analysis  of  toxic  pollutant  data
presented  in  Table  VI-5,  EPA  decided  to  exclude  17  toxic
pollutants from regulation because "they  are  present  in  trace
amounts too small to be effectively reduced by technologies known
to  the  Administrator."  The  data in Table VI-5 show that these
pollutants have been found in excess of treatability in  raw  and
treated effluents in only a few subcategories and in only a small
percentage of samples.  Two pollutants have been found at "only a
small  number  of  sources  within a subcategory and are uniquely
related  to  those  sources."  Six  pollutants  are  "effectively
controlled   by   the   technologies   on  which  other  effluent
limitations and standards are based." (see Table  VI-6)  Although
these pollutants were found above treatability in raw wastewaters
                                201

-------
                               TABLE VI-2
             POLLUTANTS INITIALLY EXCLUDED FROM REGULATION*
Pursuant to Paragraph 8{a)(11i) of the Settlement Agreement, the
following 65 toxic pollutants are excluded from regulation in all
subcategories because they were not detected 1n treated effluents
by Section 304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods:
benzidine
3,3-d1chlorobenz1dine
methyl bromide
2,4-d1n1tropheno1
N-ni trosod imethylami ne
phenanthrene
carbon tetrachloride
1,1,2-trichloroethane
chloroethane
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
dichlorodifluoromethane
isophorone
nitrobenzene
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
acenaphthylene
aldrin
chlordane
4,4' -DDE
4,4' -ODD
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxlde
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC (lindane)
delta-BHC
toxaphene
acroleln
hexachloroethane
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
bis (chloromethyl) ether
bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
1,3-dlchlorobenzene
1,2-trans-dichloroethyl ene
1,3-dichloropropylene
2,4-dinitrotoluene
fluoranthene
4-bromophenyl phenyl  ether
bis (2-chloroisopropyl)  ether
bis (2-chloroethoxy)  methane
bromoform
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
di-n-octyl phthalate
1,2-benzanthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
chrysene
1,12-benzoperylene
1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene
indeno (l,2,3-cd)pyrene
PCB 1242
PCB 1254
PCB 1221
PCB 1232
PCB 1248
PCB 1260
PCB 1016
asbestos
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
*  By affadavtt dated December 18, 1980 to parties to the Settlement
   Agreement.
                                    202

-------
                            TABLE VI-2 (cont.)
Pursuant to Paragraph 8(a)(111) of the Settlement Agreement, the following
22 toxic pollutants are excluded from regulation in all subcategories
because they were detected in treated effluents by Section 304(h) analytical
methods or other state-of-the-art methods at only a small number of
sources and were uniquely related to those sources.  The following 20
pollutants were found at only one plant at concentrations less than the
nominal detection limit in the treated effluent:
                    1,2-dichloroethane
                    1,1-dichloroethane
                    2-chloronaphthalene
                    2-chlorophenol
                    1,1-dichloroethylene
                    1,2-dichloropropane
                    2,4-dimethylphenol
                    2,6-dinitrotoluene
                    1,2-diphenylhydrazine
                    methyl chloride
                    dichlorobromomethane
                    2-nitrophenol
                    4-nitrophenol
                    3,4-benzofluoranthene
                    11,12-benzofluoranthene
                    fluorene
                    vinyl chloride
                    dieldrin
                    4,4' -DDT
                    beryllium

The following two pollutants were detected only in the treated effluents
and not in the raw effluents.

                    trichlorofluoromethane
                    N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine

Pursuant to Paragraph 8{a)(iii) of the Settlement Agreement, the following
15 toxic pollutants are excluded from regulation in all  subcategories
because they were detected in treated effluents by Section 304(h) analytical
methods or other state-of-the-art methods at only trace amounts not likely
to cause toxic effects:

                    acenaphthene
                    chlorobenzene
                    hexachlorobenzene
                    1,1,1-trichloroethane
                    1,4-dichlorobenzene
                    2,4-dichlorophenol
                    methylene chloride
                    N-nitrosodiphenylamine
                    butyl benzyl phthalate
                    di-n-butyl phthalate
                    diethyl  phthalate
                    dimethyl phthalate
                    anthracene
                    pyrene
                    tha11i urn
                                   203

-------
                                  TABLE VI-3
                  PROJECTED TREATABILITY FOR TOXIC POLLUTANTS
   Toxic Pollutants
                                 Compound Concentration      Source for
                                 Used for Comparison    Concentration Used
3.
4.
8.
21.
22.
23.
25.
38.
55.
64.
65.
66.
85.
86.
87.
114.
115.
118.
119
120.
121.
122.
123.
124,
125.
126.
128.
acrylonitrile
benzene
1,2, 4- trichlorobenzene
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometacresol
chloroform
1,2-dichlorobenzene
ethylbenzene
naphthalene
penta chlo ropheno 1
phenol
bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
antimony
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
zinc
100
50
10
25
50
100
50
50
50
10
50
10
50
50
100
80
830
270
2500
1800
280
230
100
1260
20
130
1800
*
*
*
*
*
•ft
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
-P—I^L.
WW7T
***
*#
**
**
*#
*#*
**
***#
-t^i — .L.
Wrnr
**
***
Murray P. Strier, "Treatability of Organic Priority Pollutants - Part C -
Their Estimated (30 Day Average) Treated Effluent Concentration - A Molec-
ular Engineering Approach, "Table I, 1978.

Treatability levels as specified in the Pretreatment Regulations for the  v
Electroplating Industry point source category.

Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Metal Finishing Point Source Category, EPA 440/l-82/091b,
August 1982.

Memorandum from Ben Honaker, Project Officer, Metals and Machinery
Branch, Effluent Guidelines Division, August 1982.
                                      204

-------
                                                                             TABLE VI-4
                                                          SUMMARY OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS OF POTENTIAL  CONCERN
                                                                       Toxic Pollutants
PO
                           3   4   8   21   22    23    25    38    55   64   65    66    85    86    87   114    115   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126
Subcategory

Wool Scouring

Wool Finishing

Low Water Use (General)

Woven Fabric Finishing
  Simple
  Complex
  Desizing

Knit Fabric Finishing
  Simple
  Complex
  Hosiery             x

Carpet Finishing

Stock and Yarn Finishing

Noowoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Processing
                                                                                                                                                        128
    x
X
X   X
                                                   X
                                                   X


                                                   X


                                                   X     X


                                                   X
X    X
X    X
X    X
                                             X    X    X    X
                                                  XXX
                                             X    X
                                                  X    X


                                                  X         X


                                             X    X
                                                                      X


                                                                 X    X
      x  indicates  detected above  anticipated treatability levels  in raw or treated  effluent.

      Toxic Pollutants  are as  Follows:
 3. acrylonitrile
 4. benzene
 8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlorometa cresol
23. chloroform
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
38. ethylbenzene
         55. napthalene                    115.  arsenic
         64. pentachlorophenol             118.  cadimua
         65. phenol                        119.  chromium
         66. bis(2-ethylbexyl)pthalate     120.  copper
         85. tetrachloroethylene           121.  cyanide
         86. toluene                       122.  lead
         87. trichlorethylene              123.  mercury
        114. antimony                      124.  nickel
                                                                                               125.  silenium
                                                                                               126.  silver
                                                                                               128 .  zinc

-------
                                  TABLE VI-5
         SUMMARY OF DATA ASSESSMENT - POLLUTANTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN
Niwber of Samples Analyzed
  Influent    Effluent
Conceotration Range
      Pg/1
Influent    Effluent
     Average
 Concentrations (Jg/1
Influent    Effluent
  Nuaber of Saatples
     in Excess of
 Treatability Levels
Influent    Effluent
3. Acrylonitrile
Knit Fabric Finishing
(Hosiery Products)
ro
O ' 4. Benzene
°* : Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Nonwoven Manufacturing
8. 1,2,4 Trichlorobezene
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Stock and Yarn Finishing
21. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Hosiery)
23. Chloroform
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Hosiery)
Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing


4


3
28
3

0
6
3
26
6
3
7

26
4

6
3
4
4
7
3


1


6
23
0

1
4
—
0
0
2
3

—
—

0
2
—
—
0
--


0-1600


31
1-170
5-200

—
90-14,000
28
45-156
120-2700
190
270

1-94
27

22-498
17-71
140-642
5-280
1-410
160


400


6-64
1-33
—

0-32
46-1900
—
2-10
6
1-916
19-43

—
—

2-2
3-1020
—
—
5
--


1600


31
49
103

— -
4195
28
101
1045
190
270

44
27

260
44
391
143
86
160


400


28
17
—

7
8
0
23
8
21
6

0
0

8
21
0
0
8
0


1


0
4
1

0
2
1
2
3
1
1

2
1

1
0
2
1
1
1


1


1
0
-

32
1257
—
6
6
237
27

—
—

2
221
—
—
5
—

-------
                                                                             TABLE VI-5  (Continued)
no
o
                                           Number of Samples Analyzed
                                             Influent    Effluent
Concentration Range
      Pg/1
Influent    Effluent
    Average
Concentrations H8/1
Influent    Effluent
 Number of Samples
    in Excess of
Treatability Levels
Influent    Effluent
25.



38.






55.





64.






1 ,2-JJichlorobeozene
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Ethylbenzene
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Kait Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Kapthalene
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Carpet Finishing
Felted Fabric Processing
Pentachlorophenol
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Stock and Yarn Finishing

8
26
7

8
3
3
28
6
3

26
6
3
5
0

5
8
3
3
26
0

a
23
8

7
0
6
23
8
22

23
0
21
0
1

—
8
6
6
23
8

10-460
1-62
1-56

6-1770
5-460
18-2835
1-19,000
2-2600
852-1209

1-2079
1-51
2-210
95-260
—

0-24
29-71
32-42
20
2-310
—

1-20
1-1
1-5

1-75
—
1-29
1-3018
3-4
1-278

1-22
—
2-255
—
56

—
1-2
15-66
56
7-16
13-23

160
17
29

267
233
960
1692
713
1031

468
32
118
198
—

24
50
37
20
75
—

7
1
3

21
—
11
440
4
78

12
—
87
—
56

—
2
41
56
10
18

3
1
1

1
1
1
15
4
2

9
1
2
3
--

1
2
2
1
9
—

0
0
0

1
—
0
2
0
2

0
~"
1
—
1

—
0
2
1
1
2

-------
                                                                             TABLE VI-5 (Continued)
no
                                           Nuober of Samples Analyzed
                                             Influent    Effluent
Concentration Range
      Mg/1
Influent    Effluent
    Average
Concentrations pg/1
Influent    Effluent
 Number of Sanples
    in Ezcess of
Treatability Levels
Influent    Effluent
65. Phenol
Wool Scouring
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Hosiery)
Carpet Finishing
Felted Fabric Processing
Low Water Use Processing (General)
66. Bis (2-ethylhexyl)pthalate
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Hosiery)
Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Low Water Use (General Processing)
85 . Tetrachloroethylene
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Stock and Yarn Finishing

6
3
0
26
6
4
5
1
1

a
3
3
26
6
3
4
5
7
3
1
1

8
28
6
3
7

8
6
6
23
0
1
4
1
1

e
6
6
23
8
21
1
4
8
0
1
1

8
23
8
22
8

10-4930
40-147
—
1-295
1-55
3-59
1-68
85
82

1-160
5-860
9-138
5-1449
1-430
30-135
22
19-400
3-490
14
26
26

2-1126
1-26
9-1108
39-890
1-310

8-16
12-24
10-103
1-31
--
14
2-50
2
10

6-760
10-10
1-24
2-231
5-50
6-109
172
10-27
2-230
—
18
3

1-5
1-51
8-27
1-370
3

1222
94
—
58
17
39
40
85
82

51
382
90
210
157
83
22
121
90
14
26
26

193
15
438
465
156

11
18
38
15
—
14
30
2
10

204
10
15
44
20
34
172
18
89
—
16
3

3
14
17
194
3

5
1
—
6
1
2
3
1
1

2
2
2
20
2
3
1
4
3
1
1
1

I
0
3
2
1

0
0
1
0
—
0
0
0
0

7
0
4
9
2
14
1
3
7
—
1
0

0
1
0
3
0

-------
                                                                              TABLE  VI-5  (Continued)
ro
O
                                            Number of Samples Analyzed
                                              Influent    Effluent
Concentration Range
      Mg/1
Influent    Effluent
    Average
Concentrations
Influent    Effluent
 Number of Samples
    in Excess of
Treatability Levels
Influent    Effluent
86.







87.




114.






115.



Toluene
Wood Scouring
Woven Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Noncover Manufacturing
Trichloroethylene
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desiziag)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Stock Yarn Finishing
Antimony
Wool Scouring
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Simple)
Knit Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Arsenic
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Complex)

6
3
3
28
6
3
3

8
28
6
7

S
25
5
3
2
7

4
8
3

8
6
6
23
8
22
0

8
23
8
0

6
19
7
22
2
8

6
6
4

10-62
8-620
28-303
2-3200
4-140
3-61
3-83

2-187
1-5600
5-840
1-229

2-4
1-180
1-186
57-515
52
5-200

162-225
2-200
120

1-10
1-140
1-33
1-111
1-1
1-22
—

2-4
1-130
37-41
—

21-540
1-96
1-684
31-867
11-105
3-177

4-160
2-60
3-

31
216
204
490
45
33
43

•39
812
322
80

3
n
59
286
52
94

193
37
120

7
48
15
16
1
6
—

3
42
39
—

153
21
230
452
58
95

37
17
3

1
1
2
7
2
I
1

1
1
2
1

0
3
1
1
0
1

3
1
1

0
1
0
1
0
0
—

0
1
0
—

1
1
5
11
J
4

0
0
0
      118. Cadmium
          Wool Scouring
 9-13
             3-130
                              11
                                          26

-------
                                                                               TABLE VI-5 (Continued)
ro
»-»
CD
                                             Number of Samples Analyzed
                                               Influent    Effluent
Concentration Range
      W/l
Influent    Effluent
    Average
Concentrations
Influent    Effluent
 Number of Samples
    in Excess of
Treatability Levels
Influent    Effluent
119.
120.

122.

124.

225-


126.


128.





Chromium
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desiziag)
Copper
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desiziag)
Lead
Wool Scouting
Nickel
Wool Scouring
Selenium
Kait Fabric Finishing (Hosiery)
Felted Fabric Processing
Silver
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Ziuc
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing (Desizing)
Kait Fabric Finishing (Complex)
Low Water Use Processing (General)
26

26

5

5

4
2

5
8

5
8
26
3
1
0

23

7

7

1
2

7
8

7
8
23
22
1
4-4930

8-3120

18-752

54-304

38-736
57

1-65
1-47

190-1969
51-7500
56-7900
75-200
120
—

5-100

57-3500

28-2000

97
32

1-500
6-140

25-1500
320-38400
27-5100
42-5160
2300
787

656

435

134

275
57

17
24

832
1307
999
132
120
—

32

929

452

97
32

130
73

299
6833
502
614
2300
7

5

4

0

1
1

0
0

1
1
4
0
0
__

0

1

1

0
1

1
1

0
3
1
2
1

-------
                                  TABLE VI-6
                           TOXIC POLLUTANTS EXCLUDED
(1)  Toxic pollutants present in trace amounts too small to be effectively
reduced by the technologies known to the Administrator:

     2,4,6-trichlorophenol
     chloroform
     1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
     1,2-dichlorobenzene
     pentachlorophenol
     parachlorometacresol
     tetrachloroethylene
     arsenic
     cadmium
     copper
     cyanide
     lead
     mercury
     nickel
     selenium
     silver
     zinc

(2)  Toxic pollutants detected at only a small number of sources within a sub-
category and uniquely related to those sources:

     acrylonitrile
     antimony

(3)  Toxic pollutants effectively controlled by the technologies on which
other effluent limitations and standards are based:

     benzene
     trichloroethylene
     ethylbenzene
     naphthalene
     phenol
     toluene

(4)  Toxic pollutant not detectable with the use of analytical methods
approved pursuant to section 304(h) of the Act:

     bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
                                      211

-------
they  were  consistently  removed  in  biological  treatment  and
anticipated treatability levels  were  exceeded  in  only  a  few
instances.

Pollutants Found ir\ Trace Amounts For each of the pollutant found
in   trace  amounts  too  small  to  be  effectively  reduced  by
technologies known to the  administrator,  possible  sources  and
analytical results are discussed below.

     2,4,6-Trichlorophenol  -  The compound 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
belongs to the chemical class known as chlorinated phenols.  This
class represents a group of  commercially  produced,  substituted
phenols   and   cresols   referred   to   as   chlorophenols  and
chlorocresols.  Chlorinated phenols are used as intermediates  in
the  synthesis of dyes, pigments, phenolic resins, pesticides and
herbicides.  Certain chlorophenols also are used directly as flea
repellents,  fungicides,  wood  preservatives,  mold  inhibitors,
antiseptics,  disinfectants, and antigumming agents for gasoline.
Sources  of  trichlorophenol  in  the  textile  industry  include
possible usage as a preservative and as a constituent or impurity
in   carrier   systems   for   dyeing   polyester.   Out  of  418
questionnaire returns, 7 indicated "suspected presence"  in  mill
wastewaters.   Trichlorophenol was detected in the wastes at only
five textile mills during the field sampling program.  It was not
detected above treatability levels in  any  biologically  treated
effluent samples.

     Chloroform  -  The major uses of chloroform are as a solvent
and  as  an  intermediate  in  the  production  of  refrigerants,
plastics  and Pharmaceuticals.  Chloroform seems to be ubiquitous
in  the  environment   in  trace  amounts;  discharges  into   the
environment  result  largely from chlorination treatment of water
and wastewater.

Sources of chloroform reported by the  textile  industry  include
its  use  in dyeing operations and in the laboratory.  Only 7 out
of  418  questionnaire  returns  indicated  "known  or  suspected
presence"  of  chloroform.   Although chloroform was occasionally
found above treatability levels  in raw wastes it was found  above
treatability levels only twice in biologically treated effluents.
      1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene - The
is  a  chlorinated  benzene  and
organic compounds characterized by
to   six   chlorine   atoms   on
trichlorobenzene   isomers   are
1,3,5-trichlorobenzene  but  these
quantities.  The compound has seen
textile  industry,  a  herbicide
medium, a  dielectric  fluid  in
lubricant,  and  as  a  potential
During   the   period   1973-1974,
compound 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
is one of the class of aromatic
 the substitution of  from  one
 the  benzene  nucleus.   Other
 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene,    and
  are  not  used in significant
 use as a dye  carrier  in  the
intermediate,  a  heat transfer
transformers,  a  degreaser,  a
 insecticide  against termites.
   production   and   use    of
                              212

-------
trichlorobenzenes  resulted  in  approximately
(7,421 tons) entering the aquatic environment.
8,182 metric tons
Sources of trichlorobenzene  reported  by  the  textile  industry
include  usage  as  a  dye  carrier  in  dyeing  polyester fiber,
laboratory operations, scouring in the dyeing process, and  as  a
raw  material.   Out  of  418 questionnaire returns, 86 indicated
"known   or   suspected   presence"    in    mill    wastewaters.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene  was  found above treatability in only one
effluent sample in the wool scouring subcategory.  It  was  found
at  high levels in one plant in the wool scouring subcategory and
not detected at the other wool scouring plant.  Only  two  of  21
effluent samples at one plant were above treatability in the knit
fabric finishing subcategory, while only one raw waste sample was
found  above  treatability  level.  Although three final effluent
samples were found above treatability levels  in  the  stock  and
yarn finishing subcategory, they were at one.plant.  Only one raw
waste sample was detected above treatability.

     1,2-Dichlorobenzene   -   The  compound  1,2-dichlorobenzene
belongs to the chemical class known  as  dichlorobenzenes.   This
class   of   compounds   is   represented   by   three   isomers:
1,2-dichloro-,  1,3-dichloro-  and   1,4-dichlorobenzene.    Both
1,2-dichloro-   and   1,4-dichlorobenzene   are  produced  almost
entirely as byproducts from the production of  monochlorobenzene.
The major uses of 1,2-dichlorobenzene are as a process solvent in
the  manufacture  of toluene di-isocyanate,and as an intermediate
in the synthesis of dyestuffs, herbicides and degreasers.

In the survey carried out by DETO, 1,2-dichlorobenzene was judged
to be present in some commerical dyes, but at  levels  less  than
0.1  percent.   This is the only reported source of this compound
in textile mill wastewaters.  Out of 418  questionnaire  returns,
18  indicated  "known  or suspected presence" in the wastewaters.
1,2-dichlorobenzene was not found above  treatability  levels  in
textile mills biological effluent samples.

     Pentachlorophenol    -    Pentachlorophenol   (PCP)   is   a
commercially produced bactericide, fungicide and  slimicide  used
primarily  for  the preservation of wood, wood products and other
materials.   As  a  chlorinated   hydrocarbon,   its   biological
properties  have  also  resulted  in  its  use  as  a  herbicide,
insecticide and molluscicide.

Pentachlorophenol  is  used  in  the  textile   industry   as   a
preservative  in  dyes.  In the DETO survey results, this was one
of six toxic pollutants that could be expected in some commerical
dyes at levels greater than 0.1 percent,  resulting  in  possible
raw  textile  wastewater  concentrations in the 100 to 1,000 ug/1
range.  Out of 418 questionnaire returns, 17 indicated "known  or
suspected  presence"  in mill wastewaters.  Pentachlorophenol was
detected above treatability in only 4 of 35 effluent  samples  in
the  woven fabric finishing and in 2 of 8 effluent samples in the
                                213

-------
stock and yarn finishing subcategory.  It  was  not  found  above
treatability  in  either raw waste or treated effluent samples in
any of the other textiles subcategories.

     Parachlorometacresol - Parachlorometacresol belongs  to  the
chemical   class   known  as  chlorinated  phenols.   This  class
represents a group of commercially produced  substituted  phenols
and  cresols  referred  to  as  chlorophenols  and chlorocresols.
Chlorinated phenols are used as intermediates in the synthesis of
dyes, pigments,  phenolic  resins,  pesticides,  and  herbicides.
Certain  chlorophenols also are used directly as flea repellents,
fungicides, wood  preservatives,  mold  inhibitors,  antiseptics,
disinfectants, and antigumming agents for gasoline.

Sources  of Parachlorometacresol reported by the industry include
its possible use as a biocide or disinfectant in  dyestuffs,  dye
carrier  systems,  and  in  industrial  cleaning  compounds.  The
survey of  the  dye  manufacturing  industry  conducted  by  DETO
indicated that this compound was one of six toxic pollutants that
could  be  present  at  levels  greater  than 0.1 percent in some
commerical dyes, resulting in possible raw  waste  loadings  from
100  to  1,000  ug/1.   Of  418  questionnaire  returns,  only  3
indicated  "suspected   presence"   in   the   mill   wastewater.
Parachlorometacresol  was  not found above treatability levels in
either raw waste or treated effluent.

     Tetrachloroethvlene   -   (Tetrachloroethylene,    (1,1,2,2-
tetrachloroethylene,  perchloroethylene,   PCE)  is  a  colorless,
nonflammable liquid used primarily as a solvent in  dry  cleaning
industries.   It  is  used  to  a  lesser  extent as a degreasing
solvent in metal industries.  Tetrachloroethylene  is  widespread
in  the  environment,  and  is found in water, aquatic organisms,
air, foodstuffs  and  human  tissues,  in  micrograms  per  liter
quantities.  The highest environmental levels of PCE are found in
commercial dry cleaning and metal degreasing industries.

Although  PCE  is  released into water via aqueous effluents from
production plants, consumer industries,  and  househould  sewage,
its  level  in ambient water is reported to be minimal because of
its high volatility.

Tetrachloroethylene is used in the  textile  industry  as  a  dry
cleaning  solvent  and  in  some dyeing operations as part of the
carrier  systems  or   scouring   formulations.    Out   of   418
questionnaire returns, 29 indicated "known or suspected presence"
in  mill wastes.  Tetrachloroethylene was detected slightly above
treatability  only  once  in  the  wool   finishing   subcategory
effluent.   It  was  detected  above treatability  in only 3 of 22
effluent  samples  in  the  knit   fabric   finishing   (complex)
subcategory.  All three were at the same facility.
     Arsenic  -  Arsenic
referred to as a  metal,
is  a naturally occurring element often
although  chemically  classified  as  a
                                 214

-------
metalloid.   Environmental  concentrations  of  arsenic have been
reported at 0.0005 percent in the earth's crust and 3 u/gl in sea
water.  Analysis of 1577  surface  waters  samples  in  the  U.S.
showed arsenic present in 87 samples, with concentrations ranging
forom  5  to 336 ug/1, and a mean level of 64 ug/1 (16).  Arsenic
and its compounds are used in the manufacturing of glass,  cloth,
and   electrical   semiconductors,   as   fungicides   and   wood
preservatives, as growth stimulants for plants and  animals,  and
in veterinary applications.

Individual  textile  mills  reported likely sources of arsenic in
their wastewaters  as  dyes  and  "raw  materials."  Out  of  418
questionnaire   responses,   16  indicated  "known  or  suspected
presence" in  mill  wastes.   The  survey  carried  out  by  DETO
confirmed  that  some  commerical  dyes  contain  arsenic; likely
levels are less than 0.1 percent.  Other  possible  uses  include
its  presence in fungicides and specialty chemicals.  Arsenic was
not detected at appreciable levels in  any  mill  water  supplies
sampled.   Arsenic  was  not  detected  above treatability in any
biologically treated effluent samples.

     Cadmium - Cadmium is a  soft,  white  metal  that  dissolves
readily  in  mineral  acids.  Biologically, it is a non-essential
element of high toxic potential.  It occurs in nature chiefly  as
a  sulfide  salt,  frequently  in  association with zinc and lead
ores.  Accumulations of cadmium in soils in the vicinity of mines
and smelters may result in high  local  conentrations  in  nearby
waters.   The  salts  of  the metal also may occur in wastes from
electroplating plants, pigment works, and  textile  and  chemical
industries.   Seepage  of  cadmium from electroplating plants has
resulted in groundwater cadmium concentrations  of  0.01  to  3.2
mg/1.

Dissolved  cadmium was found in less than 3 percent of 1,577 U.S.
surface water samples with a mean concentration of slightly under
10 ug/1.  Most fresh waters contain less than 1 ug/1 cadmium  and
most  analyses  of  seawater indicate an average concentration of
about 0.15 ug/1 (16).

Sources of cadmium reported by individual textile  mills  include
pigments,  dyes,  nylon  carpet  processing, and "raw materials",
including dirt in  raw  wool.   Cadmium  was  one  of  the  toxic
pollutants  in  the  DETO survey that could be present in dyes at
levels less than 0.1 percent.  Of 418 questionnaire  returns,  24
indicated  "known presence" and 17 indicated "suspected presence"
in mill wastes.   In  the  field  sampling  program  cadmium  was
measured  above  detectability in only 1 of the 12 water supplies
sampled.  It was not found above treatability levels in any final
effluent samples.

     Copper - Copper is a soft heavy metal that is ubiquitous  in
its  distribution in rocks and minerals of the earth's crust.  In
nature, copper occurs usually as  sulfide  and . oxide  salts  and
                                215

-------
occasionally  as  metallic  copper.   Weathering  and solution of
these natural copper minerals  result  in  background  levels  of
copper in natural surface waters at concentrations generally well
below  20 ug/1.  Higher concentrations of copper are usually from
anthropogenic sources.  These sources include corrosion of  brass
and  copper  pipe  by  acidic  waters,  industrial  effluents and
fallout,  sewage treatment plant effluents and the use  of  copper
compounds as aquatic algicides.

A  five year study of natural surface waters in the U.S. revealed
copper concentrations ranging from less than 10 ug/1  (the  limit
of  detection)  to 280 ug/1, with a mean value for U.S. waters of
15 ug/1.   Values from 0.6 ug/1 to 4.3 ug/1 have been reported  in
seawater (16).

Sources  of  copper  reported by individual textile mills include
pigments, dyestuffs, and the  mill  plumbing  system.   The  DETO
survey  results  indicated  that  copper  may  be present in some
commerical dyes at levels of 3 to 4 percent.  Because the  copper
is  an  integral  part  of the dye molecule, most of it should be
exhausted from the dye bath onto the fiber being  dyed.   Of  418
questionnaire  returns,  87  indicated  "known  presence"  and 79
indicated "suspected presence" in the mill wastewaters.   In  the
field  sampling  program,  copper was not detected in nine of the
twelve water supply samples.  Only one sample had  more  than  11
ug/1.  Copper was found above treatability levels in only 5 of 26
raw  waste samples, all in the woven fabric finishing subcategory
and was not found above treatability levels in samples of treated
effluent from any mill.

     Cyanide - Cyanide compounds are almost  universally  present
where  life and industry are found.  Besides being very important
in a number of manufacturing processes, they are  found  in  many
plants  and animals as metabolic intermediates that generally are
not stored for long periods of time.

Possible sources of cyanide reported by individual textile  mills
include  dyestuffs  and  "raw  materials."  The  ATMI  Task Group
suggested  that  cyanide  is  probable  in  some  waste  streams,
originating  in  laboratory and specialty chemicals.  Cyanide was
not among the 25 toxic pollutants identified in the  DETO  survey
as  possibly  present  in  commerical dyes.  Of 418 questionnaire
returns,  16 indicated either "known  or  suspected  presence"  in
mill  wastewaters.  In the field sampling program, cyanide was at
less than 2 ug/1 in 9 of the 12 water  supply  samples  with  the
maximum  level  at  22  ug/1.   Cyanide  was  not  detected above
treatability levels in any raw waste or final effluent samples.

     Lead - Lead is a naturally occurring  metal  that  makes  up
0.002  percent  of the earth's crust.  The reported concentration
of lead in seawater of 35 parts per  thousand  salinity  is  0.03
ug/1,  while  available  data  indicate that the mean natural lead
content of the world's lakes and rivers ranges from 1 to 10 ug/1.
                                 216

-------
Analyses of over 1500 stream samples from 1962 to 1967 found lead
in 19.3 percent of the samples, with concentrations ranging  from
2 to 140 ug/1, and a mean value of 23 ug/1 (16).

Lead  is  used  in  the  metallurgy of steel and other metals; in
ceramics,  plastics  and  electronic  devices;  in   construction
materials and in x-ray and atomic radiation protection devices.

Sources  of  lead  reported  by  individual textile mills include
pigments,  process  chemicals,   "raw   materials,"   and   tramp
impurities  in dyes.  The DETO survey results indicated that lead
may be present in some commerical dyes at levels  less  than  0.1
percent.   Of  418  questionnaire  returns,  34  indicated "known
presence"  and  27  indicated  "suspected   presence"   in   mill
wastewaters.   In the field sampling program, lead was either not
detected or detected at less than 5 ug/1 in 10 of  the  12  water
supply  samples  measured.  Two samples had lead levels of 37 and
45 ug/1, respectively.  Lead was only detected above treatability
in the wool scouring subcategory in four raw  waste  samples  and
one treated effluent sample.

     Mercury  - Mercury, a silver-white metal that is a liquid at
room temperature, can exist in three oxidation states: elemental,
mercurous and mercuric; it can be  part  of  both  inorganic  and
organic compounds.

Sources  of  mercury reported by individual textile mills include
pigments, dyes  and  "raw  materials",  including  impurities  in
caustic  soda.   The  ATMI  Task  Group suggested that mercury is
probably present in some textile mill wastewaters, originating in
dyes and specialty chemicals.

The  DETO  survey  results  included  mercury  among  the   toxic
pollutants  possibly  present  in  some commerical dyes at levels
less  than  0.1  percent.   Of  418  questionnaire  returns,   19
indicated  "known presence" and 15 indicated "suspected presence"
in mill wastewaters.  In the field sampling program, mercury  was
detected  above  minimum  detectable  levels  in only 1 of the 12
water supply samples tested,  at  0.79  ug/1.   Mercury  was  not
detected  above  treatability  levels  in  either  raw  wastes or
treated effluent.

     Nickel - Nickel is a  silver-white  ductile  metal  commonly
occurring   in   natural  waters  in  the  +2  valence  state  in
concentrations ranging from a few micrograms per liter,  to  more
than  100  ug/1.   Nickel  seldom is found in groundwater, and if
present, probably exists in colloidol form.

Sources of nickel reported by individual  textile  mills  include
pigments,  dyes,  processing  chemicals, and "raw materials." The
DETO  survey  confirmed  that  nickel  may  be  present  in  some
commercial dyes at levels less than 0.1 percent.  Nickel may also
originate  from  plating  operations  in  resurfacing of printing
                                217

-------
rolls.  Of 418 questionnaire survey returns, 28 indicated  "known
presence"  and  23  indicated  "suspected  presence"  in the mill
wastewaters.  In the field sampling program, nickel was  measured
at greater than 5 ug/1 in 2 of the 12 water supplies sampled; one
at  41 ug/1 and the other at 47 ug/1.  Nickel was not found above
treatability levels in any raw waste samples and was  found  only
once in a wool scouring subcategory final effluent samples.

     Selenium  - Selenium is a naturally occurring element and is
an essential nutrient.  In ground waters, selenium levels are low
(less than 1 ug/1) but in areas with  seleniferous  soils,  water
levels up to 300 ug/1 have been reported (16).

No   widely  recognized  sources  of  selenium  in  textile  mill
wastewaters were reported in this study.   The  ATMI  Task  Group
suggested  that  selenium  might  be  present  in  some  dyes and
specialty chemicals.  This was not confirmed by the  DETO  survey
of  dye  manufacturers.   Of  418  questionnaire responses, seven
indicated  "known  presence"  and  three   indicated   "suspected
presence"  in  the mill wastewaters, although no specific sources
were mentioned.  In the field sampling program, it  was  detected
above  treatability  in  only  one  raw  waste sample in the knit
fabric finishing subcategory and it was not found in any  treated
effluent samples.  In the felted fabric processing subcategory it
was  found  above  treatability  in  one raw waste sample and one
final effluent sample.

     Silver - Silver is a white ductile metal occurring naturally
in the pure form and in ores.  Principal uses of  silver  are  in
photographic  materials, as a conductor, in dental alloys, solder
and braying  alloys,  paints,  jewelry,  silverware,  and  mirror
production.

Of 418 questionnaire returns, 12 indicated "known presence" and 4
indicated  "suspected  presence"  in  textile  mill  wastewaters,
although no specific sources were given.   The  ATMI  Task  Group
suggested  that silver was a probable constituent of some textile
mill wastewaters, originating in dyes and/or specialty chemicals.
The DETO survey did not  confirm  commerical  dyes  as  a  likely
source  of  silver.   In  the  field sampling program, silver was
measured at greater than 5 ug/1 in 2 of  the  12  water  supplies
sampled,  both  at  17  ug/1.   Silver  was  not  detected  above
treatability levels  in  raw  wastes  and  only  twice  in  final
effluent samples.

     Zinc  -  Zinc is a naturally occurring element that makes up
approximately 0.02 percent of the earth's crust.  It is  used  in
various  alloys,  as  a  protective  coating for other metals, in
galvanizing sheet iron,  and  as  a  reducing  agent.   Zinc  was
detected in 1,207 of 1,577 surface water samples collected at 130
sampling  locations  throughout  the  U.S. between  1962 and  1967.
The maximum observed concentration was  1,183 ug/1   and  the  mean
                                 218

-------
value   was   64  ug/1.
approximate 5 ug/1 (16).
Levels  of  zinc  in  natural  seawater
Zinc originates from many sources in  textile  mill  wastewaters,
including  pigements,  dyes,  dye  stripping,  coating materials,
catalysts, latex curing, and in many specialty chemicals both  as
an  added  component and as an impurity.  The DETO survey pointed
out that some dyes are prepared as double salts of zinc  and  may
contain  up  to  3  percent  of  this metal.  Unlike chromium and
copper, the zinc is not exhausted onto the fiber in dyeing.  Zinc
can also be contributed by water conditioning  chemicals,  alloys
used  in  pumps  and valves, galvanized metals, painted surfaces,
and several other  sources  in  industrial  facilities.   Of  418
questionnaire  returns,  100  indicated  "known  presence" and 64
indicated "suspected presence" in the mill wastewaters.   In  the
field  sampling  program,  zinc  concentrations  in  the 12 water
supply samples ranged from 10 to 4500  ug/1.   Four  samples  had
levels  above  100 and two were above 1000.  Zinc was found above
treatability  in  seven  final   effluent   samples   from   four
subcategories.   It  was  only found above treatability levels in
six raw waste samples from three subcategories.

Pollutants Unique to Source. For pollutants detected  at  only  a
small number of sources within a subcategory and uniquely related
to  those  sources,  the  traditional  uses, possible sources and
analytical results are discussed below.

     Acrvlonitrile - Acrylonitrile is  an  unsaturated  synthetic
organic  compound primarily used in the production of acrylic and
modacrylic  fibers,  nitrile  rubber,   and   plastics.    Annual
production   totals  approximately  0.7  billion  kilograms  (1.5
billion pounds).

Sources of acrylonitrile reported  by  textile  industry  include
fibers  and other raw materials, laboratory operations, dyes, and
latex compounds.  Out of 418 questionnaire returns, 32  indicated
"known  or suspected presence" in mill wastewaters.  Despite this
indication of rather common usage, acrylonitrile was detected  at
only 1 mill of 44 in the field sampling program.

     Antimony  -  Environmental  concentrations  of  antimony are
reported at 0.33 ug/1  in  seawater  of  35  parts  per  thousand
salinity and at 1.1 ug/1 in freshwater streams.  Antimony and its
compounds  are  used  in  the  manufacturing  of alloys, as flame
retardants, pigments and catalysts, as well as for medicinal  and
veterinary uses.

Individual mills reported possible sources of antimony in textile
wastewaters  as  finishing  agents,  dyestuffs and raw materials.
The DETO survey results did not list antimony as one  of  the  25
toxic  pollutants  likely to be present in the bulk of commerical
dyes produced.  Various antimony  compounds  have  been  used  as
mordants  in  dyeing,  in  printing pastes and as pigments in dye
                                219

-------
manufacture.  Antimony trioxide is  used  as  a  flame  retarding
agent.   Out of 418 questionnaire returns, 52 indicated "known or
suspected presence" in mill wastes.  Antimony was detected  above
treatability  in  only  one  raw  waste  sample  in  each of four
subcategories although it was found    above treatability  levels
in  16  final  effluent  samples  in  the  knit  fabric finishing
subcategory.

Three of the 16 samples were at one facility and 7  at  a  second
facility.   It  is believed that these high levels are related to
the use of antimony trioxide fire retardants  which  are  not  in
common  use in the industry.  As antimony was either not detected
or detected at low levels throughout the industry  EPA  concluded
that   antimony  discharge  is  uniquely  related  to  these  two
facilities.
                                    Standards
For   pollutants
Pollutants  Controlled  by  Other
effectively   controlled  by  the  technologies  on  which  other
effluent limitations and standards  are  based,  the  traditional
uses,  possible  sources  and  analytical  results  are discussed
below:

     Benzene - Benzene is produced principally from coal for  tar
distillation  and  from petroleum by.catalytic reforming of light
naphthas from which it is isolated  by  distillation  or  solvent
extraction.   The broad utility spectrum of benzene (commercially
sometimes   called    "Benzol")    includes:    extraction    and
rectification;  as  an intermediate for synthesis in the chemical
and pharmaceutical industries; the preparation and use of inks in
the graphic arts industries; as a  thinner  for  lacquers;  as  a
degreasing  and  cleaning  agent;  as  a  solvent  in  the rubber
industry; as an antiknock fuel additive and as a general  solvent
in  laboratories.   Industrial processes involving the production
of benzene and chemical synthesis usually are performed in sealed
and  protected  systems.   Currently,  benzene  is  used  by  the
chemical  industry at the rate of 5.3 billion liters (1.4 billion
gallons) annually.  Sources of benzene reported  by  the  textile
industry  include  raw  materials,  use  as  a  solvent and dyes,
although it was not one of 25 priority  pollutants  suggested  by
DETO  as  likely  to  be  present  in  the  151 dye products that
represent the bulk of the dye  industry's  commercial  volume  by
weight.  Out of 418 questionnaire returns, 32 indicated "known or
suspected  presence"  in  mill wastewaters.  Benzene was detected
above treatability levels in  only  one  final  effluent  sample.
Benzene  is  effectively removed in biological treatment systems;
removal is reflected by the lower final  effluent  concentrations
reported for benzene.

     Trlchloroethvlene             -            Trichloroethylene
(\t 1,2-trichloroethylene, TCE), a volatile  nonflammable  liquid,
is  used  mostly in the metal industries as a degreasing solvent.
It had minor applications as a dry cleaning  solvent  and  as  an
extractive solvent for decaffeinating coffee, but was replaced in
                                220

-------
both   these   capacities   by  perchloroethylene  and  methylene
chloride, respectively.

Its volatilization during production and use is the major  source
of  environmental levels of this compound.  TCE has been detected
in ambient air, in  food  and  in  human  tissue  in  ug/1  (ppb)
quantities.   Its  detection in rivers, municipal water supplies,
the sea and  aquatic  organisms  indicates  that  TCE  is  widely
distributed  in the aquatic environment at the microgram/kg level
or lower.  Trichloroethylene is not expected to  persist  in  the
environment.   This  is in part because of its short half-life in
air and its evaporation from water.

Sources of trichloroethylene in textile mill wastewaters reported
by the industry include its  use  as  a  solvent  in  dyeing  and
cleaning,   and   also   in  some  raw  materials.   Out  of  418
questionnaire returns, 21 indicated "known or suspected presence"
in mill wastes.   Trichloroethylene  is  effectively  reduced  in
biological  treatment systems as is reflected by the fact that it
was found above treatability in  only  one  biologically  treated
final effluent sample.

     Ethylbenzene - Ethylbenzene is an alkyl substituted aromatic
compound  employed  as  an antiknock compound for airplane engine
fuel, as a lacquer diluent,  in  the  synthesis  of  styrols  for
resins, as a solvent for paraffin waxes, and in the production of
cellulose  acetate  silks.  It is only slightly soluble in water,
but will dissolve in organic solvents.

Ethylbenzene was one of 25 toxic pollutants that may  be  present
in  some  commerical dyes, at less than 0.1 percent, according to
the survey carried out by DETO.  Its presence in dyestuffs and as
a solvent in print pastes was also reported by individual  mills.
While only 9 out of 418 questionnaire returns indicated "known or
suspected  presence"  in mill wastewaters.  Ethylbenzene was only
detected above treatability in a few final  effluent  samples  at
levels   well   below   raw  wastewater  concentrations.   It  is
effectively removed in biological treatment which forms the basis
for BPT regulations.

     Naphthalene - Naphthalene, a bicyclic aromatic compound,  is
the  most  abundant  single  constituent of coal tar.  It is also
found  in  cigarette  smoke.   This  compound  is  used   as   an
intermediate  in  the  production  of  dye  compounds  and in the
formation of solvents, lubricants, and motor fuels.  The  largest
use  of  napthalene in 1975 (58 percent of total use) was for the
synthesis of phthalic anhydride.  It has also been used as a moth
repellent and insecticide.

Sources of naphthalene in textile mill  wastewaters  reported  by
the  industry  are  dyes and possibly laboratory operations.  The
direct dyes were cited as specific sources of this compound.  The
DETO survey results  indicated  that  this  toxic  pollutant  was
                                221

-------
likely  to  be  present  in  some  dyes  at  levels less than 0.1
percent.  Out of 418 questionnaire returns, 55  indicated  "known
or  suspected presence" in mill wastewaters.  Although napthalene
was detected above treatability levels in 15 raw waste samples it
was only detected above treatability 2 times  in  final  effluent
samples.   It  was  effectively  reduced  by biological treatment
which is the basis for BPT effluent limitations.

     Phenol - Phenol is an aromatic compound that has a  hydroxyl
group  attached directly to the benzene ring.  It is a liquid and
is somewhat soluble in water.  Phenol is used in large quantities
as an industrial chemical.  It is produced almost entirely as  an
intermediate  for  the  preparation  of  other  chemicals.  These
include synthetic polymers such as  phenolic  resins,  bis-phenol
and  caprolactam  plastics  intermediates,  and  chlorinated  and
alkylated phenols.

Phenol is used in the textile industry as a preservative in  dyes
and  could  be  present  in textile mill raw wastes in the 100 to
1,000 ug/1 range according to the results  of  the  DETO  survey.
Out  of  418  questionnaire returns, 81 reported "known presence"
and an  additional  47  reported  "suspected  presence"  in  mill
wastewaters.   Reported  sources  cover a wide spectrum including
the water supply; raw materials, including various  fibers;  dyes
and  dye  carriers;  finishing  resins;  nylon carpet processing;
laboratory operations; and general  cleaners  and  distinfectants
used  in the mill.  Phenol was detected above treatability levels
         in 20 raw  waste  samples  but  only  1  final  effluent
sample.  It is effectively controlled by biological treatment.

     Toluene - Toluene is a clear, colorless, noncorrosive liquid
with  a  sweet,  pungent  odor.  The production of toluene in the
U.S. has'increased steadily since  1940  when  approximately  117
million  liters   (31  million  gallons)  were  produced; in 1970,
production  was  2.62  bill ion  1iters  (694  mill ion   galIons).
Approximately  70 percent of the toluene produced is converted to
benzene, another 15 percent is used to produce chemicals, and the
remainder is used as a solvent  for  paints  and  as  a  gasoline
additive.

Toluene  is  a  volatile compound and is readily transferred from
water surfaces to the  atmosphere.   In  the  atmosphere,  it  is
subject   to   photochemical   degradation.    It   degrades   to
benzaldehyde and traces of peroxybenzoyl  nitrate.   Toluene  can
also re-enter the hydrosphere in rain.

Sources  of toluene reported by the textile  industry include dyes
and dye carriers, raw materials, and use as  a  cleaning  solvent.
Toluene  is  one  of  25  toxic pollutants  that may be present in
commerical dyes at levels less than 0.1 percent according to  the
survey  carried out by DETO.  Out of 418 questionnaire responses,
48 indicated "known or suspected presence"  in  mill  wastewaters.
Toluene  was  detected above treatability  in 15 raw waste samples
                                  222

-------
and in only 2 final effluent samples.
by biological treatment.
It is effectively  removed
Toxic  Pollutant  Not  Detectable  - For the following pollutant,
which is not  detectable  with  the  use  of  analytical  methods
approved  pursuant  to Section 304(h) of the Act, the traditional
uses, possible  sources  and  analytical  results  are  discussed
below.

     Bis  (2-ethylhexyl)  Phthalate - Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
belongs to the group of compounds known as phthalate esters.  The
phthalic acid esters (PAE) are a large group of substances widely
used in the U.S.  and the rest of the world as plasticizers.   In
the  plastics  industry,  they  are used to impart flexibility to
plastic polymers, to improve workability during fabrication,  and
to  extend  or  modify  properties  not  present  in the original
plastic resins.

PAE are extensively used  in  polyvinylchloride  plastics,  which
have  a  wide  variety  or  applications.   They are contained in
building and construction materials (flooring,  weatherstripping,
wire,  and  cable), home furnishings (garden hoses, wall covering
and upholstery),  transportation  materials  (seat  covers,  auto
mats),  apparel  (footwear,  outerwear  and baby pants), and food
surfaces and medical products (food wrap film, medical tubing and
intravenous  bags).   Dioctylphthalate  (DOP)  and   its   isomer
di-2-ethylhexyl  phthalate  (DEPH)  are  probably the most widely
used plasticizers today.  PAE also have minor non-plastic uses as
pesticide carriers, in cosmetics,  fragrances,  industrial  oils,
and insect repellents.

The  PAE  plasticizers, which can be present in concentrations up
to 60 percent of the  total  weight  of  the  plastic,  are  only
loosely  linked to the plastic polymers and are easily extracted.
PAE are known to be widely distributed in the environment.   They
have  been  found  in  soil,  water,  air, fish tissue, and human
tissue.  As shown in Table VI-5, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate  was
apparently  detected  in  excess of treatability in raw waste and
treated effluents in  nearly  every  subcategory.   It  was  also
detected  frequently  in raw water samples and even tubing blanks
EPA concluded that  its  presence  in  nearly  every  subcategory
indicates sample contamination.  This compound also iwas"" reported
to be a laboratory contaminant in other analytical programs.  The
results  for  this  pollutant,  therefore,  cannot  be considered
valid.

Pollutant Controlled by. Existing Regulation The  remaining  toxic
pollutant, total chromium, is controlled by existing BPT effluent
limitations;  during the Agency sampling programs, total chromium
was found above  anticipated  treatability  levels  infrequently.
BPT   limitations   established  in  -1974  have   resulted  in  a
significant reduction in the total mass discharge, as well as the
concentration of chromium in treated textile industry  wastewater
                                223

-------
effluents.    Because the effectiveness of the control of chromium
is well demonstrated by BPT; that  level  of  control  should  be
continued.

Nonconventional Pollutants

The  nonconventional  pollutants  of  potential  concern that are
present in textile mills wastewaters are:

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Phenols
Sulfide
Color

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Chemical oxygen demand  (COD)  is  an
alternative  to  the BOD test for estimating the oxygen demanding
potential of a wastewater.  This test  procedure  relies  on  the
principle  that  many organic compounds can be oxidized by strong
chemical agents under acidic conditions with  the  assistance  of
inorganic  catalysts.   When  an  industrial  wastewater contains
substances which tend to inhibit biological  degradation  of  the
carbonaceous  substrate,  COD is a more reliable indicator of the
organic pollutant content of a water sample than is BOD.  The COD
test measures the  oxygen  demand  of  both  compounds  that  are
biologically   degradable   and   of   compounds  that  are  not.
Pollutants that  are  measured  by  the  BOD5.  test  as  well  as
pollutants  which  are more resistant to biological oxidation are
measured as COD.  Because of this fact, COD yields higher  oxygen
demand values than the BODS, test.

Compounds  that are more resistant to biological oxidation are of
interest not only because  they  can  exert  a  long-term  oxygen
demand on surface waters but also because a potential exists that
these  compounds  can affect human health and aquatic life.  Some
of the compounds that exert a COD have carcinogenic, mutagenic or
similar adverse effects, either  alone  or  in  combination  with
other  chemicals.   An  additional  source of concern is that the
relatively long life of high COD, low BOD  chemicals  in  surface
waters  may  result in contamination of downstream water intakes.
The standard  water  purification  technologies  are  not  always
effective  in  removing  these  chemicals.   If disinfection with
chlorine during water treatment is  practiced/  the  presence  of
organic  compounds  in  the  water  may result in the creation of
hazardous chlorinated organic chemicals.

COD is present in  the  wastewater  from  all  types,  of  textile
operations.   In  most cases the concentrations of COD  are two to
three times the BOD concentration.   COD  concentrations  in  raw
textile  wastewater are contributed by organic materials, such as
fats and dirt present in raw wool,  sizing  materials   (slashing)
and  desizing, the application of functional finishes and in some
cases dyeing operations.
                                224

-------
The continuation of controls on the discharge of COD will prevent
the discharge, on a national scale, of materials that can have an
adverse effect on  receiving  water  quality.   Likewise,  it  is
appropriate   that  limitations  and  standards  controlling  the
discharge of COD be continued.

Sulfide Sulfides discharged to neutral receiving  waters  can  be
reduced  to  hydrogen  sulfide.  Hydrogen sulfide is an extremely
toxic and corrosive gas.  It is very  soluble  and,  exists  as  a
dissolved  gas  in  surface  waters.  Minute concentrations {less
than 2 ^g/1) of hydrogen sulfide impart an objectionable odor and
taste to water, making it unfit for municipal  consumption.   The
proven   toxicity   of   sulfides  to  aquatic  life  makes  them
objectionable components of the discharge stream.

Sulfide corrosion of metal and cement structures is an additional
problem.  In addition to corrosion, discoloration  of  structures
as a result of sulfide oxidation is a cause for concern.

Organic  sulfur  and  sulfides  can  be present in the wastewater
discharges from textile industry  dyeing  operations.   They  can
also  be  discharged  as  a  result  of the use of organic sulfur
compounds  in  other  textile   processes.    The   BPT   control
established  in  1974  has adequately controlled the discharge of
sulfide and should be continued.

Phenols Phenols and phenolic wastes (as  measured  by  the  4-AAP
method) are derived from textile processing chemicals; petroleum,
coke and chemical industries; wood distillation; and domestic and
animal  wastes.  Many phenolic compounds are more toxic than pure
phenol; their toxicity varying with the combinations and  general
nature  of total wastes.  The effect of combinations of different
phenolic compounds is cumulative.  Phenols and phenolic compounds
are both acutely and chronically toxic to fish and other  aquatic
animals.  Also, chorinated phenols produce an unpleasant taste in
fish flesh that can destroy their commercial value.

It is necessary to limit phenolic compounds in raw water used for
drinking  water  supplies, because conventional treatment methods
used at water supply  facilities  do  not  remove  phenols.   The
ingestion  of  concentrated  solutions  of phenols will result in
severe pain, renal irritation, shock and possibly death.  Phenols
also reduce the utility of water  for  certain  industrial  uses,
particularly  food  and  beverage  processing,  where they create
unpleasant tastes and odors in the product.

Phenolic  compounds  are  used  in  the   textile   industry   as
preservatives   in   dyes.   In  addition,  sources  include  raw
materials, dye carriers; finishing resins, laboratory  operations
and  cleaners  and  disinfectants.  Phenols should continue to be
regulated  in  those  subcategories  for  which   total   phenols
limitations now exist.
                                225

-------
Color   Color  is  defined  as  either  "true" or "apparent."  In
Standard Methods for the Examination of_ Water and Wastewater (2),
the true color of water is defined as "the color  of  water  from
which  the  turbidity has been removed."  Apparent color includes
"not only the color due to substances in solution, but  also  due
to suspended matter."

Foreign  color  bodies  interfere  with the transmission of light
within the visible spectrum which is used in  the  photosynthetic
process  of  microflora.  Color can affect the aquarian ecosystem
by changing the amount of light transmitted and may cause species
turnover.  Color discharges can alter natural  stream  color  and
become  an  aesthetic  pollutant affecting both the visual appeal
and the recreational value of the waterways.

Color discharged to surface waters may have a detrimental  effect
on downstream municipal and industrial water users.  Color is not
treated  in conventional water treatment systems and, when passed
to users, may result in consumer  discontent  or  interfere  with
industrial processes requiring clear water.

Color,  which  is  present  in  textile  wastewater, results from
equipment washup, textile washwater and dyes not exhausted in the
dyeing process.  Some colors are water soluble and some  are  not
(dispersed  and  vat dyes).  Biodegradability of many of the dyes
responsible for the color is highly variable,  and  the  toxicity
and  effects  of  many of these dyes on aquatic life has not been
studied to any great extent.  Because  many  different  hues  are
used  in  the  dyeing process, they may appear in the wastewater.
However, the combination of hues in many waste streams frequently
results in a dominant gray or black color.

The Agency has decided not to establish either BAT limitations or
NSPS for color.  The decision is based on an evaluation of  color
discharged  by  the  textile  industry  in  terms of its national
significance.  Color, in many instances, is simply  an  aesthetic
pollutant.   In  the  textile  industry, color is a mill-specific
problem  related  to  the  combination  of  dyes  and   finishing
chemicals  used.  For this reason, EPA feels that color should be
controlled on  a  case-by-case  basis  by  local  authorities  as
dictated by water quality considerations.

Conventional Pollutants

The conventional pollutants of concern in textile mill discharges
aret

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Total Suspended Solids  (TSS)
pH

Biochemical  Oxygen Demand Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is the
quantity of oxygen  required  for  the  biological  and  chemical
                                 226

-------
oxidation   of   waterborne   substances  under  controlled  test
conditions.  Materials that may contribute to  the  BOD  include:
carbonaceous organic materials usable as a food source by aerobic
organisms; oxidizable nitrogen derived from nitrates, ammonia and
organic  nitrogen  compounds  which  serve  as  food for specific
bacteria; and certain chemically  oxidizable  materials  such  as
ferrous  iron,  suIfides  and  sulfite,  which  will  react  with
dissolved  oxygen  or  are  metabolized  by  bacteria.   In  most
industrial  and  municipal  wastewaters,  the  sources of BOD are
principally  organic  materials  and  ammonia  (which  is  itself
derived from animal or vegetable matter).

The  BOD  of a waste can exert an adverse effect on the dissolved
oxygen resources of a  body  of  water  by  reducing  the  oxygen
available   to  fish,  plant  life  and  other  aquatic  species.
Conditions can be reached where all of the  dissolved  oxygen  in
the  water is utilized, resulting in anaerobic conditions and the
production of undesirable gases  such  as  hydrogen  sulfide  and
methane.   The  reduction  of  dissolved  oxygen  levels  can  be
detrimental to fish populations, fish growth rate  and  organisms
used  as  fish  food.   A  total lack of oxygen can result in the
death of all aerobic aquatic inhabitants in the affected area.

Water with a high  BOD  indicates  the  presence  of  decomposing
organic  matter and associated increased bacterial concentrations
that degrade the water's  quality  and  its  potential  uses.   A
by-product  of  high  BOD  concentrations  can be increased algal
concentrations and blooms that result from decomposition  of  the
organic matter.

The  BOD5.  (five-day  BOD)  test  is  used widely to estimate the
oxygen demand of domestic and industrial wastewaters.   The  test
also  is  used  to  determine  the amount of aeration required in
biological treatment and to measure the oxygen demand created  by
organic  pollutants  in  surface  waters.   Complete  biochemical
oxidation  of  a  given  wastewater  may  require  a  period   of
incubation  too long for practical analytical test purposes.  For
this reason, the five-day period is used, and  the  test  results
are expressed as BOD!>.  The biochemical reactions involved in the
oxidation  of  carbon  compounds  are  related  to  the period of
incubation.  The five-day BOD usually  measures  only  60  to  80
percent  of  the  carbonaceous  biochemical  oxygen demand of the
sample; for many purposes, this represents a  reasonable  measure
of the oxygen demanding potential of wastewater.

Because  the  BODjj  test  is  a measure of biological activity in
surface  waters,  standard  conditions  of   time,   temperature,
microbial  seed  and  dilution water for the test are included in
the analytical procedure.  The environmental  conditions  of  the
BOD test must be suitable for uninhibited microorganism activity.
Therefore, toxic substances must be absent and nutrients, such as
nitrogen,   phosphorus  and  trace  elements,  must  be  present.
Through the use of this procedure, the oxygen demand  of  diverse
                                227

-------
wastes  can  be  evaluated  and compared, and the treatability in
biological treatment systems estimated,

BODS is present in wastewaters from textile processing operations
in varying concentrations and amounts.  The  processes  with  the
highest  concentrations  are  wool scouring, carpet finishing and
felted fabric processing.

BODj> should continue to be regulated in all subcategories of  the
textile industry.

Total  Suspended  Solids  (TSS)   Suspended  solids  include both
organic and inorganic materials.  The inorganic compounds include
sand, silt and clay.  The  organic  fraction  includes  materials
such as grease, oil, tar and animal and vegetable waste products.
These  solids  may  settle  out  rapidly and often leaving bottom
deposits composed of a mixture  of  both  organic  and  inorganic
solids.   Solids  may  be suspended in water for a time, and then
settle to the bed of the stream or lake.   These  solids  may  be
inert,  slowly  biodegradable  materials or rapidly biodegradable
substances.  While in suspension, solids increase  the  turbidity
of   the   water,    reduce   light  penetration  and  retard  the
photosynthetic activity of aquatic plants.

Suspended solids in water  can  interfere  with  many  industrial
processes,  and  cause  foaming  in  boilers and incrustations on
equipment  exposed  to  such  water,   especially   at   elevated
temperatures.   Suspended solids are undesirable in process water
used in most industries.

Solids in suspension are aesthetically displeasing.  In addition,
suspended solids which settle to form sludge deposits on a stream
or  lake  bed  often  damage  aquatic  life.   Solids  that   are
transformed  to  sludge deposits also may cause other damage such
as blanketing a stream or lake bed, destroying the living  spaces
for  the  benthic  organisms  normally  present  in that habitat.
Organic solids use a portion  of  all  of  the  dissolved  oxygen
available  in  the  area.  Organic materials also serve as a food
source for sludgeworms and associated organisms.

Disregarding  any  toxic  effects  of  these  solids  in   water,
suspended  solids may kill fish and shellfish by causing abrasive
injuries and by clogging the gills and  respiratory  passages  of
various  aquatic  fauna.   Suspended  solids  indirectly may harm
aquatic  life  by  screening  out  light  and  by  depleting  the
available  oxygen.   This results in the killing of fish and fish
food  organisms.   Suspended   solids   can   also   reduce   the
recreational value of the water.

Sources  of  solids  in  textile  industry wastewater include the
following operations: wool scouring, low  water  use  processing,
desizing, scouring, bleaching, printing and backing of carpet and
solids  generated  by biological activity in wastewater .treatment
                                228

-------
systems.   TSS  should  continue   to
subcategories of the textile industry.
be   regulated   in   all
pH   pH  is  related  to  the  acidity or alkalinity of water, or
wastewater.  It is not a linear  or  direct  measure  of  either;
however,  it  may properly be used as a surrogate to control both
excess acidity and excess alkalinity in water.  The  term  pH  is
used  to  describe  the  hydrogen  ion  - hydroxyl ion balance in
water.  Technically, pH is the negative logarithm of the hydrogen
ion concentrations.  A pH of 7 indicates neutrality or a  balance
between  free  hydrogen and free hydroxyl ions.  Solutions with a
pH above 7 indicate that the solution is  alkaline,  while  a  pH
below 7 indicates that the solution is acidic.

The  pH  value  of  water  or wastewater is useful in determining
necessary measures for corrosion control, pollution  control  and
disinfection.   Waters with a pH below 6.0 are corrosive to water
system distribution lines and household plumbing fixtures.   Such
corrosion  can  add  constituents to drinking water such as iron,
copper, zinc, cadmium and lead.  Low pH waters not only  dissolve
metals from structures and fixtures, but also redissolve or leach
metals  from  sludges  and  bottom  sediments.   The hydrogen ion
concentrations can affect the taste of the water; at  a  low  pH,
water tastes sour.

Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can cause stress conditions or
kill   aquatic   life   outright.   Even  moderate  changes  from
acceptable criteria limits of pH are deleterious to some species.
The harmful effect on aquatic life of many materials is increased
by changes in  pH.   For  example,  metalocyanide  complexes  can
increase a thousand-fold in toxicity with a drop of 1.5 pH units.
Similarly,  the  toxicity  of  ammonia  is a function of pH.  The
bacteriocidal effect of chlorine in most cases is less as the  pH
increases,  and  it  is  economically advantageous to keep the pH
close to 7.  Extremes of pH can occur in the textile industry  as
a   result   of   run  changes,  process  adjustments  and  other
variabilities  in  process  operations,  therefore,   pH   should
continue  to  be  regulated  in  all subcategories of the textile
industry.
                                229

-------

-------
                           SECTION VII

                CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
This section describes the  control  and  treatment  technologies
that  are  in  use  and  available  to  reduce  the  discharge of
pollutants from textile mills.  There are  two  major  technology
approaches  available:   1) in-plant controls and process changes
and  2)  effluent  treatment  technology.    Programs   combining
elements  of  both approaches are applicable to many mills in the
industry.  Both approaches  should  be  considered  to  determine
which  specific  combination  is  best  suited  to  a  particular
facility.

In-plant  controls  and  process  changes  reduce  hydraulic  and
pollutant  loadings  originating  from mill operations.  Although
their use for  pollutant  reduction  has  been  limited,  greater
attention  is  now  being  given  to them because of economic and
energy considerations.

Considerable research has taken place  on  the  various  effluent
treatment  technologies  applicable  to  textile  mills.  Over 80
percent of the direct discharging mills in the  industry  provide
wastewater treatment.  Similarly, over 40 percent of the indirect
discharging mills provide wastewater treatment before discharging
to  POTWs.  Preliminary treatment, biological treatment, chemical
treatment, physical separation and sorption systems applicable to
textile  industry  wastewater   are   described   following   the
discussion  of in-plant controls.  In addition to the description
of each treatment method, detailed information on application  of
the  method  in  the  textile  industry  and its effectiveness is
presented.

IN-PLANT CONTROLS AND PROCESS CHANGES

It is often more efficient to control pollution  at  its  source,
i.e.,  to  prevent the generation of waste, rather than to depend
on treatment to  reduce  or  remove  it.   For  this  reason,  an
investigation of in-plant controls and process changes that might
be  instituted to reduce the strength or volume of wastewaters is
a  logical  first  step  in  any   pollution   control   program.
Conscientious  implementation  of  in-plant  controls and process
changes can be effective in  reducing  water  use  and  pollutant
discharges.

For discussion purposes, in-plant measures have been divided into
five  types:  1) water reuse, 2) water use reduction, 3) chemical
substitution, 4} material reclamation and 5) process changes  and
new  process  technology.   Water  reuse  and water use reduction
modifications result in a lower  hydraulic  loading  on  existing
treatment  facilities  that  in  turn  yield an improved effluent
quality because of increased detention time.  For new facilities,
                                231

-------
smaller treatment units may be used, involving less  capital  and
lower   operating  costs.   Chemical  substitution  and  material
reclamation can be used  to  reduce  toxic,  nonconventional  and
conventional pollutant loadings on treatment facilities.  Process
changes  and  new  process  technology  can  result  in water and
pollutant  reductions  through  improved  process   control   and
operating efficiency.

Summary ol_ In-Plant Controls Data

The  Agency  received  surveys  from 541 textile mills during the
initial phase of this study.  Of  these,  152  provided  relevant
information  about  the use of in-plant process control.  In some
instances,  this  information  was  supplemented   by   telephone
discussions  with knowledgeable mill personnel.  A summary of the
responses, reported by subcategory, is provided in  Table  VII-1.
The number of controls cited by the 152 mills totaled 195, or 1.3
controls  per  mill.   Approximately  47  percent are water reuse
measures, 23 percent are process  water  reduction  measures,  19
percent  involve substitution of process chemicals and 11 percent
involve reclamation of process chemicals.

Water Reuse

Water reuse  measures  reduce  hydraulic  loadings  to  treatment
systems  by using the same water in more than one process.  Water
reuse resulting from advanced wastewater treatment  (recycle)  is
not  considered  an  in-plant control, because it does not reduce
hydraulic or pollutant loadings on the treatment plant.  The  two
major  water  reuse  measures available to textile mills are:  1)
reuse of uncontaminated cooling water in operations requiring hot
water, and 2) reuse of process water  from  one  operation  in  a
second, unrelated operation.

Cooling  water  that  does  not  come  in  contact with fabric or
process chemicals can be collected and reused directly.  Examples
include  condenser  cooling  water,   water   from   water-cooled
bearings,  heat-exchanger water, and water recovered from cooling
rolls,  yarn  dryers,   pressure   dyeing   machines,   and   air
compressors.  This water can be pumped to hot water storage tanks
for  reuse  in  operations such as dyeing, bleaching, rinsing and
cleaning where  heated  water  is  required.   Energy  and  water
savings can be substantial.

Reuse  of certain process water elsewhere in mill operations also
results in significant wastewater discharge reductions.  Examples
of process  water  reuse  include:   reuse  of  wash  water  from
bleaching  operations  in  caustic washing and scouring; reuse of
scouring rinses for desizing or for cleaning printing  equipment;
and  reuse  of  mercerizing  wash  water  to  prepare  baths  for
scouring, bleaching, and wetting fabric.
                                  232

-------
                                                TABLE VII-1
                    MILLS REPORTING  IN-PLANT  CONTROL MEASURES  - RESULTS OF INDUSTRY SURVEY
                                                Number  of Mills Reporting Measure
Sub category
1.
2.
4.
5.
ro
CO
to
6.
7.
8.
9.
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
Water
Reuse
2
2
28
24
1
10
21
2
2
92
Water Use
Reduction
1
4
20
8
0
2
9
1
0
45
Chemical
Substitution
0
1
17
9
1
3
3
1
1
36
Material
Reclamation
1
0
16
1
0
3
1
0
0
22
Total
4
7
81
42
2
18
34
4
3
195
Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.

-------
Ninety-two mills of the 541 mills in  the  survey  reported  some
form  of  water  reuse.   The  mast  common  item is the reuse of
cooling water to heat process water.   Temperature  increases  as
great  as  33°C  (91°F)  were reported.  Most mills in the survey
that reported the reuse of cooling water began  the  practice  in
the mid-seventies to conserve energy.  At some mills, both energy
and water savings were major considerations in instituting reuse.
Energy  savings  were  reported  ranging from 252 million to 25.2
billion kilogram-calories  (1  billion  to  100  billion  Btu/yr),
while  water  savings  varied  from  9.5  to 380 cu m/d (2,500 to
100,000 gpd) or more.  Costs to institute  water  reuse  measures
ranged  from  less  than  $5,000  to  more  than  $50,000 at some
facilities.   The  principal  cost  items  were   pumps,   piping
modifications and hot water storage tanks.

As  the  costs of energy and wastewater treatment increase, reuse
of cooling water is expected to become  more  widespread  in  the
industry.   This  is  supported  by the fact that many mills have
reported current engineering studies in this area.  The reuse  of
water   from   various  textile  processing  operations  also  is
practiced at a few mills and is being investigated at a number of
others.  Savings similar to those noted for cooling  water  reuse
were  reported  and it is expected that more reuse of this nature
also will become common.

Water Use Reduction

While water reuse is the use of the same water  more  than  once,
water  use  reduction  is  the  elimination  of unnecessary water
consumption.  Three in-plant control measures that are considered
forms of water use reduction are:  1) countercurrent flow washing
or rinsing, 2) conservation, and 3) process modification.

The countercurrent flow system is based  on  the  principle  that
wash  water  is  not  used  effectively if it is cleaner than the
fabric when the water leaves the washbox.  In countercurrent flow
applied to operations such as wash boxes on a  continuous  range,
the  water flows through the process in the direction opposite to
that of the material.  As the water  passes  into  each  box,  it
contacts material containing increasing amounts of impurities and
other  undesirable  matter.   This  system is considered standard
procedure in wool scouring and is not  an  uncommon  practice  at
finishing   mills  that  scour,  mercerize,  bleach,  or  dye  on
continuous ranges.  At some of these mills,  countercurrent  flow
wash  boxes  have been used for a long time.  However, many mills
still do not use countercurrent flow, especially where  water  is
inexpensive.   This  practice  is expected to change as water and
wastewater treatment become more costly (17).

Conservation measures include a variety  of  steps  that  can  be
taken  to  reduce  water  use  in  textile  mills.   They consist
primarily of maintaining close control over  mill  operations  to
avoid  accidental loss of process chemical baths and avoiding the
                                 234

-------
preparation of larger  batches  than  required.   Supervision  to
insure  efficient  operation  of  in-plant  controls, such as the
countercurrent flow systems  discussed  above,  is  an  important
conservation  technique.   Reduction  of dirt, grease and rust in
production areas to avoid unnecessary washing and  processing  of
soiled material also contributes to conservation.  Other measures
that   are   used   are  the  construction  of  retaining  walls,
splashboards and sills, and proper maintenance of  machinery  and
plumbing  to  minimize  process fluid losses through spillage and
leaks.  Use of liquid level controls, flow indicators and  meters
and  automatic shut-off devices also reduce water requirements at
textile mills.

Simply implemented process modifications that  reduce  water  use
include longer process runs between dumps and modulation of water
supply  to match the speed of the textile products being handled.
Carefully supervised trials should be run  to  determine  minimum
water  requirements  possible  without  reducing product quality.
Instrumentation and automation can be incorporated into processes
to assist in uniformity  of  application,  reduction  of  rework,
control  of  operating  parameters,  e.g., pH and temperature, or
similar functions may be used to achieve reductions in water  and
chemical use.

Based  on  questionnaire  and  telephone  surveys,  45 mills have
instituted water use reduction control measures.  The most common
water use reduction measure identified was countercurrent flow of
water during wet processing operations.  Countercurrent  flow  in
scouring  and  desizing, and the use of rinse water in bleaching,
dyeing and mercerizing have been  instituted  at  various  mills.
Energy  and  water  savings  can be substantial, but installation
costs can vary considerably.

A few  mills  have  reported  that  they  can  use  chemicals  in
operations  such  as  scouring  and  dyeing (continuous type) for
longer periods  without  dumping.   For  example,  one  mill  has
recently  extended the time between scour dumps from once every 2
hours to once every 24 hours  without  affecting  quality.   More
extensive  modifications that result in lower water use generally
require process changes and are discussed later in this section.

Chemical Substitution

The objective of chemical  substitution  is  to  replace  process
chemicals having high pollutant strength or toxic properties with
others  that  have  less impact on water quality or that are more
amenable to wastewater treatment.  A number of  process  chemical
substitutions  have  been  suggested or developed for the textile
industry, and it is expected that this  area  will  play  a  more
important  role  in  the  future.   The  cost to substitute other
chemicals and products for those containing toxic  pollutants  is
usually  much  less than the cost to remove the pollutants from a
mill's   discharge   via   end-of-pipe   treatment.    For    any
                               235

-------
substitution,  however,  a  careful  evaluation should be made to
assure that one pollution problem is not  being  substituted  for
another.

Foaming  problems  in  treatment facilities and receiving streams
have  been  solved  by  substituting  biodegradable,  low-foaming
detergents  for  the  so-called  "hard"  detergents.  Potentially
toxic pollutants have been reduced or eliminated by substitution.
For  example,  switching  from  chromate  oxidizers  to  hydrogen
peroxide or iodates eliminates chromium in dyeing processes.  The
replacement of soap with sulfuric acid in wool fulling operations
is  a  substitution  that results in lower BOD loadings.  Mineral
acids  are  substituted  for  high  BOD  acetic  acid  in  dyeing
processes,  offering  an  advantage in terms of wastewater treat-
ability.    The  substitution  of  mineral  oils   with   nonionic
emulsifiers  for  the  more traditional olive oil in carding wool
also results in lower pollutant levels.

Starch wastes from desizing are the single greatest source of BOD
at many mills.  Consequently, substitutes with low BOD,  such  as
CMC,  PVA  and  PAA, have become useful to reduce BOD loadings on
wastewater treatment systems.  However, another consideration  is
the net effect on the environment.  These low BOD, high COD sizes
contribute  substantially  to  the  ultimate oxygen demand of the
wastewater.  In  view  of  this,  the  following  from  a  report
prepared for the American Textile Manufacturers Institute (18) is
pertinent.

     "Substitution  should  assume  the  direction of easily
     treatable  materials  in   terms   of   waste   control
     technology    and    recoverabi1i ty.     Chemists   and
     environmental   engineers   must   work   together   in
     considering  which  process chemical is best handled by
     the means or unit process most  efficiently  suited  to
     its  recovery  or  removal.   Certainly,  in  terms  of
     conventional biological systems, low BOD chemicals will
     not lose their  significance.   However,  as  physical-
     chemical   treatment   methods   are   adopted,   other
     characteristics   (COD,  ultimate  BOD,  solids,   toxic
     pollutants,   etc.)  will  likely  become  increasingly
     important.   Additional  research   is   necessary   to
     determine the viability of COD versus BOD substitutions
     and  the  economic  and  treatability  impact  of  such
     cursory changes."

Thirty-six mills  reported  that  they  had  instituted  chemical
substitution  as  an   in-plant control measure.  Substitution for
dyes requiring chromium mordants and chromate oxidizers  are  the
most  commonly  cited.   One  wool  finishing  mill reported that
savings in labor and other processing costs more than offset  the
higher  cost  of  the dyes substituted for the traditional  chrome
dyes.  BOD reductions were achieved at some mills by substituting
synthetic warp sizes for starch, using  low  BOD  detergents  for
                                 236

-------
those  with high BOD, and eliminating the use of acetic acid as a
pH adjuster.

Material Reclamation

Material reclamation measures often  are  implemented  to  reduce
processing  costs,  the  reduction  of pollutant loadings being a
secondary benefit.  As noted previously, caustic  recovery  after
mercerizing  is  quite  common,  especially  in  large  finishing
operations.  Recovery of various warp sizes has been investigated
at length and shows promise.  Size  recovery  was  identified  at
three  facilities;  two mills reclaim PVA and one reclaims WP-50.
While many carpet finishing mills segregate latex  waste  streams
for  treatment,  only  two  segregate  for  recycle.   Some mills
reclaim scouring detergent or  dye  liquor  for  future  batches.
Reclamation  of  print solvent is practiced at one mill.  In all,
some form of material reclamation was noted at 22 mills.   It  is
anticipated  that  chemical  and  wastewater treatment costs will
make material conservation and recovery a more viable alternative
in the future.

Process Changes and New Process Technology

Process changes and the implementation of new process  technology
are  modifications  to  the  basic  manufacturing operations of a
mill.  Some reduce  water  use  and  eliminate  or  minimize  the
discharge  of  high  strength or toxic chemicals.  Others provide
for material and energy reclamation.  One new  technology,  water
jet  weaving,  requires additional water, although the wastewater
generated is relatively low in pollutant concentration.

Adoption of process changes and new process technology offers the
greatest opportunity for reducing hydraulic and  pollutant  loads
from  textile  mills.   Technological advances in fibers, process
chemicals, other  raw  materials  and  processing  equipment  are
constantly occurring and, in general, these changes are resulting
in lower hydraulic and conventional pollutant loadings (3).

Solvent processing is an example of a new process technology.  It
involves    the   use   of   a   nonaqueous   solvent   such   as
perchloroethylene to scour and dye fabric.  Because  the  solvent
has  a high vapor pressure (compared to water), it is possible to
vaporize it more easily and recover it for reuse.   It  has  not,
however,  achieved  the  original  expectations  of  performance,
except for specialized processing  and  small  batch  operations.
Effective  applications  include  solvent scouring of wool fabric
and  some  synthetic  knit  fabrics  and  solvent  finishing   of
upholstery,  drapery,  synthetic  knits,  and  fabrics  that  are
sensitive to water.

There are a number of reasons  for  the  limited  application  of
solvent processing to date.  The most troublesome problem is that
the  value  of  the  recovered  solvent  is  often  less  than is
                                237

-------
necessary  to  make  the  process  economically   feasible.    In
addition,  only  a  limited  number of the thousands of different
dyestuffs and chemicals now used in commercial textile processing
can be transferred directly to solvent use.  Another  problem  is
the  emission  of  unrecovered  solvent  to the work place or the
atmosphere.

A more common method of reducing hydraulic and pollutant loadings
in the industry is changing process and material flow procedures.
It has been  noted  (19)  that  continuous  operations  generally
require  less  space,  water  and process chemicals than do batch
operations.  Circulating  baths  and  rinses  also  require  less
water.   Rope  washers  are  reportedly more effective than open-
width washers in  reducing  water  use.   Significant  water  use
reductions  also  are  achieved by combining separate operations,
such as scouring and dyeing in the finishing of synthetic  fibers
and the desizing and scouring of cotton fibers.

Some  of  the newer textile processing equipment results in lower
water and chemical usage.  For example, pressure dye machines use
dyestuff more efficiently, reduce water requirements  and  reduce
the  level  of toxic dye carriers required in atmospheric dyeing.
It is reasonable to expect that the textile processing  equipment
of  the  future  will be even more efficient in the use of water,
chemicals and energy.

EFFLUENT TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

Treatment of the total waste stream is the primary method used by
the textile industry to remove or reduce the  pollutants  present
in  the wastewater from wet processing operations.  This approach
is used because of the  difficulty  and  expense  of  segregating
waste  streams  at existing facilities.  New facilities, however,
have the opportunity  to  segregate  more  concentrated  or  more
troublesome wastes and treat them independently.

A  summary  of  current wastewater treatment practices by the wet
processing mills surveyed is presented in Table VII-2.   Not  all
of  the  mills  surveyed  provided information on their treatment
systems so the table only includes 1,085 of the  1,169  mills  in
the  major wet processing subcategories.  Eighteen percent of the
direct dischargers provide  no  wastewater  treatment  (discharge
directly  to  surface  waters or have wastewater transported from
the site),"19 percent provide only preliminary  treatment  (i.e.,
screening,  equalization,  heat  exchange, primary sedimentation,
flotation, filtration, neutralization, chemical  coagulation  and
oxidation),   56  percent  provide  biological  treatment  (i.e.,
aerated or unaerated lagoons, biological filtration and activated
sludge), and 7 percent provide an  advanced  level  of  treatment
(i.e.,  chemical coagulation/precipitation, filtration, activated
carbon  adsorption,  ozonation,   ion   exchange   and   membrane
processes).
                                 238

-------
                                                          TABLE VII-2
                                  WASTEWATER TREATMENT STATUS - WET PROCESSING MILLS SURVEYED
ro
CO
Mills
Reporting
Treatment
Status
Subcategory
1.
2.
4.
5.


6.
7.
8.
9.

Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
D
6
6
78

37
7
11
36
5
_!
187
I
10
24
210

218
149
42
168
25
13
859
Z
1
3
8

9
2
2
3
7
4
39
D
1
0
14

6
4
0
6
3
0
34
None
I
5
9
125

135
99
6
104
11
1
495
Z
0
2
4

5
2
1
0
7
1
22
Level of Treatment
Preliminary
Physical Chemical Biological
D
2
0
3

25
0
0
2
0
0
32
I
3
8
54

48
38
33
36
9
8
237
Z
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
1
4
D
0
0
2

0
0
0
1
0
0
3
I
0
3
17

11
7
1
17
2
4
62
Z
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
3
6
54

2
3
10
25
1
1
105
I
2
4
13

24
4
2
11
3
0
63
Z
0
0
3

1
0
1
1
0
2
8
Advanced
0
0
0
5

4
0
1
2
1
0
13
I
0
0
1

0
1
0
0
0
0
2
Z
0
0
0

3
0
0
2
0
0
5
    Notes_:  D refers  to  direct dischargers,  I  to  indirect dischargers,  and Z  to  zero  discharge mills.
                      None  -  direct discharge to POTWs,  surface waters,  land,  or  wastewater hauled from site.
    Preliminary,  Physical  -  screening,  equalization,  heat exchange,  sedimentation,  flotation, filtration.
    Preliminary,  Chemical  -  neutralization,  chemical  coagulation,  oxidation.
               Biological  -  unaerated and aerated lagoons, biological filtration, activated  sludge.
                  Advanced  -  chemical  coagulation/precipitation,  filtration, activated carbon adsorption,  ozonation,
                             ion exchange, membrane processes.

    Source:   EPA  Industry  Survey,  1977.

-------
Effluent treatment technologies applicable to textile wastewaters
can   be   categorized  as  follows;   1)  preliminary  treatment
(screening,  neutralization  and  equalization),  2)   biological
treatment (aerated lagoons, activated sludge, biological beds and
stabilization   lagoons),  3)  chemical  treatment  (coagulation,
precipitation and oxidation), 4) physical separation (filtration,
hyperfiltration/ultrafiltration,   dissolved    air    flotation,
stripping   and   electrodialysis),   and   5)  sorption  systems
(activated carbon and powdered activated carbon).  Each of  these
categories is discussed in detail below.

Fifty-eight  percent  of  the  indirect  dischargers  provide  no
treatment, 35 percent provide preliminary  treatment,  7  percent
provide biological treatment and 0.2 percent  (2 mills) provide an
advanced level of treatment.

Fifty-six   percent  of  the  zero  discharge  mills  provide  no
treatment, 10 percent provide preliminary treatment,  21  percent
provide  biological  treatment and 13 percent provide an advanced
level of treatment.

Approximately 18 percent of the mills  that  furnished  data  (63
percent  of  the  direct  dischargers,  8 percent of the indirect
dischargers and 33 percent of the zero discharge mills) provide a
minimum of biological treatment.

The  specific  treatment  technologies  employed  by  the   mills
surveyed  are  presented  in Table VII-3 for mills that discharge
directly to surface waters and zero discharge mills, and in Table
VII-4 for mills that discharge to a POTW.

Of  the  direct  and  zero  discharge  mills  that  treat   their
wastewater,  65  percent  provide  screening,  36 percent provide
equalization and 23 percent provide  neutralization.   Similarly,
57,  46 and 19 percent of the indirect discharge mills that treat
their   wastewater   provide    screening,    equalization    .and
neutralization.   Approximately 68 percent of the direct and zero
discharge mills have activated sludge treatment systems.

Preliminary Treatment

Screening Screening is a physical unit operation and  is  usually
the  first operation used in wastewater treatment.  Based on size
of openings, less than  or  greater  than  0.63  cm   (0.25  in.),
screens  may  be  classified  as  coarse or fine.  Coarse screens
consist of parallel bars, rods or wires, grating,  wire  mesh  or
perforated  plate.   The openings can be any  shape, with circular
or rectangular slots the most common.  Screens are  hand  cleaned
by  plant  personnel or mechanically cleaned  and have the primary
function of removing rags, sticks and similar coarse solids  that
may  clog  or damage the pipes, pumps, valves or other mechanical
equipment of the treatment system.  Fine screens include inclined
disks or drums, static plates and mesh units  and  vibratory  mesh
                                 240

-------
                                                      TABLE VII-3
                          EXISTING TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES - DIRECT AMD ZERO DISCHARGE MILLS
ro
                                                               Treatment
                                                    Physical               Biological
                                                         Chemical   Sorption
Sub category
1.
2.
4.
5.


6.
7.
8.
9.
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
No. of
Mills
6
5
56

29
2
11
29
1
3
Sc
3
4
39

20
1
8
17

1
Eq
1
2
21

10

4
13

1
1°
2

4



2
4
1

2° Sk Fl
3 1
3
41 1

23 1
2 2
6
18

1
Fi


2

5

1
3


AS
3
3
40

23
2
6
18

1
Al

2
13

6

4
8
1

A2 An TF Ne
1
2
16

9

5
9

2

3
2 13

6

3
7


CC

1
8

3


2
1

Ox AC PC
2

19 1

20

5 3,
12

2
                     Total
142
93  52  13  97
4  11  96  34  44   0   2  32  15  60   1
     Note:   Sc = Screening
            Eq = Equalization
      Fl = Flotation
      Fi = Filtration
            1°  = Primary Sedimentation   AS = Activated Sludge
            2°  = Secondary Sedimentation Al = Aerated Lagoon
                                    TF = Trickling Filter
                                    Ne = Neutralization
                                    CC = Chemical Coagulation
                                    Ox = Oxidation, incl.  Disinfection
            Sk = Skimming
      A2 = Facultative or Tertiary Lagoon   AC - Activated Carbon
                                         An = Anaerobic Lagoon
                                            PC = Powdered Activated Carbon
     Source:   EPA Industry Survey,  1977.

-------
                                                     TABLE VII-4
                              EXISTING PRETREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES - INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
ro
-t*
ro
                                                               Treatment
                                                    Physical               Biological
                                                   Chemical  Sorption
Sul
1.
2.
4.
5.


6.
7.
8.
9.

3 category
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
Total
No. of
Mills
2
10
46

42
20
24
43
6
7
200
Sc
1
8
25

17
12
23
21
2
5
114
Eq

4
23

18
7
9
26
4
2
93
1°
1

2

1

2
7

1
14
2°

2
3

2
1
1
4


13
Sk Fl Fi AS

2
311

2
1 1
1 1
1 4


1 3 3 11
Al

2
6

11
2

2


23
A2
2

3

5
2

3
1

16
An TF Ne

3
8

3
2
1 2
13
2
5
1 0 38
CC

1
4.

1

2
2


10
Ox AC PC

1
1

3

2
4


11 0 0
    Note:   Sc =  Screening               Fl = Flotation
            Eq =  Equalization            Fi = Filtration
            1° =  Primary Sedimentation    AS = Activated Sludge
            2° =  Secondary Sedimentation Al = Aerated Lagoon
                                      TF = Trickling Filter
                                      Ne = Neutralization
                                      CC = Chemical Coagulation
                                      Ox = Oxidation, incl. Disinfection
            Sk =  Skimming
A2 = Facultative or Tertiary Lagoon   AC = Activated Carbon
                                         An = Anaerobic Lagoon
                                      PC = Powdered Activated Carbon
     Source:  EPA Industry Survey,  1977.

-------
units.    These   are  cleaned  by  continuous  water  spray,  by
mechanically  driven  brushes,  or,  in  the  case  of  vibratory
screens,  automatically  by  the  vibration.  Fine screens remove
floe, strings, short fibers,  vegetable  matter  or  other  small
solids  that clog or damage equipment or form a mat or scum layer
over aeration basins.

     Industry Application - Both coarse and  fine  screening  are
practiced   in  the  textile  industry.   The  number  of  direct
(including zero discharge mills) and indirect dischargers in each
subcategory using screening is provided in Table VII-5.  The data
is from the mills that returned detailed  questionnaires  and  is
the  same  data  base  previously noted.  Only the most extensive
type of screening at each plant is noted in the tabulation.

Approximately 40 percent of the direct and zero  discharge  mills
and  nearly  25  percent of the indirect discharge mills reported
static coarse screening as the only screening in their  treatment
systems.   Fine  screening  (static,  mechanical,  hydrosieve  or
vibrating) is practiced by 34 percent  of  the  direct  and  zero
discharge  mills,  and 31 percent of the indirect discharge mills
that provided detailed survey information.

Nearly all  of  the  mills  in  the  wool  finishing  and  carpet
finishing  subcategories provide some type of screening.  This is
because of the high fiber content of the untreated wastewater  in
both subcategories.

Neutralization  Neutralization is the process of adjusting the pH
to within acceptable -limits for discharge to  surface  waters  or
subsequent treatment operations.  Generally, a pH range of 6.0 to
9.0   is   acceptable  for  discharge  to  surface  waters  while
additional treatment operations usually require more specific  pH
tolerances.   Neutralization  of acidic waste is accomplished by:
1) mixing with an on-site  alkaline  waste  stream;   2)  passing
through  beds  of limestone;  3) mixing with lime slurries; or 4)
adding a solution of caustic soda (NaOH) or  soda  ash  (Na2C03.).
Alkaline  waste may be neutralized by:  1) mixing with an on-site
acidic waste stream;  2) blowing waste boiler  flue  gas  through
the  waste;  3) adding compressed C0£; or 4) adding sulfuric acid
(H2S04).   Mixing  of  various  wastewater  streams  is   usually
insufficient to meet the pH requirements of biological treatment.
Therefore, chemical addition frequently is required for proper pH
control.    Limestone   is   the   least  expensive  reagent  for
neutralizing  acidic  wastewater  but  is  not  satisfactory  for
sulfate-bearing   wastewater   because   it  becomes  coated  and
inactive.  If the wastewater is deficient in either  nitrogen  or
phosphorus,  ammonia  or  trisodium phosphate addition serves the
dual purpose of  providing  both  alkalinity  and  the  deficient
nutrient.

     Industry  Application  -  Current  wastewater neutralization
practices reported by the textile mills surveyed  are  summarized
                                243

-------
                                                  TABLE VII-5
                      WASTEWATER SCREENING BY TEXTILE INDUSTRY - RESULTS OF INDUSTRY SURVEY
                                               Mills   Employing   Screens
                                        Coarse                         Fine
Mills
Sub category
1. Wool Scouring
2. Wool Finishing
4. Woven Fabric Finishing
5. Knit Fabric Finishing
4* Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
6. Carpet Finishing
7. Stock & Yarn Finishing
8. Nonwoven Manufacturing
9. Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
Note: D represents direct and
Static Mechanical
D I D I
2
3
24
13
1
2
10
0
0
55
zero
1
2
14
9
6
3
8
1
1
45
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
4
discharge
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
mills.
Static
D I
0
0
7
4
0
3
3
0
1
18

0
0
5
5
4
12
10
0
0
36

Mechanical
D I
0
0
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
5

0
0
0
1
1
5
1
1
1
10

Hydro si eve
D I
0
1
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
6

0
0
2
0
0
2
1
0
0
5

Vibrating In Survey
D I D I
0
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
5

0
3
3
2
0
0
1
0
3
12

6
5
56
29
2
11
29
1
3
142

2
10
46
42
20
24
43
6
7
200

       I represents indirect discharge mills.

Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.

-------
in  Table VII-6.  Approximately 21 percent of the direct and zero
discharge mills and 19 percent of the  indirect  discharge  mills
surveyed practice neutralization.  Neutralization of acidic waste
by  indirect  dischargers  represents the greatest total.  Only a
small percentage of both direct and indirect dischargers find  it
necessary  to  provide  both  acidic  and  alkaline  neutralizing
capability.

Equalization Industrial discharges that result from a variety  of
processes  in  the  mill  often are treated more effectively when
equalization  is  practiced  as  an   initial   treatment   step.
Subsequent  physical,  chemical and biological treatment steps are
more efficient if operated  at  uniform  hydraulic,  organic  and
solids loading rates.

Equalization  of  discharges  with fluctuating pollutant loads is
accomplished by holding the untreated wastewater for  the  period
of   time   that  corresponds  to  the  repetitive  manufacturing
operations.  For example, facilities that  discharge  a  variable
waste  over  an eight hour work shift need to provide up to eight
hours of storage.  Similar facilities  that  operate  on  two  or
three  shifts  may  need to provide storage for 16 to 24 hours of
wastewater  flow.   Equalization  basins  may   be   earthen   or
fabricated  and  may  be  mixed  or unmixed.  Mixing is typically
accomplished by aeration to provide for a uniform influent to the
treatment processes.


     Industry  Application  -  Current   equalization   practices
reported  by  the  textile mills surveyed are summarized in Table
VII-7.  A higher percentage of indirect dischargers (46  percent)
than  direct dischargers (37 percent) provide equalization.  This
is a result of two factors.  First, many of the direct  discharge
mills  have  extended aeration activated sludge treatment systems
with several days detention time and do not require equalization.
Secondly, many of the indirect dischargers are  required  by  the
municipalities to equalize their flow.

Biological Treatment

Biological  treatment of industrial wastewater has been practiced
for decades,  but  most  activated  sludge  processes  have  been
constructed  in the last 10 to 15 years.   Biological treatment is
based on the ability of microorganisms to consume organic  carbon
as  a food source.  Biological treatment is classified aerobic or
anaerobic depending on the presence of free dissolved  oxygen  in
the  wastewater.  Aerobic biological treatment is accomplished by
aerobic bacteria that utilize free dissolved oxygen  in  breaking
down   (oxidizing)   organic   compounds.   Anaerobic  biological
treatment is accomplished by  anaerobic  bacteria   that  utilize
chemically  bound oxygen in oxidizing organic compounds.  A third
class of bacteria, facultative, also is active.   These  bacteria
                                245

-------
                                                  TABLE VII-6
                  WASTEWATER NEUTRALIZATION BY TEXTILE INDUSTRY - RESULTS OF INDUSTRY SURVEY
Subcategory
        Mills   Practicing   Neutralization
Addition of Acid    Addition of Base    Addition of Both     Mills in Survey
Direct*  Indirect   Direct*  Indirect   Direct*  Indirect   Direct*  Indirect
1.
2.
4.
5.

ro
-P*
a*
6.
7.
8.
9.

Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing

Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
0
0
10

0

0
0
3
0
0
13
0
0
4

1

1
0
5
1
1
13
0
2
2

5

0
3
2
0
0
14
0
3
4

1

1
2
7
0
2
20
0
1
1

0

0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0

1

0
0
1
1
2
5
6
5
56

29

2
11
29
1
3
142
2
10
46

42

20
24
43
6
7
200
* Includes zero discharge mills.

Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.

-------
                                                  TABLE VII-7
                   WASTEWATER EQUALIZATION BY TEXTILE INDUSTRY - RESULTS OF INDUSTRY SURVEY
                                       Unmixed
                                       Mixed
Subcategory
                                                                Mills in
Direct & Zero     Indirect     Direct & Zero    Indirect         Survey
LT 24* ETGT 24* LT 24 ETGT 24  LT 24 ETGT 24  LT 24 ETGT 24  Direct^  Indirect
1.
2.
4.
5.


6.
7.
8.
9.

Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing
Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
0
1
4

4
0
2
3
0
0
14
0
0
8

3
0
1
4
1
0
17
0
1
19

10
3
7
21
2
0
63
0
3
3

4
4
2
5
2
0
23
0
1
4

2
0
0
3
0
0
10
1
0
5

1
0
1
3
0
0
11
0
0
1

2
0
0
1
2
0
6
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0
1
6
5
56

29
2
11
29
1
3
142
2
10
46

42
20
24
43
6
7
200
* LT 24 = Less than 24 hours; ETGT 24 = Equal to or greater than 24 hours.
# Includes zero discharge mills.

Note:  For four direct discharge mills (two Subcategory 4 and two Subcategory 7) and seven indirect discharge
       mills (two Subcategory 2, two Subcategory 5 - Fabric Processing, one Subcategory 5 - Hosiery Processing,
       one Subcategory 6, and one Subcategory 7) the equalization detention times could not be calculated so 24
       hours was assumed.

Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.

-------
can  act as aerobes or anaerobes depending on the availability of
free oxygen in the wastewater.

Unlike municipal wastewater, industrial  wastes  frequently  lack
nutrients  to sustain microbial growth.  This deficiency often is
eliminated by mixing sanitary wastewater from the plant site with
the process wastewater, or  by  addition  of  chemicals  (usually
nitrogen  or  phosphorus).   A description and discussion of each
biological process relevant to  the  treatment  of  textile  mill
wastewaters follows (20).

Aerated  lagoons  An  aerated  lagoon  is a basin to which air is
added  through  mechanical  agitation  or  diffusion.   The   air
provides  the  oxygen  required  for  aerobic  biodegradation  of
organic waste.   If  properly  designed,  the  aeration  provides
sufficient mixing to maintain the biological solids in suspension
so   that   they  can  be  removed  efficiently  in  a  secondary
sedimentation tank.  After settling, sludge may  be  recycled  to
the  head  of  the  lagoon   to insure the presence of a properly
acclimated seed.  When  operated  in  this  manner,  the  aerated
lagoon  is  analogous  to  the activated sludge process, which is
discussed later in this section.  The  viable  biological  solids
concentration  in  an aerated lagoon is low when compared to that
of an activated sludge unit.  The aerated lagoon relies primarily
on detention time for the breakdown and removal of organic matter
and aeration periods of 3 to 8 days are common.

     Industry Application - Thirty-four direct dischargers and 23
indirect dischargers report using  aerated  lagoons  as  part  of
their  treatment  systems.   Of the direct dischargers, 12 employ
aerated lagoons as their primary means of  treatment;  14  employ
aerated  lagoons  followed  by unaerated aerobic lagoons as their
primary means of treatment; 2 employ aerated lagoons as polishing
ponds following activated  sludge  biological  treatment;  and  6
employ  aerated lagoons in combination with advanced treatment (2
chemical coagulation, 2 filtration, 1 chemical  coagulation  plus
filtration and 1 activated carbon).  Of the indirect dischargers,
21  employ  aerated lagoons as their primary pretreatment step, 1
employs an aerated lagoon followed by an unaerated aerobic lagoon
and 1 provides multimedia filtration following an aerated lagoon.

     Historical Data - The performance of aerated lagoons in  the
treatment  of  textile  wastewater is demonstrated in Table VI1-8
for those mills that provided wastewater  monitoring  data.   The
values   reported  are  averages  for  each  mill  and  generally
represent data for the year 1976.

     Field Sampling - Sampling was conducted at two woven  fabric
finishing  mills  and one knit fabric finishing mill to determine
the effectiveness of aerated lagoons in the  treatment  of  toxic
pollutants.  Summaries of the data obtained from this program are
presented in Tables VII-9 through VII-ll.
                                248

-------
TABLE VI I -8
PERFORMANCE OF AERATED LAGOONS IN THE TREATMENT
OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
DESIGN DATA EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (% REMOVAL)


Subcategory/Mill
Wool Scouring
10002
Wool Finishing
20017
20020
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Simple)
40066
40128
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Complex)
40067
40077
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Desizing)
40047
40142
Knit Fabric
Finishing (Simple)
50037
50117
Knit Fabric
Finishing (Complex)
50019
50034
50065
Carpet Finishing
60001
60021
60029

Direct/
Indirect

I

D
D


D
D


D
D


D
D


D
D


D
D
D

D
D
D

Detention
(hrs)

	

240
120


999
624


48
288


168
60


336
267


72
576
288

252
210
24

Aer. /Mixing
(Hp/mil.gal)

	

16
34


4.8
4.7


64
15


26
45


12
0.7


43
38
46

11
6.8
100

Settling
Pond

Yes

Yes
Yes


Yes
Yes


No
Yes


No
No


No
Yes


Yes
No
No

Yes
Yes
No

BODS
(mg/D

80(-)

53(44)
11(88)


95(-)
28(-)


36(66)
52(87)


147(53)
94(74)


45(77)
56(-)


87(-)
13(-)
63(76)

20(-)
78(-)
23(-)

COD
(rag/1)

1096(-)

190(44)
183(69)


2804(-)
177(~)


20(-)
	


676(19)
814(3)


	
84(-)


	
	
491(54)

133(-)
376(-)
330(~)

TSS O&G
(mg/1) (mg/1)

64(-) 67(-)

17(47) 	
23(65) —


208(-)
40(-)


27(33)
55(0) 25(-)


99(-)
89(-)


28(60)
54(-)


107(-) 46(-)
31(-)
52(0)

25(-)
85(-)
44(-)
Total Total
Phenols Chromium
(Mg/D (M8/D

	 	

	 	
76(-) 31(-)


	 	
	 	


	 	
70(77) 131(2)


27(91)
	 	


2K-)
	 	


32(-)
	 	
15(-) 113(0)

84(->
285(-) 15(-)
60(-) 25(-)
Total
Sulfide Color
(Mg/1) (APHA Units)

	 	

	 	
280(-)


	 	
	 	


	 	
169(97)


	 —
	 	


	 	
	 	


306(-)
	 	
16(-)

	 	
266(-)
287(-)

-------
                                                                         TABLE VI1-8 (continued)



                                                             PERFORMANCE OF AERATED LAGOONS IN THE TREATMENT

                                                                  OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                              DESIGN DATA
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (% REMOVAL)
Subcategory/Mi 1 1
Stock and Yarn
Finishing
70035
70038
70044
70088
70103
Direct/
Indirect


D
D
D
D
D
Detention
(hrs)


240
75
264
240
240
Aer ./Mixing
(Hp/mil.gal)


23
25
10
26
3,0
Settling
Pond


Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
BODS
(rag/1)


9(95)
14(87)
1U-)
15(-)
48(-)
COD
(mg/1)


218(74)
	
130(-)
189(-)
239(-)
TSS OSG
(mg/1) (mg/1)


16(71) —
12(43)
IS(-) 5(-)
24(-)
I9(-)
Total
Phenols
(M8/D


12(-)
	
52(-)
40(-)

Total
Chromium
(Mg/D


25(-)
	
21(-)
70(-)

Total
Sulfide
(M8/D


55(-)
	
236(-) ...
79(-)

Color
(APHA Units)


	
	
67(-)
	

     Source:  EPA/Industry 308 Study
ro
01
o

-------
                              TABLE VII-9
                     PERFORMANCE OF AERATED LAGOONS
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING MILLS  (SIMPLE)
Parameter
Mill
40144
Discharge type                              D
Detention, hrs                            168
Mixing, hp/mil gal                         18
                                                            Subcategory
                                                              Average
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)   ug/1 %
Benzene
1 , 2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Toluene
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
52
TA
32
TA
33
TA
13
ND
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(77)
(66)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(84)
(NC)
(NR)
(NC)
(80)
(100)
(NR)
(100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
52
TA
32
TA
33
TA
13
ND
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
77
66
100
100
100
100
84
NC
NR
NC
80
100
NR
100
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program

-------
                              TABLE VII-10
                     PERFORMANCE OF AERATED LAGOONS
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                 WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (COMPLEX)

Parameter
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal


Average Effluent
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl Chloride
Naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Asbestos (MFL)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Mill
40077
D
288
15


Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
TA (100)
10 (NC)
TA (NC)
ND (100)
29 (NC)
18 (83)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
11 (89)
TA (NC)
39 (NC)
TA (NC)
391 (MR)
TA (NC)
77 (NC)
98 (50)
TA (NC)
TA (100)
ND (100)
66 (80)
TA (NC)
18 (NC)
132 (72)





Subcategory
Average
ug/1 %
TA NC
TA NC
TA NC
TA NC
TA NC
TA 100
10 NC
TA NC
ND 100
29 NC
18 83
TA NC
TA NC
TA NC
11 89
TA NC
39 NC
TA NC
391 m
TA NC
77 NC
98 50
TA NC
TA 100
ND 100
66 80
TA NC
18 NC
132 72
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program    252

-------
                              TABLE VII-11
                     PERFORMANCE OF AERATED LAGOONS
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (SIMPLE)
Parameter
Mill
50030
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
  D
  6
750
Subcategory
Average
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal ,%) ug/1 %
Benzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
Chloroform
1, 1-Dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Zinc (Total)
ND
100
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
18
ND
10
TA
TA
145
68
13
240
(100)
(94)
(NC)
(55)
(66)
(100)
(100)
(95)
(100)
(23)
(NC)
(NR)
(29)
(56)
(NC)
(NR)
ND
100
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
18
ND
10
TA
TA
145
68
13
240
100
94
NC
55
66
100
100
95
100
23
NC
NR
29
56
NC
NR
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                   253

-------
Activated  Sludge  The  activated  sludge  process  is an aerobic
biological process.  The basic components consist of  an  aerated
biological  reactor,  a clarifier for separation of biomass and a
piping arrangement to return separated biomass to the  biological
reactor.  Aeration provides the oxygen for aerobic biodegradation
and  the  mixing to maintain the biological solids in suspension.
The aeration requirements for activated  sludge  are  similar  to
those of the aerated lagoon.

The  activated  sludge  process is flexible and adaptable to many
wastewater treatment situations.  Factors that are considered  in
design  include:  1) loading criteria, 2) reactor type, 3) sludge
production, 4) oxygen requirements and  transfer  efficiency,  5)
nutrient    requirements,   6)   temperature,   7)   solid-liquid
separation, and 8) desired effluent  characteristics.   Depending
on  these factors, the conventional activated sludge process or a
commonly  used  modification  of  the  conventional  process   is
selected.   The  processes  that  can  be  used  to treat textile
wastewaters  include:   1)  conventional,  2)  complete-mix,   3)
tapered-aeration,  4)  step-aeration,  5)  modified-aeration,  6)
contact-stabilization, 7) extended-aeration, 8) oxidation  ditch,
and 9) pure oxygen.

In the conventional activated sludge process, influent wastewater
and recycled sludge enter the head of the reactor and are aerated
for  a  period  of  about  4  to  8 hours.  Aeration is by either
diffusion or mechanical agitation and is constant  as  the  mixed
liquor  moves  through  the  tank in a plug-flow fashion.  Oxygen
demand decreases as the mixed liquor  travels  the  tank  length.
The  mixed liquor is settled in a conventional clarifier, and the
activated sludge is returned at a rate of approximately 25 to  50
percent of the influent flow rate.

In the complete-mix activated sludge process, influent wastewater
arid recycled sludge enter the reactor from several points along a
central  channel  running  the  length of the reactor.  The mixed
liquor is aerated at a  constant  rate  as   it  passes  from  the
central  channel  to  effluent  channels  at  both  sides  of the
reactor.  The contents of the reactor are  completely  mixed  and
the  oxygen  demand  remains  uniform  throughout.   The aeration
period is from 3 to 5 hours, and the activated sludge  is returned
at a rate of 25 to  100 percent of influent flow rate.

The  tapered  aeration  process  is   a   modification   of   the
conventional  process,  with  the arrangement of the aerators and
the amount of air supplied the primary differences.  At the  head
of  the  reactor,   where wastewater and returned activated sludge
are mixed, more oxygen is required so  the   aerators   are  spaced
close together.  As the mixed liquor traverses the aeration  tank,
the  oxygen  demand decreases so aeration is decreased by spacing
the aerators further apart.  Because the decreased oxygen  supply
is matched to the decreased oxygen demand, less total  aeration is
required in the tapered-aeration process.
                                254

-------
The   step  aeration  process  also  is  a  modification  of  the
conventional  activated  sludge  process.   The   wastewater   is
introduced  to  each segment of a compartmentalized reactor while
the return activated sludge is introduced  at  the  head  of  the
reactor.   The compartments of the reactor are linked together in
series.   Aeration  is  either  diffused  or  mechanical  and  is
constant  as  the  mixed liquor moves through the tank in a plug-
flow fashion.  Because wastewater is added in  each  compartment,
the oxygen demand is more uniformly spread over the length of the
reactor  than in the conventional activated sludge process.  This
results in better utilization of the oxygen  supply  and  reduces
the  aeration  time.   The aeration period is typically between 3
and 5 hours, and the activated sludge is returned at a rate of 25
to 75 percent of influent flow rate.

The modified-aeration activated sludge process is similar to  the
conventional  or  tapered-aeration  processes,  except  that  the
aeration period is shorter (usually 1.5 to 3 hours) and the food-
to-microorganism ratio is higher.  Activated sludge  is  returned
at  a  rate  of  only  5 to 15 percent of the influent flow rate.
BOD5. removal is approximately 70 percent  (for  typical  sanitary
wastewater).

The   contact   stabilization  process  takes  advantage  of  the
absorptive  properties  of  activated  sludge  by  operating  the
process  in  two  stages.   In  the  first  stage,  most  of  the
colloidal, finely suspended and dissolved organics  are  absorbed
in  the  activated  sludge in a contact tank.  The wastewater and
return stabilized sludge enter at the head of the  contact  tank,
are  aerated  for  a period of 20 to 40 minutes, and settled in a
conventional  clarifier.   In  the  second  stage,  the  absorbed
organics   are   metabolically   consumed  providing  energy  and
producing new cells.  In this stage the settled sludge  from  the
absorptive  stage is aerated for a period of from 3 to 6 hours in
a stabilization tank,  A portion  of  the  sludge  is  wasted  to
maintain  a  constant  mixed  liquor  volatile  suspended  solids
(MLVSS) concentration in the stabilization tank.  Total  aeration
requirements  are  approximately  50  percent  of  those  of  the
conventional or tapered-aeration plants.   However,  the.  process
usually  is  not  effective in treating industrial waste in which
the organic matter is predominantly soluble.

The extended-aeration process is a complete-mix activated  sludge
process in which the aeration period is relatively long (24 to 48
hours)  and  the  organic  loading  relatively  low  (16 to 40 kg
BOD5/100 m' or 10 to 25 Ib BOD5/1000 cu ft).   Because  of  these
conditions,   the   process   is   very  stable  and  can  accept
intermittent loads without upset.   In smaller applications,  the
reactor  and clarifier are generally a single-fabricated unit and
all sludge is returned to the reactor.  The mixed  liquor  solids
concentration  is  allowed  to  increase over a period of several
months and then is removed directly from the aeration basin.  The
reactor and clarifier are separate in  larger  applications,  and
                                255

-------
some  means  of wasting and treating sludge is usually necessary.
Reactors can be  concrete  with  diffused  aeration  or  a  lined
earthen  basin  with  mechanical aerators.  The extended-aeration
activated sludge process  is  used  by  the  majority  of  direct
dischargers in the textile industry.

The  oxidation  ditch  activated  sludge  process is an extended-
aeration process in which aeration and circulation  are  provided
by  brush  rotors placed across a basin shaped like a race track.
The waste enters the ditch at one end, is aerated by the  rotors,
and  circulates  at  about  1  to  0.6  m/sec  (2 fps).  When the
operation is intermittent, the ditch  is  similar  to  a  lagoon.
During  continuous operation, a separate clarifier and piping for
recycling settled sludge are provided and treatment is similar to
activated sludge.

The pure oxygen activated sludge process is a modification of the
complete-mix process in which high purity oxygen, instead of air,
is  introduced  into  the   wastewater.    Wastewater,   returned
activated  sludge  and  oxygen  gas  under  a slight pressure are
introduced at the head of an aeration tank that is  divided  into
stages by baffles and covered with a gas-tight enclosure.  Oxygen
is  reintroduced  to  the  mixed  liquor by circulation through a
hollow shaft  with  a  rotating  sparger  device  or  by  surface
mechanical aerators.  The mixed liquor passes from compartment to
compartment  and  is  discharged  from  the last compartment to a
clarifier.  Waste gas, which is  a  mixture  of  carbon  dioxide,
nitrogen and 10 to 20 percent of the oxygen applied, is exhausted
in  the last compartment.  Reported advantages of the pure oxygen
process are improved oxygen transfer 'efficiency, decreased sludge
volume,  reduced  aeration  tank  volume,  and  improved   sludge
settleability.

     Industry Application - Ninety-four direct dischargers and 11
indirect  dischargers  report  using  activated sludge as part of
their   wastewater   treatment   systems.    Fifty-five    direct
dischargers  rely  on  activated  sludge  treatment alone; 24 use
activated sludge followed by unaerated lagoons; 3  use  activated
sludge  followed  by chemical coagulation; 4 use activated sludge
with chemical addition to the activated sludge effluent to aid in
settling; 4 use activated sludge followed by  filtration;  2  use
activated  sludge  followed  by aerated lagoons; 1 uses activated
sludge followed by filtration and aeration lagoons;  and  1  uses
activated  sludge  followed by a trickling filter.  Nine indirect
dischargers rely on  activated  sludge  alone  for  pretreatment,
while  2  other  mills  use activated sludge followed by chemical
coagulation.

     Historical Data - The performance of  the  activated  sludge
process   in  treating textile wastewater  is demonstrated in Table
VII-12  for  those  mills  that  reported  applicable  historical
monitoring  data.  The values reported are averages for each mill
and generally represent data for the year 1976.
                                256

-------
Seventy-nine of the 82 mills listed are operating their activated
sludge systems with aeration detention times of 24 hours or more,
and all but one use surface aerators for mixing and  oxygenation.
The  detention  periods  noted  are  calculated based on reported
average flow conditions and full basin volumes.

The Agency conducted a detailed study  of  the  effectiveness  of
biological  treatment  in the textile industry using responses to
the  EPA  industry  survey  and  monitoring  data  reports.   The
extended-aeration  mode  of operating activated sludge systems is
commonly used by direct discharging mills.  An  analysis  of  the
available  data indicated that the two principal design variables
affecting the quality of an aeration basin effluent are detention
time (hours) and aeration horsepower per unit volume of the basin
(hp/1000 cu ft).  EPA conducted an analysis of  treatment  plants
with  activated  sludge  biological  treatment  to  determine the
minimum horsepower and detention time which would  result  in  an
effluent  meeting  the  BPT limitations.  A total of 69 treatment
plants in subcategories 4, 5,  6  and  7  used  activated  sludge
biological  treatment.   The  Agency  found  that  40  of  42 (95
percent) of the plants maintaining a minimum detention time of 40
hours, a minimum of 5.3 kw/1000 cu m (0.2  hp  1,000  cu  ft)  of
basin  hours,  and a minimum of 680 kg cal/cu m (0.2 hp per 1,000
cu ft) of basin volume, met the BPT  limitations.   Figure  VII-1
presents this analysis.

Figure VII-1 shows that increasing detention time will compensate
for  inadequate  aeration  horsepower but that the reverse is not
true.  This  emphasizes  the  importance  of  designing  aeration
basins  with  sufficient  detention  time.  Selecting and spacing
aerators for proper mixing  and  adequate  recycle  of  activated
sludge   also   are   important   factors  in  achieving  optimum
performance.

     Field Sampling - Sampling was conducted at 32 mills (2  wool
scouring,  1 low water use processing, 15 woven fabric finishing,
4 knit fabric finishing, 3 carpet finishing,  6  stock  and  yarn
finishing   and   1  nonwoven  manufacturing)  to  determine  the
effectiveness of activated  sludge  in  the  treatment  of  toxic
pollutants.    DetaiIs   of  the  overal1  sampling  program  are
discussed in Section V.  Summaries of the data obtained for these
mills can be found in Tables VII-13 through VII-24.

In addition to the analysis  of  toxic  pollutants,  color  (ADMI
method)  was  measured  at  11  mills  using the activated sludge
process.  All measurements were performed  at  pH  7.6  to  allow
comparisons  between mills.  Table VII-25 shows the effectiveness
of the activated sludge process in removing color.

Biological  Beds  Biological  beds  are  fixed-growth  biological
systems  that  contact  wastewater with organisms attached to the
surfaces of supporting media.  Systems that  are  in  common  use
include trickling filters, packed towers, and rotating biological
                                257

-------
                                                                            TABLE VII-12

                                                          PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE  IN  THE TREATMENT
                                                                OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                            DESIGN DATA
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (% REMOVAL)
CO
Direct/
Subcategory/Mill Indirect
Wool Scouring
10006
10015
Wool Finishing
20005
20009
20011
20021
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Simple)
40O23
40035
40050
40098
401OO
40109
40143
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Conplex)
40022
40091
40111
40114
40148
40154
40160
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Desiziog)
40003
40007
40012
40017
40031
40034
40037
40059
40064
40072

D
D

D
D
D
I


D
D
D
D
D
D
D


D
D
D
D
D
D
D


D
D
D
D
D
I
D
D
D
D
Detention
(hrs)

48
77

120
48
36
24


120
24
40
42
320
24
53


24
96
120
36
24
24
240


7
24
96
236
222
86
36
72
	
120
Aer . /Mixing
(HP/Mil.**!)

343
160

60
100
67
145


38
59
129
71
30
70
60


59
111
50
52
90
80
20


789
500
122
29
10
45
60
41
	
57
Settling BOD5
Pond (ntft/1)

No
No

No
No
No
No


No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No


No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes


Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No

60(99)
42(98)

24(-)
25(83)
25(90)
153(67)


5(74)
22(83)
15(89)
12(91)
45(81)
124(74)
9(95)


14(83)
69(81)
24(-)
101(82)
5(98)
3(99)
43(91)


53(-)
73(-)
19(96)
27(-)
15U-)
14(97)
27(-)
24 (~)
42(93)
8(98)
COD TSS
(•R/D («*/!) (

1443(92)
810(89)

	
	
212(68)
800(40)


139(36)
307(35)
384(50)
177(54)
409(28)
	
159(76)


152(51)
301C-)
426 (-)
714(39)
	
86(-)
452(69)


244(-)
	
	
155 (-)

166(98)
297(89)

49(-)
64(63)
61(0)
80(38)


19(98)
38(0)
36(0)
56(0)
49(0)
55(-)
18(36)


35(19)
95(0)
24(-)
5H-)
48(78)
18(62)
105(36)


67(-)
23H-)
9K-)
2K-)
Total
O&G Phenols
BR/1) (Mg/D

. 	 	
48(95) 37(-)

	 	
— iii(o)
45(76)
20(71) —


— 114(0)
24(-) 56(-)
• 	 13(-)
	 17(-)
35(27)
87(-)
20(-)


	 250(-)
	 	
25(-)
	 112(-)
	 	
	 	
30(-)


	 	
	 	
	 	
	 15(-)
Total Total
Chroaium Sulfide
(M8/D (M8/D

	
«(-)

24(-)
	
120(74)
	


20(46)
182(-)
20(-)
31(16)
16(27)
14(-)
17(-)


118(25)
	
27(-)
9(-)
	
8(-)
169(-)


	
	
	
22(-)
912(-) 123(-) — 103(-)*11637(-)
254(83)
214(-)
336 (-)
	
252 (-)
54(72)
15(-)
27(-)
148(-)
8(90)
	 	
	 	
	 2(-)
	 	
—
	
	
5(-)
94(-)
3K-)


219(->

	

	
— -


	
	
200(-)
	
	
57(-)
	


47(-)
100(0)
28(-)
60(-)
	
133(-)
lOOO(-)


	
	
	
1000 (-)
1606(-)
	
	
1250(-)
	

Color
(APHA Units)

	
1887(-)

	
	
	
	


337(21)
	
	
	
	
	
	


	
	
	
	
	
	
	


	
-—
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	

-------
                          TABLE VII-12 (continued)

              PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE IN THE TREATMENT
                    OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
DESIGN DATA
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (% REMOVAL]
Direct/
Suhcategory/Mill Indirect
(continued)
Woven Fabric
Finishing (Desizing)
40074
40087
40097
40099
40103
40118
40120
40140
40145
40151
40153
Knit Fabric
1\5 ;Finisbing (Simple)
tn 50008
^° ; 50015
50026
50057
50081
50082
50098
50108
50113
50116
Knit Fabric
Finishing (Complex)
50013
50035
50052
50056
50063
50099
50115
50123
Knit Fabric
Finishing (Hosiery)
5H028
5II029


D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D


D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D


D
D
D
D
I
D
D
D

-
D
D
Detention
(hrs)


72
120
39
48
45
8
168
60
120
120
60


31
120
432
24
48
264
144
22
141
60


24
72
200
48
96
48
60
72


130
48
Aer. /Mixing
(Hp/mil.Ral)


80
43
248
63
120
2000
63
79
57
84
6.7


77
40
5.4
133
74
29
8.3
64
38
75


133
37
40
60
60
65
113
163


67
667
Settling BOD5
Pond (niR/1)


No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No


Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No


Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No


No
No


10(99)
30(-)
23(88)
16(95)
19(98)
14(89)
7(99)
105(84)
7(-)
43(94)
62(88)


14(-)
1K-)
19(-)
21(94)
19(90)
13(94)
139(66)
6(95)
13(93)
5(97)


143(-)
21(86)
24(-)
45(83)
37(82)
1K-)
4(-)
6(99)


63(0)
98(42)
COD


272(-)
	
594(68)
252(73)
	
227(60)
181(92)
664(46)
164(81)
199(92)
464(55)


	
277(-)
	
744(-)
164(56)
250(53)
533(33)
154(64)
226(70)
124(-)


1752(-)
277(55)
272(-)
354(49)
232(57)
174(-)
291(-)
!«(-)


596(-)
	
Total Total
TSS O&G Phenols Chromium
(«8/l) (raR/1) (MR/1) (MR/I)


69(63) 14(-)
41(-) 6(-)
44(-)
49(18) 9(-)
21(83) ll(-)
124(42)
57(82)
176(0)
54(-)
67(-) 5(0)
132(0)


20(-)
22(-)
15(-) 	
35(0) 8(-)
63(34)
71(0) 90(-)
180(0)
11(48)
62(0) 8(-)
18(0)


187(-) 110(-)
116(84)
65(-)
55(0) 32(-)
53(0)
26(~)
27(-)
27(96)


99(1)
	 	


347(-)
22C-)
	
17(-)
47(-)
100(-)
	
	
18(-)
	
132(-)


	
41(-)
	
	
	
32(-)
	
	
72(-)
	


323(-)
	
2(-)
100(0)
	
83(-)
	
	


28(-)
	


46(-)
22(-)
	
16(20)
l(-)
10(-)
	
28(-)
18(-)
40(0)
59(-)


. 	
58C-)
l(-)
	
11(15)
62(40)
	
	
63(-)
25(-)


— :
—
12(-)
100(0)
—
15(-)
	
	


66(-)
	
Total
Sulfide
(M8/D


	
	
	
	
	
300(-)
	
	
100(-)
—
224(-)


	
90(-)
	
	
126(-)
	
	
	
222(-)
	


U13(-)
	
75(-)
100(0)
	
73(-)
	
	


46(-)
	
Color
(APHA Units)


118(-)
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	


	
	
	
52(-)
	
	
	
	
	
	


	
	
	
	
	
	
321(~)
	


	
	

-------
                                                                   TABLE VI1-12 (continued)

                                                       PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE IN THE TREATMENT
                                                             OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                         DESIGN DATA
EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (% REMOVAL)
Subcategory/Mill
Carpet Finishing
60005
60013
60018
60034
60037
60039
Stock and Yarn
Finishing
70009
70031
70034
70036
70054
ro i70075
0) | 70084
0 ,70087
i 70089
! 70096
70102
70104
70106
70126
Felted Fabric
Finishing
80025
Direct/
Indirect

D
D
D
D
D
D


D
D
D
D
I
D
D
D
I
D
D
D
D
D


D
Detention
(hrs)

96
60
30
96
192
128


62
36
48
384
48
' 40
58
126
24
65
5664
24
96
40


160
Aer. /Mixing
(HP/nil. gal)

60
83
19
44
40
125


46
80
92
30
500
91
33
14
80
107
3.4
56
114
200


60
Settling
Pond

No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes


Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No


Yes
BODS
(»g/l3

27(-)
54(-)
33(-)
29(87)
36(-)
38(-)


5(94)
6(96)
6(-)
15(-)
233(86)
7(95)
21(93)
21(93)
5(96)
29(-)
16(-)
3(97)
7(99)
73(-)


40(89)
COD
(mg/1)

546 (-)
31U-)
286(-)
227(52)
	
274(-)


106(71)
124(75)
179(-)
203 (-)
1844(61)
146(73)
268(62)
148(62)
158(-)
204 (-)
134(-)
96(71)
119(93)
176(-)


383(82)
TSS
(mg/1)

113(-)
57(-)
70(-)
50(50)
33(-)
9K-)


9(76)
27(25)
6(-)
35(-)
195(0)
36(47)
71(89)
24(27)
21(55)
24(-)
46(-)
20(38)
10(97)
60(-)


66(23)
Total
O&G Phenols
(mg/1) (Mg/D

	 100(-)
ao(-)
— —
128(2)
	 100(-)
6(-) 370(-)


4U-)
	 186(-)
	 	
	 91(-)
	 	
	 	
40(-)
56(-)
	 	
	 	
240(-)
	 	
	 	
12(-)


192(0) 29(97)
Total
Chromium
(MS/1)

	
29(-)
	
22(-)
17(-)
45(-)


	
42(-)
	
18(-)
	
	
265(61)
14(13)
	
	
	
146 (-)
	
138(-) ]



Total
Sulfide
(PB/1)

	
60(-)
	
	
	
67(-)


	
92(-)
	
14K-)
	
	
185(-)
27(-)
	
	
	
	
	
U93(-)



Color
(APHA Units)

	
	
	
	
	
309(-)


225 (-)
	
	
	
	
	
	
—
	
	
	
	
719(-)
	



Source:  EPA Industry 308 Study

-------
             1.5
           75
        0.8--
ro
01
     ui
    uj
    v>
    qc
        0.6--
        0.4-•
        0.2-•
                                                              FIGURE VII-1
                                DETENTION  TIME VS AERATION HORSEPOWER PER  UNIT VOLUME OF  BASIN
                                               PLANTS WITH ACTIVATED SLUDGE  TECHNOLOGY
                   O
 A
A
     A

     A
   \
   AY
                      O
                     A
 O
                                       °
1.9

A
1.7
 I
A
                                               A

                                              O
                                                  LEQEND

                                               A Meeting 1977 BPT limitations

                                               O Not meeting 1977 BPT limitation*
                                                                                                               O
                                                                                           A	334
                                                                                           A—514
                                                                                           A—417

                                                                                           A— 331,384,384

                                                                                           O	381

                                                                                           A	703
                                                                                   O
                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                                       .— 513
                                                                                                                       — 7000
                                                                                                                             .1200
                    24       48       72       96      120      144      168      192
                                                         DETENTION TIME, hrs.
                                                           216
                                                 240
                         264
288
312

-------
                              TABLE VII-13
                    PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter
10006
                                      Mill
10015
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
D
48
343
Average Effluent Concentration,
Benzene
Hexachlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4-Benzofluoranthene
Anthracene
Pyrene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
m
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
17
16
658
92
ND
52
TA
25


(100)
(100)


(100)
(100)
(100)
.(100)








(NC)

(92)
(96)
CNR)
(88)
(100)
(83)
(NR)
(99)
D
77
160
ug/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
31
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
270
21
72
TA
161
110
1779
TA
1030
298
795
Subcategory
Average
(Removal, %) ug/1 %
(100)
(100)


(100)
(NC)
(100)
(»R)


(NO
(NO
(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
(84)
(100)
(NC)
(NR)
(NR)
(17)
(57)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(53)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
16
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
135
21
36
14
89
384
936
TA
541
154
410
100
100
100
100
100
NC
100
50
100
100
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
84
100
NC
NR
NR
55
77
NR
44
50
42
NR
76
Note:   ND indicates "not detected."
       NA indicates "not analyzed."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program   262

-------
                              TABLE VII-14
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
                                      Mill
Parameter
20011
20021
Discharge type D I
Detention, hrs 36 24
Mixing, hp/mil gal 67 145
Subcategory
Average
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %) ug/1 %
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
1 , 2 -Di chlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichloroben2ene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
2 , 4-Dimethylphenol
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
Methylene Chloride
Trichlorofluorome thane
Naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Heptachlor
Antimony (Total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
TA
TA
19
TA
23
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
374
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
TA




(NC)

(97)

(95)
(NR)
(96)
(NC)
(NC)

(100)

(NC)
(100)
(NR)
(NC)
(NC)

(NC)

(NC)
(NC)
(61)
(100)

(NC)
TA
TA
1,257
TA
ND
TA
TA
12
TA
ND
TA
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
34
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
12
TA
TA
29
(NC)
(100)
(74)
(100)

(9)
(65)
(98)
(68)

(NC)

(MR)
(NR)
(77)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(63)

(100)
(100)
(17)
(17)

(100)
(NR)
(NC)
(NC)
(17)
TA
TA
629
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
15
TA
17
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
204
TA
TA
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
11
TA
TA
20
NC
100
74
100
NC
9
81
98
82
NR
96
NC
NR
NR
89
.100
100
100
32
NC
100
100
17
17
NC
100
31
100
NC
17
                                  263

-------
Parameter
                              TABLE VII-14 (Cont.)
        Mill
20011          20021
Arsenic (Total)
Asbestos (MFL)*
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
TA
24
ND
584
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
10,296
(NC)
(NR)
(100)
(NR)
(50)


(100)
(MR)

(NC)
(NR)
16
NA
TA
142
28
TA
58
ND
64
TA
35
3,371
(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
(49)
(38)
(HR)
(NR)
(100)
(NR)
(8)
(NC)
(24)
13
24
TA
363
19
TA
29
ND
37
TA
23
6,834
NC
NR
100
25
44
NR
NR
100
NR
8
NC
12
* Values reported as million fibers per liter.

Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                  264

-------
                              TABLE VII-15
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                LOW WATER USE PROCESSING MILLS (GENERAL)
Parameter
Mill
30*
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal
Chloroform
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-tmtyl Phthalate
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Asbestos (MFL)**
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
10
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
12
37
84
120
50
2300
(79)
(100)
(62)
(100)
(NR)
(100)
(100)
(NC)
(NR)
(5)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
Subcategory
Average
, %) ug/1 %
10
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
12
37
84.
120
50
2300
79
100
62
100
NR
100
100
NC
NR
5
NR
NR
NR
NR
 * Data is for POTWs to which mill discharges.
** Value reported as million fibers per liter.

Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                  265

-------
                              TABLE VII-16
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (SIMPLE)

Parameter
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal


Average Effluent
Acenaphthene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobeuzene
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Pentachlorophenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Mill
40023
D
120
38


Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
ND (100)
ND (100)
ND (100)
TA (NC)
ND (100)
12 (NC)
17 (NC)
TA (NR)
TA (NC)
ND (100)
TA (NC)
36 (NR)
19 (NC)
13 (NR)
TA (NC)
ND (100)
TA (NC)
105 (26)
17 (NR)
12 (NC)
TA (NC)
248 (26)





Subcategory
Average
HaZiX
ND 100
ND 100
ND 100
TA NC
ND 100
12 NC
17 NC
TA NR
TA NC
ND 100
TA NC
36 NR
19 NC
13 NR
TA NC
ND 100
TA NC
105 26
17 NR
12 NC
TA NC
248 26
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace.amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program

                                  266

-------
                              TABLE VII-17
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                 WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (COMPLEX)
Parameter
Mill
40160
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/rail gal
   D
 240
  20
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
Ethylbenzene
Penta chlo rophenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Beta-BHC
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
32
ND
29
56
12
ND
TA
ND
17
TA
140
290
210
(100)
(100)
(MR)
(100)
(99)
(MR)
(90)
(100)
(MO
(100)
(94)
(NR)
(MR)
(43)
(13)
Subcategory
Average
%) ug/1 %
ND
ND
32
ND
29
56
12
ND
TA
ND
17
TA
140
290
210
100
100
NR
100
99
NR
90
100
NR
100
94
NR
NR
43
13
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                  267

-------
                                                     TABLE VII-18
                         PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                                        WOVEN FABRICJ1NISHING_MILLS (DESIZING)
ro
o>
CO
Parameter
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal

Acenaphthene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethane
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
1 , 2-Tr ans -Dichloroethylene
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
1,2-Dichloropropane
1 , 3-Dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Dichlo rob romome thane
Trichlorofluoromehtane
Chlorodibromomethane
Naphthalene
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
40
D
48
88

ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
40034*
I
86
45
Average
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
51 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
40059
D
72
41
Mill
40072
D
120
57
Effluent Concentration,
TA (NR)
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (91)
ND
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
58 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (84)
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND
ND
40081*
I
_
-
40097
D
39
248
40099
D
48
63
ug/1 (Removal, %)
ND
33 (42)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
44 (NR)
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
TA (86)
58 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
TA (92)
ND (100)
ND
ND
TA (25)
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND (100)
12 (64)
TA (NR)
ND
ND
TA (50)
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
2138 (NR)
ND
ND (100)
ND (100)
ND (100)
       Data is for POTWs to which the mill discharges.

-------
                                                TABLE VII-18 (Cont.)
Parameter
40
40034*
40059
Mill
40072
Average Effluent Concentration
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Di-n-octyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Gamma -BHC
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
10
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
31
TA
56
18
105
TA
ND
22
ND
TA
ND
225

(100)

(NC)

(100)

(NR)




(NC)


(NC)
(41)
(NC)
(NC)
(100)
(NR)
(NC)

(100)

(100)

(NR)
ND
ND
ND
35
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
25
100
ND
ND
ND
90
ND
ND
ND
800



(78)

(57)

(100)


(NR)

(72)


(100)


(48)
(96)

(100)

(7)

(100)

(62)
ND
TA
12
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
23
ND
ND
50
TA
TA
19
39
TA
74
TA
70
ND
40
ND
142

(NC)
(100)
(93)

(NC)

(100)

(NR)

(100)
(87)
(100)

(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
(11)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(7)

(NC)

(NR)
ND
ND (100)
ND
TA (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
24 (1?)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
TA (NC)
ND (100)
ND (100)
TA (47)
15 (42)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
110 (27)
40081*
40097
40099
ug/1 (Removal, %)
ND
ND
TA (NC)
15 (76)
TA (85)
TA (41)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
51 (NR)
TA (69)
TA (100)
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
53 (79)
55 (59)
210 (13)
ND
ND
49 (NR)
ND (100)
15 (NR)
ND
90 (59)
ND
TA (92)
ND (100)
87 (21)
TA (NR)
TA (34)
ND
TA (46)
ND
ND
ND
TA (47)
TA (50)
ND
ND
15 (2)
21 (40)
ND
TA (83)
27 (49)
212 (NR)
ND
ND
ND (100)
TA (100)
ND
ND (100)
137 (71)
ND
ND
ND
231
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
960


(100)
(NR)

(100)






(54)


(NC)


(100)
(100)



(100)

(100)

(75)
* Data is for POTWs to which mill discharges.
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."
Source:  Field Sampling Program

-------
                                                     TABLE VII-18 (Cont.)
    Parameter
40103
40120
      Mill
40145      40146      40150      40156
ro
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
D
45
120
D
168
63
D
120
57
D
120
16
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1
Acenaphthene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Tr i Chlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
2 ,4 , 6-Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
1 , 2-Trans-Dichloroethylene
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
1 ,3-Dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Dichlorobromome thane
Trichlorofluoromehtane
Chi orodibromome thane
Naphthalene
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pent a chl o r opheno 1
Phenol
ND
ND
ND
TA (94)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12








(100)




(100)
(100)

(100)
(100)






(100)
(100)
(77)
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3018 (NR)
ND
ND
89 (NR)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
21 (89)
D
40
150
D
24
115
Subcategory
Average
(Removal, %) ug/
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

(100)
(100)

(100)



(100)
(NR)
(NC)

(100)



(100)




(100)



(100)
(100)
ND
TA (50)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (89)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (89)
TA (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND (100)
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
239
TA
TA
171
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
1 %
67
64
50
65
96
100
100
100
69
67
NC
NR
100
100
100
NR
77
41
NR
NR
NC
85
100
100
100
99
96

-------
                                                     TABLE VII-18 (Cont.)
ro
     Parameter
40103
40120
      Mill
40145      40146
40150
40156
Subcategory
Average
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %) ug/1 %
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Di-n-octyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Gamma -BHC
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND (100)
ND
58 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
410 (66)
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
50 (NR)
23 (NR)
ND
ND (100)
32 (62)
TA (NR)
ND (100)
ND
93 (60)
ND (100)
ND (100)
ND
429 (39)
TA (95)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
111 (NR)
ND
ND
12 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
50 (48)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
370 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA (NC)
NA (NC)
ND
ND (100)
26 (49)
TA (5)
61 (11)
ND (100)
ND (100)
NA (NC)
ND (100)
ND
45 (30)
18 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
ND
TA (NR)
ND
TA (84)
ND (100)
ND
TA (NC)
ND
TA (NC)
TA (9)
30 (96)
ND
ND (100)
ND
40 (NR)
ND
ND (100)
ND
5100 (35)
TA (100)
ND
TA (NC)
TA (NC)
ND
ND
TA (NC)
ND
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
67 (NR)
ND
22 (NR)
67 (8)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
27 (NR)
27 (NR)
ND
55 (33)
ND
21 (NR)
ND
426 (NR)
34
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
18
TA
TA
17
14
TA
15
32
45
13
TA
32
TA
TA
ND
711
60
43
55
NC
58
NR
50
NR
49
43
60
NR
20
38
50
58
58
3
59
50
59
100
78
100
36
     Note:  NA indicates "not analyzed."
            ND indicates "not detected."
            TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
            NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
            NR indicates "no removal."
                                  Source:  Field Sampling Program.

-------
                              TABLE VII-19
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (SIMPLE)
Parameter
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
50108
D
22
64
Mill
50112
D
32
148
50116
D
60
75
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
Acenaphthene
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
Chloroform
1 , 2~Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
1,3-Dichloropropylene
2 , 4-Dimethylphenol
Kthylbenzeae
Trichlorofluoromethane
Naphthalene
2-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Fluorene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
23
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
10
TA
130
ND
TA
TA
60
ND
80
570
(100)
(92)
(100)
(100)

(100)
(100)
(100)
CNR)
(NR)
(NR)
(78)


(100)
(100)
(NR)
(100)

(100)

(17)

(NC)

(NR)
(NC)
(78)

(88)
(NR)
(40)

(20)
(NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
17
ND
ND
673
ND
ND
32
104
ND
24
ND
ND
41
TA
49

(100)








(100)

(100)
(NR)

(100)
(63)



(NR)
(100)
(100)
(NR)


(NR)
(NR)
(100)
(NR)

(100)
(NR)
(NR)
(16)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
70
TA
20
92
TA
48
NA
150
NA
56
68

(100)


(100)
(100)




(100)

(100)


(100)
(NR)

(NR)

(100)

(100)
(NC)
(30)
(NC)
(NR)
(NR)
(NC)
(20)
(NC)
(NR)
(NC)
(3)
(NR)
Subcategory
Average
ug/1 %_
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
16
ND
TA
ND
TA
TA
ND
342
23
TA
21
109
TA
27
TA
70
21
49
229
100
97
100
100
100
100
100
100
NR
NR
67
78
100
NR
100
100
21
100
NR
100
50
59
100
NR
30
NR
NR
26
100
36
NR
47
NR
8
5
Note:  NA indicates "not analyzed."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."
Source:   Field Sampling Program
                                272

-------
                              TABLE VII-20
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (COMPLEX)
Parameter
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
50013
D
24
133

Mill
50035
D
72
37

50099
D
48
65
Subcategory
Average
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
Acenaphthene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1,2 , 2-Tetrachloroethane
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Butyl benzyl Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phatalate
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
41
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
317
TA
24
454
TA
TA
TA
14
TA
47
ND
151
16
54

(100)


(100)
(52)
(NR)

(NC)
(NC)

(NC)
(100)

(100)
(NR)
(100)
(NC)
(100)

(100)

(64)
(NC)
(33)
(12)
(NC)
(NR)
(NC)
(69)
(72)
(25)

(NR)
(NR)
(28)
TA
TA
ND
135
ND
ND
128
ND
ND
ND
14
ND
36
ND
TA
21
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
676
ND
TA
ND
66
ND
40
TA
52
11
77
(NC)

(100)
(NR)


(100)



(87)

(NR)

(NC)
(70)

(NC)




(74)
(66)
(NC)
(NR)
(100)
(NC)
(100)
(NR)
(100)
(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
(30)
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
20
TA
ND
ND
26
TA
TA
TA
TA
40
ND
TA
TA
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
83
ND
TA
21
12
13
TA
TA
87
21
1046

(NC)
(100)
(NC)


(41)
(NC)


(77)
(NC)
(100)
(NR)
(100)
(NR)

(100)
(100)
(100)

(NC)

(39)

(NC)

(NC)
(100)
(NC)
(26)
(100)
(NC)
(60)
(67)
(30)
ug/1 %
TA
TA
TA
48
ND
TA
63
TA
TA
TA
13
TA
15
TA
TA
24
ND
TA
TA
ND
ND
TA
109
TA
11
404
TA
TA
10
31
TA
32
TA
97
16
392
NC
100
100
NR
100
52
47
NC
NC
NC
82
NC
67
NR
100
23
100
100
100
100
100
NC
69
53
33
6
100
NR
100
35
66
63
NC
30
34
29
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount,11 less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."
Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                273

-------
                              TABLE VII-21
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                  KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILLS (HOSIERY)
Parameter
Mill
5H034
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
  I
 12
250
Subcategory
Average
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %) ug/1 %
Acrylonitrile
Naphthalene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
400 (75)
TA (NR)
ND (100)
14 (NR)
172 (NR)
ND (100)
TA (NR)
ND (100)
199 (70)
14 (NR)
97 (87)
112 (NR)
400
TA
ND
14
172
ND
TA
ND
199
14
97
112
75
NR
100
NR
NR
100
NR
100
70
NR
87
NR
Note:   ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                   274

-------
                              TABLE VII-22
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                         CARPET FINISHING MILLS
Parameter
60008
Mill
60034
             60037
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
  I
 48
 73
 D
96
44
                D
              192
               40
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1  (Removal,
                                                                  Subcategory
                                                                    Average
Note:  NA indicates "not analyzed."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
Acenaphthene
Chlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Chloroform
1 , 2-Diphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Dichlorobromomethane
Naphthalene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Fluorene
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
45
18
ND
ND
ND
105
ND
356
ND
TA
ND
NA
NA
NA

(100)

(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(25)
(36)



(NC)

(NR)
(100)
(NC)

(NC)
(NC)
(NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
27
ND
ND
ND
NA
TA
170
46
ND
25
79
33
130








(100)
(NR)



(NC)
(NC)
(NR)
(2)
(100)
(24)
(19)
(21)
(NR)
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
10
11
ND
TA
11
ND
TA
28
TA
ND
13
ND
260
(96)

(NR)
(100)



(100)
(NC)
(47)
(NR)
(100)
(NR)
(79)

(NC)
(56)
(NR)
(100)
(54)
(100)
(42)
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
18
18
TA
ND
TA
58
TA
179
25
TA
TA
46
17
195
96
100
NR
100
100
100
100
100
63
28
NR
100
NR
79
NC
NR
53
50
62
37
61
21
                                  275

-------
                                                TABLE VII-23
                    PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                                        STOCK & YARN FINISHING MILLS
Parameter
70009
70072
     Mill
70081     70087     70096
70120
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
D
62
46

Average
Acenaphthene
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Bis(chloromethyl) Ether
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-Dicixlorobenzene
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
2 , 4-Dimethyphenol
2 , 6-Dinitro toluene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Trichlorofluorome thane
Naphthalene .
N-uitrosodi-n-propylamine
Penta chl o ropheno 1
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
10
TA
ND
ND
ND

25
ND




(NR)



(NR)
(NC)




(100)


(NR)
(NC)


(100)

(7D

D
55
140

D
120
114

D
126
14
D
65
107
D
24
150
Subcategory
Average
Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %) ug/1 %
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA

134
ND
(100)

(100)




(NR)
(100)






(100)


(NC)


(47)

(NR)

ND
TA
ND
27
TA
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
12
ND

169
TA

(NR)

(90)
(NR)
(100)
(79)
(77)

(88)

(100)
(100)
(100)

(100)
(NC)

(87)

(NR)
(100)

(65)
(NR)
ND (100)
TA (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND (100)
TA (NR)
ND
ND

TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
48 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND

40 (NR)
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
TA
ND
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
TA
11
TA
TA
TA
TA

65
TA
100
NR
100
90
NR
100
79
39
80
88
100
100
100
100
100
100
NC
NR
94
NR
NR
82

34
NR

-------
                                                TABIE VII-23 (Cont.)
Parameter
                           Mill
70009       70072     70081     70087     70096     70120

Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Fluorene
Indeno(l,2,3-cd) Pyrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Beryllium (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Mercury (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Average
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA (38)
ND
ND
ND
TA (62)
110 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
91 (62)
Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
ND
12
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
NA
TA
290
ND
29
160
NA
160
NA
57
100

(20)



(100)


(NR)



(NC)
(NC)
(55)
(100)
(NR)
(NR)
(NC)
(20)
(NC)
(16)
(23)
TA C58)
TA (NR)
ND (100)
TA (NR)
ND (100)
ND
TA (NR)
TA (99)
13 (50)
ND (100)
157 (4)
TA (47)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
76 (NR)
119 (NR)
ND
12 (NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
250 (50)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
30
96
172
ND
ND
35
ND
ND
720


(100)





(100)

(NC)



(NR)
(68)
(NR)
(100)

(35)


(28)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
TA (NR)
ND
ND (100)
ND
ND
ND
NA (NC)
ND (100)
TA (17)
30 (59)
ND (100)
ND
TA (NC)
ND
ND
ND
170 (43)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
10
ND
36
ND
ND
ND
TA
865


(100)





(100)
(100)

(NC)


(NR)
(72)

(NR)


(100)
(NR)
(NR)
Sub category
Average
ug/1 %
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
30
TA
TA
TA
71
61
34
35
TA
33
ND
11
366
29
30
100
50
100
100
NR
99
70
100
21
47
NR
50
22
50
33
25
NC
52
100
8
34
Note:  NA indicates "not analyzed."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program

-------
                              TABLE VII-24
                     PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                  IN THE TREATMENT OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                      FELTED FABRIC FINISHING MILLS
Parameter
Mill
80025
Discharge type
Detention, hrs
Mixing, hp/mil gal
   D
 160
  60
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1  (Removal,
                                                               Subcategory
                                                                 Average
Naphthalene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Asbestos (MFL)*
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
56
TA
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
35
ND
32
45
(NR)
(88)
(31)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(NC)
(NR)
(100)
(44)
(NR)
56
TA
18
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
35
ND
32
45
NR
88
31
100
100
100
100
NC
NR
100
44
NR
* Value reported as million fibers per liter.

Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                                   278

-------
Mill
                          TABLE VII-25
                 PERFORMANCE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE
                     IN THE REMOVAL OF COLOR
Average Color, ADMI (pH =7.6)
  Influent        Effluent       Average Removal, %
10013
20021
40081
40097
40156
50112
50013
5H034
70081
70120
80025
343*
390
148
253
380
278
121
816
134
312
194
113
210
62
880
114
187
82
898
114
208
283
68
43
58
NR
70
33
32
NR
15
33
NR
* Value for untreated wastewater from finishing plant.

Note:  NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Field Sampling Program
                              279

-------
disks.   While  the  physical  structures  differ, the biological
process is the same in all of these systems.

As wastewater contacts the  supporting  media,  a  thin  film  of
biological  mass__  develops  and  coats  the  surfaces.   The film
consists primarily of bacteria, protozoa and fungi that  feed  on
material  in the wastewater.  Organic matter and dissolved oxygen
are extracted from the wastewater and the metabolic end  products
are  released.   Because  the  biological mass layer is anaerobic
near the supporting media, hydrogen sulfide, methane and  organic
acids  are  generated.   Periodically the mass separates (sloughs
off) from the supporting media and is carried through the  system
with  the  hydraulic  flow.   The  sloughed  biomass is typically
removed in a clarifier.

Trickling filters are classified by hydraulic or organic  loading
as  low  or high rate.  Low rate filters have a hydraulic loading
rate of 9350 to 37400 cu m/hectare/day (1 to 4 mil gal/acre/day),
an organic loading rate of 136 to 454  kg/hectare/meter/day  (300
to  1000  Ib  BOD5/acre ft/day), a depth of 1.8 to 3.0 m (6 to 10
ft), and no recirculation.  High rate filters  have  a  hydraulic
loading  rate  of  93500 to 374000 cu m/hectare/day (10 to 40 mil
gal/acre/day),  an  organic  loading  rate   of   453   to   2265
kg/hectare/meter/day   (1000 to 5000 Ib BOD5/acre ft/day), a depth
of 0.9 to 3.0 m (3 to  10 ft), and a recirculation rate of 0.5  to
4.   High rate filters have one or two stages.  The most suitable
trickling filter media are crushed stone or gravel  graded  to  a
uniform  size  within  the  range of 2.5 to 7.6 cm (1 to 3 in. in
diameter.  The media must be strong and durable so that  it  does
not deteriorate.

Biological  towers  are similar to conventional trickling filters
but with manufactured media instead of  crushed  rock  or  gravel
media.   The manufactured media are corrugated plastic packing or
rough-sawn  redwood  slats,  both  of  which  are  effective   in
retaining biological films.  The advantages of this type of media
are  a  high specific surface  [(sq m/cu m)  (sq ft/cu ft)], a high
percentage  of  void  volume,  uniformity   for   better   liquid
distribution,  light weight allowing construction of deeper beds,
resistance to chemical reactivity, and the ability to treat  high
strength  and  unsettled wastewaters.  Biological towers are used
in flow patterns similar to normal high rate natural media filter
systems.  For strong wastewater, two towers are set in series and
settled solids from the final clarifier are returned to the first
tower influent.  Because of the increased void  space,  activated
sludge  will  build up in the flow and the system will perform as
both a filter, with fixed biological growth, and as a  mechanical
aeration  system.   Biological beds have a hydraulic  loading rate
of up to 0.8  1/sec/sq  cm  (2 gpm/sq ft), an organic  loading  rate
of  from  0.4  to  2.4  kg/cu  m/day)  (25 to 150 Ib BOD5/1000 cu
ft/day), and a depth of 6.1 m  (20 ft).
                                280

-------
The rotating biological disk makes use of the advantages  of  the
manufactured  plastic  media used in the packed tower to increase
the contact time between  the  wastewater  and  fixed  biological
growth.   A  series  of  disks  constructed of corrugated plastic
plate and mounted on a horizontal shaft are placed in a tank  and
immersed  to approximately 40 percent of the diameter.  The disks
rotate as wastewater passes through the tank  and  a  fixed  film
biological  growth,  similar  to  that on trickling filter media,
adheres to the surface.  Alternating exposure to  the  wastewater
and  the oxygen in the air results in biological oxidation of the
organics in the wastes.  Biomass sloughs off, as in the trickling
filter and packed tower  systems,  and  is  carried  out  in  the
effluent for gravity separation.  Direct recirculation usually is
not practiced with the rotating biological disk.

     Industry  Application  -  Based on the industry survey there
are only three textile mills  that  utilize  biological  beds  in
their wastewater treatment systems.  Two direct discharging woven
fabric  finishers use trickling filters.  One of these mills uses
a modified approach to the standard filtration process.  The beds
are square, 4.3 to 4.9 m  (14  to  16  ft)  deep,  wastewater  is
applied  continuously,  and  forced  ventilation  insures aerobic
conditions  throughout.   The  system  obtains  96  percent  BOD5.
reduction.   The  other  mill uses a standard high rate trickling
filter as a polishing process after activated  sludge  treatment.
The  overall system performance is 98 percent BOD5. removal and 93
percent COD removal.  The third mill uses a  rotating  biological
disk  as  an  intermediate step between filtration and biological
aeration.   This  mill  is  a  direct  discharger  and  practices
recovery of dyestuff.

Stabilization   Lagoons   Stabilization  lagoons  are  a  popular
biological treatment process.  They are often called  lagoons  or
oxidation   ponds   and   are  classified  aerobic,  facultative,
anaerobic, and polishing.   They  are  used  extensively  in  the
treatment of municipal wastewater in small communities and in the
treatment  of  industrial  or  combined  industrial  and muncipal
wastewaters that are amenable to biological treatment.

Aerobic lagoons contain bacteria and  algae  in  suspension,  and
aerobic  conditions  prevail throughout the depth.  Wastewater is
stabilized as a result  of  the  symbiotic  relationship  between
aerobic  bacteria  and  algae.   Bacteria  break  down  waste and
generate carbon dioxide and  nutrients  (primarily  nitrogen  and
phosphorus).   Algae,  in  the  presence of sunlight, utilize the
nutrients and inorganic carbon; they in turn supply  oxygen  that
is  utilized  by  aerobic  bacteria.  Aerobic lagoons are usually
less than 45  cm  (18  in)  deep  (the  typical  depth  of  light
penetration)  and  are  periodically  mixed  to  maintain aerobic
conditions throughout.  In order to achieve effective organic and
suspended solids removal with  aerobic  lagoons,  some  means  of
removing algae (coagulation, filtration, multiple cell design) is
                               281

-------
necessary.   Algae  have  a  high  degree  of mobility and do not
settle well using conventional clarification.

In facultative lagoons,  the  bacterial  reactions  include  both
aerobic  and anaerobic decomposition.  The symbiotic relationship
between aerobic bacteria and algae exists, as in aerobic lagoons,
and anaerobic decomposition takes place by bacteria that feed  on
settled  solids.   Facultative  lagoons are up to 1.5 m {5 ft) in
depth and require the same types of provisions for removing algae
if effective pollutant removals are to be realized.  Most of  the
textile   mills   reporting  use  of  stabilization  lagoons  are
operating facultative lagoons.

Anaerobic lagoons are anaerobic throughout their depth  and  have
the  advantage of a low production of waste biological sludge and
low  operating  costs.   Stabilization  is  accomplished   by   a
combination  of  precipitation  and  anaerobic  decomposition  of
organics to carbon dioxide, methane, other gaseous end  products,
organic  acids,  and  cell  tissue.  Lagoons are constructed with
depths up to 6 m (20 ft) and steep side  walls  to  minimize  the
surface  area  relative  to  total volume.  This allows grease to
form a natural cover, which retains heat, suppresses  odors,  and
maintains anaerobic conditions.  Wastes enter near the bottom and
the  discharge  is  located  on the opposite end below the grease
cover.    Sludge   recirculation   is   not   necessary   because
gasification  and the inlet-outlet flow pattern provides adequate
mixing.  The anaerobic lagoon is not  particularly  suitable  for
treating textile wastewaters, with the possible exception of wool
scouring waste.

Polishing  ponds  serve  as  a  polishing  step  following  other
biological treatment processes.  They are often called maturation
ponds and primarily  serve  the  purpose  of  reducing  suspended
solids.   Water  depth is generally limited to 0.6 or 1.0 m (2 or
3) ft and mixing is usually provided by surface aeration at a low
power-to-volume ratio.  Polishing ponds are popular  as  a  final
treatment  step for textile wastewater treated with the extended-
aeration activated sludge process.

     Industry Application - Current use of stabilization  lagoons
by  the  textile  mills  surveyed  is summarized in Table VII-26.
Forty-four direct dischargers and 17 indirect dischargers  report
using  stabilization  lagoons  as part of their treatment system.
Three direct dischargers rely on facultative  lagoons  alone  for
treatment;  15 use facultative lagoons following aerated lagoons;
25 use polishing lagoons following activated sludge; and one uses
a polishing lagoon after activated sludge and prior  to  chemical
coagulation.   Fifteen  indirect  dischargers rely on facultative
lagoons alone  for  treatment,  one  uses  a  facultative  lagoon
following  an aerated lagoon, and one uses two parallel anaerobic
lagoons prior to activated sludge.
                               282

-------
                                                 TABLE VII-26
                USE OF STABILIZATION LAGOONS BY TEXTILE INDUSTRY - RESULTS OF INDUSTRY SURVEY
Subcategory
Facultative Lagoon
Direct    Indirect
Aerated Lagoon +
Facultative Lagoon
Direct    Indirect
* One mill follows polishing lagoon with chemical coagulation.

Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977.
Activated Sludge
+ Polishing Lagoon
Direct    Indirect
1.
2.
4.
5.

no
CO
CO
6.
7.
8.
9.

Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Woven Fabric Finishing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Fabric Processing


Hosiery Processing
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
All Subcategories
0
0
2

0


0
0
0
1
0
3
2
0
3

7


2
0
2
1
_o
17
0
2
3

3


0
3
4
0
_0
15
0
0
0

0


0
0
1
0
_q
1
1
0
11

5*


0
2
5
1
_0
25
0
0
0

1


0
0
0
0
JO
1

-------
     Historical Data - Only one mill reported both  influent  and
effluent   monitoring  data  for  the  lagoon  portion  of  their
treatment  system.   However,  several  of  the  mills  employing
facultative  lagoons alone for treatment or pretreatment provided
effluent data.   These data are presented in  Table  VII-27.   The
general  effectiveness  of  the  lagoons  can  be  established by
comparing the effluent concentration with those presented earlier
in this section for aerated lagoons and activated sludge.

     Field Sampling - Although a  number  of  textile  mills  use
polishing  lagoons  as  a  final  treatment  step  (see  Industry
Application), there are  limited  historical  data  available  to
demonstrate   the   effectiveness  of  the  lagoons  in  treating
conventional, nonconventional and toxic pollutants.  Sampling was
conducted around the  polishing  lagoons  at  a  stock  and  yarn
finishing  and at a felted fabric processing mill where polishing
ponds are used  after  activated  sludge  treatment.   Analytical
results   do  not  demonstrate  any  significant  improvement  in
effluent quality.  Because only single 24 hour composite  samples
were  obtained,  these  results are not conclusive.  The detailed
results of this sampling  episode  can  be  found  in  the  field
sampling results in the administrative record for mills 70120 and
80025.

Chemical Processes

Coagulation/Sedimentation    Suspended   sol ids   (TSS)   are   a
significant constituent of most textile  mill  wastewaters.   The
larger  solids  are  removed in preliminary treatment steps but a
variety of colloidal particulates remain  even  after  biological
treatment.   Besides  fiber,  these  solids include color bodies,
soaps, fine mineral particulates, oil and grease and  microscopic
organisms.   The  wastewater  from  carpet  mills, other adhesive
related processing mills, and nonwoven  manufacturing  facilities
may,   in   addition,  contain  considerable  amounts  of  latex.
Coagulation/sedimentation can be used to remove these pollutants.

Coagulation is  the  process  by  which  chemicals  are  used  to
destabilize suspended material so that the particles agglomerate.
Two  forces,  hydration,  which  results in a protective shell of
water molecules, and electrostatic charge  keep  small  particles
apart and lead to a stable, colloidal suspension.  Most colloidal
particles  carry  a characteristic negative charge and are unable
to  coalesce  because  of  to   this   electrostatic   repulsion.
Neutralization  of  these  repulsive  forces  by  the addition of
multivalent cations attracts the particles together.  The  weight
of the coagulated particles results in sedimentation (20).

The  most effective inorganic coagulants for wastewater treatment
are alum  (aluminum sulfate),  copperas   (ferrous  sulfate),  lime
(calcium  hydroxide),  ferric  chloride, and ferric sulfate.  The
multivalent  cation  (Al+3,  Fe+3)  enters  into  a   series   of
hydrolytic  reactions  to  form  multivalent  positively  charged
                                284

-------
                              TABLE VII-27
                  PERFORMANCE OF STABILIZATION LAGOONS
         IN THE TREATMENT OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
Subcategory    Mill
Discharge
Average Effluent Concentration, mg/1
    BODS         COD         TSS
4c
4c
4b
5b
5b
5a
5c
7
7
8
8
40014
40065
40038
50023
50045
50069
5H049
70023
70122
80027
80014
Direct
Direct
Indirect
Indirect
Indirect
Indirect
Indirect
Indirect
Indirect
Direct
Indirect
53
35
482
325
145
141
211
233
111
17
79
175
115
2186
810
-
862
548
634
789
-
-
14
35
18
40
-
-
-
59
945
29
179
Source:  EPA Industry Survey, 1977
                                 285

-------
hydrous oxide species  that  are  adsorbed  onto  the  negatively
charged  colloid.   This  neutralizes  the  colloidal  system and
allows the particles to agglomerate.

Because these chemical reactions are instantaneous, a  rapid  mix
process  is  used to mix the coagulant with the wastewater.  This
brief mixing provides a  complete  dispersion  of  the  coagulant
throughout   the   wastewater   but   is   not  long  enough  for
agglomeration to take place.  The second stage  of  the  process,
flocculation,  promotes  interparticle  contact of the stabilized
colloids to form a floe that is removed in the final stage of the
process, sedimentation.

In addition to the coagulants noted, polyelectrolytes  (polymers)
are  used  as  coagulants  or as coagulant aids.  These compounds
contain repeating units of small molecular  weight,  combined  to
form  a  molecule of colloidal size.  Each of the repeating units
carries one or  more  electrical  charges  or  ionizable  groups.
Because   of   their   large   size,   the   major   benefit   of
polyelectrolytes is an increase in floe size.   It  is  generally
agreed   that   a   "bridging"   mechanism   is  responsible  for
flocculation  enhancement.   One  end  of  the  polymer  molecule
attaches  itself to the surface of a suspended particle at one or
more sites and the free end is able to adsorb  onto  yet  another
suspended  particle  forming  a  "bridge"  between the two.  This
union increases the mass  of  the  colloidal-polymer  system  and
increases  the  settling  velocity.   As the particle settles, it
entraps other  colloids  and  polymers  and  thus  clarifies  the
wastewater with a "sweep floe" effect.

     Industry  Application  -  Thirty-four  of the wet processing
mills surveyed report that chemical coagulation  is  employed  in
their  wastewater  treatment  system.  Sixteen of these mills are
direct dischargers,  15  are  indirect  dischargers,  2  practice
complete  recycle  and  one  discharges  to an evaporation lagoon
after coagulation.  At 13 of these mills, coagulation is used for
the treatment of latex or printing wastewater, 10 of these  mills
are indirect dischargers, which is two-thirds of all the indirect
discharge  mills  that  identify  coagulation  as  part  of their
treatment system.  Of the direct  dischargers  using  coagulation
for treatment of wastewater other than latex or print wastes, two
employ  it  as  a  last  step after biological treatment, six add
polymer and/or alum to the effluent from an aeration basin  prior
to secondary sedimentation, two coagulate as an intermediate step
between  activated  sludge  and  filtration, and two coagulate in
place of biological treatment.  The use  of  coagulation  at  two
mills was unclear from the survey results.

     Historical  Data  -  Based on the above breakdown, there are
only two mills of the thirty-four presently using  coagulation  as
their   principal   treatment  process  and  6  mills  (4  direct
dischargers and  2 recycle) that employ coagulation as an advanced
treatment  measure.   However,  because  of  the   nature  of  the
                               286

-------
historical  data  available  from these mills, i.e., influent and
effluent data for the entire treatment systems, the effectiveness
of the chemical coagulation process alone cannot  be  determined.
The performance of the treatment systems that include coagulation
are  presented  in  Table  VII-20.   The concentrations generally
represent average values for the year 1976 for those  mills  that
provided historical monitoring data.

Literature/Research    Coagulation   of  textile  wastewater  has
received considerable attention from the engineering and research
communities.  Much of the work is general and  does  not  address
adaptability  to  high  volume  textile  discharges.  Some of the
studies are specific to individual wastewater streams and are not
applicable to total mill  effluent  performance.   The  following
cases  offer relevant information on studies that are applicable.
In addition to the laboratory and full-scale  studies  presented,
two  mills  with full scale systems were sampled during the field
sampling program.  The results of this sampling are included with
the other cases.

In case 1_ a laboratory  study  performed  in  1974(68)  evaluated
coagulation   using  alum  in  removing  color  from  a  dyehouse
effluent.  The effluent was from a woven  fabric  finishing  mill
that processes cotton-polyester broadwoven fabrics.  The types of
processing  performed  and  the  types  of  dye utilized were not
provided by the author.

The  mill's  dyehouse  wastewater,  boiler  blowdown,   and   air
conditioning condensate were being treated in a two-stage aerated
lagoon.   Approximately  50  percent  removal of BOD was achieved
prior to discharge to a small creek.

The study used a jar  test  apparatus  to  conduct  a  series  of
coagulation  investigations  using  various dosages of alum.  The
results, which are  presented  in  Table  VII-29,  establish  the
feasibility   of   removing  COD  and  color  from  the  dyehouse
wastewater prior to biological treatment.

In  case  2  a  laboratory  study  was  performed   to   evaluate
coagulation  of  textile  mill printing waste.  The waste studied
was collected from the discharge line of the printing  department
of   a  large  woven  fabric  finishing-desizing  facility.   The
facility dyes and/or prints sheets, and  the  wastewater  streams
resulting from the dyeing and printing operations are segregated.
The   waste  from  the  printing  department  contained  printing
pigment, adhesives, an acrylic latex emulsion, and varsol  (print
paste  carrier).   These  constituents are typically suspended in
the wastewater in particulate  or  colloidal  form  and  are  not
readily   solubilized   by   microorganisms   when  subjected  to
biological treatment.

A series of jar test  experiments  were  performed  using  ferric
chloride,  ferric  sulfate and aluminum sulfate.  The experiments
                                287

-------
                                                       TABLE VII-28
                                   PERFORMANCE OF CHEMICAL COAGULATION IN THE TREATMENT
                                           OF TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
ro
oo
GO
Sub cat-
egory
Mill
Coagulant(s)
Treatment Step
BODS, mg/1
Inf# Eff
COD, mg/1
Inf# Eff
TSS,
Inf#
mg/1
Eff
(Direct Dischargers)
2
4b
4b*
4c
4c
4c*

4c*
5a
5a
5a
7
7
8

20009
40022
40126
40130
40145
40150

40156
50030
50052
50112
70072
70105
80016

Alum, Polymer
Alum
-
-
Polymer
Ferric Chloride,
Lime
-
-
Polymer
Polymer
Alum, Polymer
Copperas, Lime
-

Secondary Clarifier
Secondary Clarifier
Flotation Unit
Secondary Clarifier
Secondary Clarifier
Coag/Floc - Raw Waste

-
Coag/Floc - Secondary
Secondary Clarifier
Injection Prefiltration
Secondary Clarifier
Secondary Clarifier
Flotation-Post Biolo-
gical
150
83
-
200
-
-

760
334
-
279
327
60
-

25
14
51
51
7
4

12
24
24
5
20
15
6

900
308
-
845
846
1,400

1,600
1,265
-
934
1,572
331
-

_
152
482
663
164
99

248
206
272
196
480
129
-

175
43
-
82
-
168

420
-
-
41
26
31
-

64
35
188
142
54
30

99
40
65
7
23
11
14

(Indirect Dischargers)
2
4a*
4c*
4a**
4a*

4a*
20022
40001
40081
40112
40124

40144
Lime
Lime, Alum
Ferric Chloride
Aluminum Chloride
Alum

Alum
Coag/Floc - Raw Waste
Flotation
Coag/Clarify-Print Waste
Flotation-Print Waste
Coag/Clarify-Print Waste
(Recycle Mill)
Flotation
_
-
-
-
322

298
_
250
420
341
126

10
1,328
-
-
-
1,985

-
556
400
695
885
263

1,550
_
-
-
-
460

-
560
30
118
206
72

5
    * Fabric printing is a significant portion of production.
   ** Latex and PVC coating operation.
    # Influent indicates raw waste concentration not influent to coagulation/sedimentation.

   Source:   EPA Industry Survey,  1977.

-------
                          TABLE VII-29
                  CASE 1 - LABORATORY STUDY OF
            CHEMICAL COAGULATION ON DYEHOUSE EFFLUENT
Total
Alum Dosage, mg/1
as







A12(S04)3 18H20
660
660
550
440
440
440
330
COD,
Inf*
935
903
1,590
1,030
973
954
805
mg/1
Eff**
490
471
598
525
590
573
398
Soluble
COD,
Inf
582
-
667
' 730
-
740

mg/1
Eff
429
-
559
335
-
519

TSS,
Inf
132
-
590
-
-
-
"
mg/1
Eff
49
-
12
-
-
-
"
Color,
Inf
12,800
10,200
8,800
7,700
11,000
12,200
11,800
APHA
Eff
580
288
428
450
442
340
690
 * "Inf" represents dyehouse effluent
** "Eff" represents supernatant from jar test after 1 hr settling

Source:  Reference 68.
                          TABLE VII-30
        CASE 2 - LABORATORY STUDY OF CHEMICAL COAGULATION
                   ON A PRINTING WASTE STREAM
Dosage, mg/1
Coagulant of Metal+3
Ferric
Ferric
Chloride
Sulfate
Aluminum Sulfate
25
25
25
PH
6.
7.
6.
6
1
6
Turbidity, JTU
Inf Eff
270
270
270
19
26
14
COD,
Inf
2,100
2,100
2,100
mg/1
Eff
665
155
235
Source:  Reference 69.
                              289

-------
reported here consisted of:  placing a one-liter  sample  into  a
standard  flocculation vessel and stirring at 100 rpm; adding the
desired quantity of coagulant and adjusting the pH  with  HC1  or
NaOH;  mixing  for  one minute after pH adjustment at 100 rpm and
flocculating for two minutes at 10 rpm;  and  quiescent  settling
for  30  minutes  followed by analysis.  Results are presented in
Table VII-30 for removal of suspended and colloidal materials.

In case 3. the results of a full-scale investigation of  activated
sludge  and  alum  coagulation treatment of the wastewater from a
knit fabric finishing - simple processing  mill  are  summarized.
The   investigations  were  supported  by  an  EPA  Demonstration
Grant(24), and were conducted over a 1 year period.

At the time of the study, the mill was  producing  velour  fabric
for  the  apparel  trade (approximately 56 percent), nylon fabric
for the automotive industry (approximately 13 percent), fabric of
polyester/nylon blends for the uniform  trade  (approximately  13
percent),  and  various  other  fabrics  each at less significant
production levels.

During the study period, the mill's daily production ranged  from
a  low monthly average of approximately 14,790 kg  (34,000) Ibs to
a high monthly average of approximately 24,800 kg   (57,000)  Ibs.
Average  daily  production  was  approximately  20,900 kg (48,000
Ibs).  The production was pressure  beam-dyed  (approximately  54
percent),  atmospheric  beck-dyed  (approximately  27 percent), or
pad-dyed  (approximately 17 percent).  Approximately 30 percent of
the dyestuff utilized was of the disperse class  and  20  percent
was  of  the  acid  class.   Besides  dyeing,  the production was
scoured  and  various  functional  finishes  (water   repellents,
softeners, and flame retardants) were applied.

The   wastewater  treatment  system  included  heat  reclamation,
equalization, activated sludge (aerated lagoon  plus  clarifier),
alum  coagulation, chlorination, and mechanical sludge processing
(horizontal scroll centrifuge).  Each component of  the  treatment
system  was  evaluated.   The performance of the alum coagulation
component throughout the study period is presented  in Table  VII-
31 for the parameters of primary concern here.

As part of the field sampling program sampling was  performed at a
woven  fabric  finishing-desizing  mill  that  performs desizing,
scouring, bleaching and dyeing to produce finished  woven  goods.
Piece  dyeing  accounts  for  approximately  90  percent  of  the
production.  No production figures were reported for the sampling
period.   The  processing  operations  result  in   a   wastewater
discharge of 4,730 cu m/day (1.25 mgd).

Wastewater  treatment  at this mill consists of static screening,
mixed equalization, aeration (1 basin), secondary   sedimentation,
chemical   addition,   clarification,   a   polishing   pond  and
disinfection   (chlorine).    Aeration    detention   time    is
                                290

-------
                          TABLE VII-31
          CASE 3 - FULL SCALE CHEMICAL COAGULATION AT A
                   KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILL
Parameter/Pollutant
    Influent
(yearly median)"
   Effluent
(yearly median)*
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TOG, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Dissolved Solids, mg/1
Phenolics, ug/1
Color, APHA Units
Chromium, ug/1
Copper, ug/1
Lead, ug/1
Nickel, ug/1
Zinc, ug/1
Mercury, ug/1
122
1,056
200
368
619
30
804
360
30
28**
-I A*Xi»Ad
i(Jnn
220
1.8**
33
416
105
122
600
40
320
280
ND
23**
10**
110
1.7**
 * Samples were collected daily and daily analyses were performed
   for all parameters listed except phenolics and metals; the
   samples for these parameters were combined into a composite
   sample and analyzed once per month.
** average value

Note:  ND indicates "not detected."

Source:  Reference 70.
                              291

-------
approximately  24  hours, and air is provided by surface aerators
with a total power-to-volume ratio of approximately 325  kwh/1000
cu m (115 hp/million gal).

Three 24 hour composite samples were collected over a typical 72-
hour  period  of  operation of the raw waste stream, the effluent
from the biological clarifiers, the effluent  from  the  chemical
clarifiers, and the effluent from the chlorine contact tank.  The
results  presented  in Table VII-32 demonstrate the effectiveness
of chemical coagulation in treating  toxic,  nonconventional  and
conventional pollutants.

Sampling  was  also  performed at a stock and yarn finishing mill
that used chemical coagulation after aerated  equalization.   The
processing  operations  result in a wastewater discharge of 1,770
cu m/day (467,000 gpd).

Wastewater  treatment  at   this   mill   consists   of   aerated
equalization,  chemical addition (ferric chloride), flocculation,
clarification, and filtration.  The discharge from the  treatment
plant is recycled for reuse in the mill operations.

Three 24 hour composite samples were collected over a typical 72-
hour  period  of operation at the discharge from the equalization
basin, at the discharge from the chemical clarifiers, and at  the
discharge from the clear well following the filters.  The results
are presented in Table VII-33.

     EPA/Industry  Field  Studies     In  a joint research effort
between EPA and the textile industry (ATMI, NTA, and CRI),  pilot
plant  studies  were conducted during 1977 and 1978 at 19 textile
mills to  evaluate  the  effectiveness  of  alternative  advanced
wastewater treatment technologies.  The studies were performed on
the  effluent  from  treatment  systems  using  extended aeration
activated  sludge.   One  of  the   technologies   was   chemical
coagulation using a 6,245 liter (1,650 gallon) reactor/clarifier.
Prior  to  initiating  the  pilot  plant studies, jar testing was
performed  to  determine  the  coagulant(s)  and  dosage(s)  most
effective  for  removal of suspended solids and organic material.
Among  the  coagulants  evaluated  were  alum,  ferric  chloride,
polymers and lime, individually and in various combinations.  The
jar    tests    established    operating   conditions   for   the
reactor/clarifier  during  screening   (comparison)   experiments
against   other  treatment  modes.   Based  on  the  comparisons,
promising  modes  were  selected  for  more  extensive  study  in
candidate    process    evaluations.     The   effectiveness   of
precoagulation on  filtration  effectiveness  also  was  studied.
These experiments are discussed later (see Filtration).

Chemical  coagulation was included as the first treatment step in
the selected candidate process  modes  at  10  of  the  19  mills
studied.   Processing  information,  waste treatment information,
and statistical summaries of  the  results  of  the  pilot  plant
                               292

-------
                          TABLE VII-32
              FULL SCALE CHEMICAL COAGULATION AT A
             WOVEN FABRIC FINISHING (DESIZING) MILL
Parameter/Pollutant
Biological
 Effluent
Min  Max  n
Chemical Clarifier
     Effluent
    Min  Max  n
            Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
COD, mg/1                     184  343  3
TSS, mg/1                       7   13  3
Sulfide, ug/1                   4    41
Color, ADMI Units             107  135  3
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)    100  134  3

                      Toxic Pollutants ug/1
                     23
                     ND
                      3
                     40
                     47
          50  3
           3  3
           3  1
          70
          79
Total Phenols
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
14
ND
TA
12
61
TA
TA
26
ND
ND
11
416
17
13
130
28
71
10
13
27
49
95
36
434
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
16
ND
ND
ND
58
ND
ND
27
ND
36
13
406
40
22
140
16
70
TA
10
30
34
47
18
442
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Notes:   ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at less
        than 10 ug/1 in the influent and/or effluent:   Benzene;
        Chlorobenzene; 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene;  Chloroform;
        Ethylbenzene; Methylene Chloride; Dichlorobromomethane;
        Di-n-butyl Phthalate; Di-n-octyl Phthalate; Diethyl
        Phthalate; Anthracene; Tetrachloroethylene; Toluene;
        Cadmium.

Source;  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 40156, August 1978
                              293

-------
                          TABLE VII-33
           FULL SCALE CHEMICAL COAGULATION AT A STOCK
                     AND YARN FINISHING MILL
Parameter/Pollutant
 Raw
Waste
  Chemical Clarifier
       Effluent
Min       Max       n
            Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
COD, rag/1
TSS, mg/1
Sulfide, ug/1
Color, ADMI Unit
Color, ADMI Unit (pH 7.6)
736
58
420
140
114
426
30
25
71
75
722
65
170
108
108
                     Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Parachlorometa Cresol
2-Chlorophenol
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Total Phenols
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
10
ND
TA
ND
240
ND
69
ND
22
TA
200
23
40
63
146
51
141
ND
ND
60
ND
TA
92
ND
ND
66
TA
10
TA
51
16
TA
48
128
42
42
18
80
60
45
100
92
ND
32
110
140
190
26
78
24
12
98
148
51
1,790
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the influent and/or effluent:
        Benzene; Chlorobenzene;  1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane;
        2,4,6-Trichlorophenol; Chloroform; 2,4-Dimethylphenol;
        Ethylbenzene; Methylene Chloride; Trichlorofluoromethane;
        Di-n-butyl Phthalate; Diethyl Phthalate; Anthracene;
        Phenanthrene; Tetrachloroethylene; Toluene; Arsenic;
        Cadmium; Selenium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 70, August 1978.

                              294

-------
studies during the candidate process evaluations at each of these
mills  is  included in the administrative record.  In addition to
the regular  pilot  plant  testing,  sampling  was  conducted  at
selected   mills   to   evaluate   the  performance  of  chemical
coagulation in the treatment of toxic pollutants.   The  detailed
results  of  the sampling at each mill also are included in EPA's
administrative record.

The data from these studies are summarized in Tables  VII-34  and
VII-35 for wool finishing mills and for all other mills in Tables
VII-36 and VII-37.

Precipitation  Precipitation  is a chemical unit process in which
undesirable soluble metallic  ions  are  removed  from  water  or
wastewater  by conversion to an insoluble form.  It is a commonly
used  treatment  technique  for  removal  of  hardness  (calcium,
magnesium,  strontium, ferrous iron, and manganous ions and other
metals) and phosphorus.  The procedure involves alteration of the
ionic equilibrium to produce insoluble metallic  hydroxides  that
can  be  easily settled in a clarifier.  The hydroxide is usually
supplied in the form of lime (Ca(OH}2).
For example, a precipitation reaction involving
magnesium ions (Mg+2) with lime is:
                                            the  removal  of
Mg+2 + S04-2
                      Ca(OH}2  =  Ca+2  +  S04-2  +  Mg(OH)2
Metallic  hydroxides  have  an  optimal  pH  where  they are most
insoluble.  For Mg(OH)£, noted in the  equation  above,  10.8  is
considered  optimal.   When  precipitation  of  several metals is
required, a pH of about 9 is often useful in practice.

In order to precipitate hexavalent chromium (Cr+6),  a  pollutant
found  in  textile  wastewaters,  it first must be reduced to the
trivalent state (Cr+3).  The reducing  agents  used  are  ferrous
sulfate,  sodium  metabisulfate,  and sulfur dioxide.  If ferrous
sulfate is used, acid must be added for pH adjustment.

     Industry Application - Precipitation was not reported  as  a
treatment  method  by  any  of the direct or indirect dischargers
surveyed.  One possible reason why this technology is not favored
is that some of the auxiliary chemicals used in dyeing can act as
complexing agents with metals.  These chemicals act  as  chelates
and make the metals less susceptible to precipitation.

     Literature/Research - Literature describing the treatment of
textile  wastewaters  by  precipitation  is  limited.   The  only
applicable research study (21)  compared  chemical  precipitation
with lime and sulfide.
                                295

-------
                             TABLE VII-34
             SUMMARY OF RESULTS - EPA/INDUSTRY FIELD STUDIES
              CHEMICAL COAGULATION AT WOOL FINISHING MILLS
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
Parameter
     Mill
  B    B
Loading rate, gpd/sq ft
Alum as Al+3, mg/1
400  520  400
 35   35    7
                    Average Effluent Concentration

BOD, mg/1                      33   17* 2.5
COD, mg/1                     212  216  111
TSS, mg/1                      20   82   31
TOC, mg/1                      71   77   30
Total Phenols, ug/1            20*   -   41
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)    106    -   67
                           Subcategory
                             Average

                                18
                               180
                                44
                                59
                                41
                                87



Average Removal
BOD
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
80
75
81
75
0*
76*
93*
73
69
71
-
"

, Percent
56
33
41
10
27
30
Subcategory
Average
68
60
64
52
27
30
*Value represents a single data point and was not included in calcu-
 lating subcategory average.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  296

-------
                             TABLE VII-35
             SUMMARY OF RESULTS - EPA/INDUSTRY FIELD STUDIES
              CHEMICAL COAGULATION AT WOOL FINISHING MILLS
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Mill
 B
Loading rate, gpd/sq ft            400 - 520
Alum as Al+3, mg/1                  27 - 35
                                                           Subcategory
                                                             Average
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthlate
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
154 (90)
ND (100)
44 (MR)
14 (55)
32 (NR)
62 (NR)
41 (65)
16 (30)
30 (NR)
57 (25)
172 (NR)
5730 (11)
154
ND
44
14
32
62
41
16
30
57
172
5730
90
100
NR
55
NR
NR
65
30
NR
25
NR
11
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                 297

-------
                             TABLE VII-36
             SUMMARY OF RESULTS - EPA/INDUSTRY FIELD STUDIES
                          CHEMICAL COAGULATION
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
Parameter
BB
Mill
 Q    Q
EE
Subcategory               4b   4c   5b   5a   5a    6    7    7
Loading rate, gpd/sq ft  100  400  400  400  320  400  400  400
Alum as Al+3, mg/1       120   40    -   20   30        30
Anionic Polymer, mg/1      -           0.75 0.75    1
Cationic Polymer, mg/1     -    -   20    -        35        20
                              Average Effluent Concentration
                                          Average
BOD,
COD,
TSS,
TOC,
Total
Color


BOD
COD
TSS
TOC
Total
Color
Note:
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Phenols, ug/1
, ADMI Units
(pH 7.6)





Phenols

( ) indicates "
Source : EPA/ Indus try
12
162
60
43
65
189


50
56
38
55
27
50
3.6
352
51
72
-
263


50
8.9
9.8
4.9
-
1.2
less than"
Field
10
124
13
24
52
47

Average
48
50
69
12
14
69
value.
5.4
195
73
-
-
196

3.8
178
61
22
-
133

Removal,
29
26
0.4
-
-
19

59
38
10
29
-
50

7.4
142
28
26
60
164

(2)
93
26
36
(20)
44

6.1
83
19
6.8
-
90

Percent
85
68
61
69
49
54

24
29
14
18
-
73

80
22
41
37
-
64

6.3
166
41
33
49
141

Average
53
37
30
32
30
48

Studies
                                  298

-------
                             TABLE VII-37
             SUMMARY OF RESULTS - EPA/INDUSTRY FIELD STUDIES
                          CHEMICAL COAGULATION
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                                       Mill
Parameter/Pollutant
V
Subcategory
Loading rate, gpd/sq ft
Alum as Al+3, mg/1
Polymer, mg/1
4c
400
40
-
5b
400
-
20
                                                                 Average
               Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1  %
Benzene
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Phenol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
13 (NR)
16 (30)
34 (NR)
TA (33)
123 (NR)
17 (NR)
11 (81)
66 (NR)
ND
72 (10)
195 (NR)
TA (NR)
28 (33)
TA (NC)
226 (NR)
13 (29)
ND
14 (44)
TA (90)
m (100)
ND (100)
14 (35)
ND
48 (97)
TA
14
12
121
24
TA
69
14
TA
33
TA
36
122
NR
33
NR
15
15
33
22
45
91
50
35
10
49
Note:  NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  299

-------
The sulfide removes heavy metals from solution as it precipitates
because  metal  suIf ides  are  several  orders  of magnitude less
soluble than the corresponding metal hydroxides.  This process is
useful in  the  removal  of  hexavalent  chromium  because  prior
reduction to trivalent chromium is unnecessary.

A  wastewater  sample  from  the  aeration basin of a knit fabric
finishing-complex processing mill was used in the research.   The
mill  dyes 95 percent of the production.  The dyes are:  acid (64
percent), direct (32 percent), sulfur (2 percent),  dispersed  (1
percent),  and reactive (1 percent) dyes.  Analytical results are
summarized in Table VII-38.

Oxidation Oxidation is a chemical unit process that  is  used  in
wastewater  treatment for removal of color and ammonia, reduction
of  organics  and  reduction  of  bacteria  and   viruses.    The
disinfection  of wastewater with chlorine is the most common form
of oxidation used.  Other available and tested oxidants  include:
hydrogen  peroxide, potassium permanganate, chlorine dioxide, and
ozone.  Ozone oxidation is favored in the treatment of industrial
wastes.

Ozone (03,) is a faintly blue, pungent-smelling, unstable gas that
exists  as  an  allotropic  form  of  oxygen.   Because  of   its
instability,  ozone is generated on-site.  Ozone generators use a
corona discharge that  occurs  when  a  high-voltage  alternating
current  is  imposed  across  a  discharge gap.  Approximately 10
percent of the applied energy directly results in the  conversion
of  oxygen  into ozone.  Improvement in the conversion efficiency
is achieved if pure oxygen is used in the  generator  instead  of
air.

Ozone   reacts   rapidly   with   most   organic   compounds  and
microorganisms  present   in   industrial   wastewaters.    Ozone
oxidation  is  practical  for  color  removal in small segregated
textile wastewater streams but it is not  suitable  for  reducing
the  organic  concentration of high volume streams because of the
high dosages required.

     Industry Application  -  Sixty  direct  dischargers  and  11
indirect  dischargers  report using oxidation.  Fifty-nine of the
direct dischargers chlorinate for disinfection only.   The  other
mill  adds  chlorine in a rapid-mix contact tank for disinfection
and color removal.   Four  indirect  dischargers  chlorinate  for
disinfection  only,  while five add chlorine, usually in the form
of hypochlorite,  to  control  color.   The  other  two  indirect
dischargers  recycle part of their effluents and add chlorine for
disinfection.  No survey data are available  to  demonstrate  the
performance of chlorine oxidation for removing color.

     Literature/Research - Ozone oxidation of textile wastewaters
to  remove  color  is  the  subject  of  several  engineering and
research studies.  Two of these case studies are discussed below.
                                300

-------
Metal
                          TABLE VII-38
                EFFECTIVENESS OF LIME AND SULFIDE
          IN THE PRECIPITATION OF TOXIC METALS FROM THE
                   UNTREATED WASTEWATER OF A
                   KNIT FABRIC FINISHING MILL
         Concentration,  mg/1
Raw Sample       Lime Effluent    Sulfide Effluent
Zinc
Nickel
Iron
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Silver
Total Chromium
3.2 0.11
0.05
2.3 0.17
0.01
0.50 0.03
0.10
0.05
0.93 0.08
0.09
-
0.19
-
0.01
-
-
0.05
Source:   Reference 21.
                             301

-------
In case 1_ Snyder and Porter (22) studied  the  effect  of  pH  on
ozone  reduction  of  organics and color in dye wastes from three
textile mills.  Ozone was  produced  from  compressed  air  by  a
commercial  electric-discharge  ozone generator and fed at a rate
of 0.5 g/hr through an experimental apparatus  containing  500-ml
samples  of  the dyehouse wastewater.  The studies were conducted
at room temperature (approximately 20°C) and a  contact  time  of
approximately  one  hour  was used.  To check the effect of pH on
ozone reactivity, each dye waste was studied at neutral,  acidic,
and  basic  pH values.  Adjustments in pH were made with sulfuric
acid and sodium hydroxide.

The  researchers  found  no  correlation  between  pH,  and   the
efficiency  of  ozonation  in  reducing  the  organics in textile
dyehouse wastewater.  The greatest COD removals occurred  in  the
acid  pH samples, but this is in contrast to the results obtained
by other researchers.  The COD removals  for  the  three  samples
were   8,   41  and  55  percent.   This  indicates  that  a  low
concentration ozone stream (1 g/1) is not feasible as the centra^L
organic treatment operation  for  textile  dyehouse  wastewaters.
Excellent color removal was observed in each sample tested, which
the  researchers  attributed  to  the susceptibility of the amine
function in the dye molecules to ozone attack.

In case 2_  the  Georgia  Department  of  Natural  Resources  (23)
investigated  ozone  treatment  and disinfection of tufted carpet
dye wastewater.  The studies used effluent samples from the  City
of  Dalton,  Georgia,  POTW,   Approximately  90  percent  of the
plant's flow originates from textile mills that  dye  and  finish
carpet.   The  wastewater  from  these  mills contain significant
amounts of unexhausted color bodies  and  auxiliary  organic  dye
chemicals.   The Dalton POTW was treating approximately 15,140 cu
m/day (40 mgd) by extended-aeration activated sludge.

The effectiveness of various dosages of  ozone  were  studied  by
monitoring  color,  COD,  organic carbon, suspended solids (TSS),
BOD5., total and fecal  coliform,  anionic  detergents,  dissolved
oxygen and ozone residual.

Grab  samples  were  collected  from  the  POTW  effluent on five
occasions between April 4 and June 21,  1973.   Portions  of  the
samples were placed in a 37.8 1 (10-gal) plexiglas contact column
and  ozone  was  injected  at  a  fixed  feed rate.  Samples were
withdrawn  from  the  column  for  analysis  at   specific   time
intervals.   Results of the investigations are summarized for the
parameters of most interest here in Table VII-39,

The researchers concluded that:

1.   True color was reduced to less than  30  APHA  Units  at  an
     ozone  dosage of 40 mg/1; suspended solids removal decreased
     that ozone dosage to 26.5 mg/1.
                               302

-------
                          TABLE VII-39
       CASE 2 - OZONATION OF TUFTED CARPET DYE WASTEWATER
                       SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Parameter
   Ozone
Dosage, mg/1
  Parameter Concentration, mg/1
Dalton Effluent   Ozonated Effluent
Color (Filtered)
Color (Filtered)
Color (Filtered)
Color (Filtered)
Color (Filtered)
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
SS
SS
SS
SS
BODS
BOD5
BODS
BODS
BODS
Biphenyl
Biphenyl
Biphenyl
Biphenyl
Biphenyl
Biphenyl
5
10
14
26
45
3
6
20
42
60
7
19
24
52
8
14
19
25
33
5
12
20
26
42
89
300*
300*
300*
300*
300*
130
130
130
130
130
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
21
21
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
125*
95*
60*
32*
18*
125
110
100
75
75
12
8
6
2
27
53
25
20
19
1.98
1.35
1.62
1.19
1.21
0.10
* APHA Units

Source:  Reference 23.
                             303

-------
2.
3.
A 40 percent COD reduction was achieved with a 45 mg/1 ozone
dosage;  suspended  solids  removal  did  not  significantly
enhance COD reduction.
Suspended solids were reduced by
with a 52 mg/1 ozone dosage.
approximately  90  percent
4.   The BOD5. was unchanged at all ozone dosages.

5.   Biphenyls were reduced from approximately  2  mg/1
     than 0.1 mg/1 with an ozone dosage of 89 mg/1.
                                                    to  less
     EPA/Industry  Field  Studies  - EPA and the textile industry
(ATMI, NTA, and CRI) conducted pilot plant  studies  during  1977
and  1978  at  19  textile  mills  to evaluate the performance of
advanced wastewater treatment  technologies  following  extended-
aeration  activated  sludge  biological treatment.  Ozonation was
tested using a 110 liter (29  gal)  contactor  [Schedule  80  PVC
column,  196 cm high and 29.5 cm inside diameter (77 in. high and
11.6  in.  inside  diameter)].   Ozone  was  generated   with   a
commercial ozone generator with a capacity of 6 g/hr (pure oxygen
feed)  and  fed  through  diffusers  of  70  mesh stainless steel
screen.  The contactors could be operated in either a batch or  a
continuous   mode.    The  offgases  were  sampled  to  determine
concentration of ozone for calculation of ozone utilization.

Ozonation was included in the selected process modes at 7 of  the
19  mills studied.  Multimedia filtration or chemical coagulation
plus multimedia filtration preceded the ozone  contactor  in  the
process    mode.    Processing   information, •  waste   treatment
information, and statistical summaries  of  the  results  of  the
pilot  plant  studies  during  the process evaluations at each of
these  mills  are   presented   in   detail   in   the   Agency's
administrative  record.   In  addition to the regular pilot plant
testing, sampling was conducted at selected mills to evaluate the
performance of ozonation in the treatment  of  toxic  pollutants.
Statistical  summaries  of  the  results  of  the toxic pollutant
sampling at each mill are also presented in the record.  The data
is summarized in Tables VII-40 through VII-43.  Data is presented
separately for wool scouring mills and other textile mills.

Filtration Wastewater filtration is  a  physical  unit  operation
that  removes  suspended  materials.   It  is  used  to polish an
existing biological effluent, prepare wastewater  for  subsequent
advanced  treatment  processes,  or reclaim wastewater for reuse.
Applications of filtration discussed in this section include:  1)
filtration  of  biological  treatment  effluent   alone   or   as
pretreatment for carbon adsorption or ozonation, 2) filtration of
chemically  clarified  effluent,  and 3) filtration of biological
treatment   effluent   following   in-line   chemical   injection
(precoagulation).
                                304

-------
                             TABLE VII-40
                           SUMMARY OF RESULTS
                     020NATION OF TEXTILE EFFLUENTS
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter
                   Mill
                    A
Ozone utilized, mg/1
Batch (B) or Continuous (C)
                  250
                    B
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
   Average Effluent Concentration

                   46
                  825
                  104
                  303

7.6)              265
        Average Removal, Percent

                  6.0
                  4.3
                   16
                  1.3

                   57
Subcategory
  Average

      46
     825
     104
     303

     265

Subcategory
  Average

     6.0
     4.3
      16
     1.3

      57
Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   305

-------
                              TABLE VII-41
                           SUMMARY OF RESULTS
                     OZOKATION OF TEXTILE EFFLUENTS
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
 Mill
  A
Ozone utilized, mg/1
Batch (B) or Continuous (C)
250
  B
                                                                Subcategory
                                                                  Average
               Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1  %
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
13 (24)
106 (NR)
1200 (NR)
43 (48)
250 (NR)
590 (NR)
ND (100)
5000 (NR)
1300 (NR)
460 (NR)
13
106
1200
43
250
590
ND
5000
1300
460
24
m
m
48
NR
NR
100
NR
NR
NR
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   306

-------
                             TABLE VII-42
                           SUMMARY OF RESULTS
                     OZONATION OF TEXTILE EFFLUENTS
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                               OTHER MILLS
Parameter
Subcategory
Ozone utilized, mg>
K
4a
a 49
AA
4c
163
D
4c
427
2
4c
60
Mill
Q
5a
1130-1500
S
7
5
S S
7 7
35 60
Batch (B) or
  Continuous (C)      C     C    C
                            Average Effluent Concentration
Average
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
(pH 7.6)

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
14
52
2.9
-
-
155


5.3
19
43
-
-
58
13
222
12
-
20
125


4.0
23
21
-
-
65
47
18 4
349 414
16
106
15*
264

Average
0 5
25
28
5.4
-
66
3
-
-
91

Removal
.9
11
_
-
-
59
.9
18
.0
15
-
13

j
16
92
66
33
-
88
5.5
81
29
12
22
168

Percent
17
14
5.5
7.4
-
17
12
126
16
12*
(20)
115*


15
0
0
0*
-
59*
10
102
22
7.7
(20)
77


0
16
18
0
.
68*
16
171
14
35
21
128

Average
8.0
25
26
11
-
59
*Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating
 average.

Note:  ( ) indicates "less than" value.

Source:   EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   307

-------
                             TABLE VII-43
                           SUMMARY OF RESULTS
                     OZONATION OF TEXTILE EFFLUENTS
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                               OTHER MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
Mill
 K
Subcategory
Ozone utilized, mg/1
Batch (B) or Continuous (C)
4a
49
 C
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)
                      Average
                      ug/1  %
Methylene chloride
Pentachlorophenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
15 (NR)
ND (100)
89 (NR)
TA (17)
TA (50)
44 (NR)
91 (NR)
32 (33)
65 (7)
17 (13)
218 (8)
15
ND
89
TA
TA
44
91
32
65
17
218
NR
100
NR
17
50
NR
NR
33
7
13
8
Note:  NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  308

-------
The   filtration   process   separates  suspended  material  from
wastewater by passing the  wastewater  through  porous  material.
The  mechanisms  responsible  for  removal  include:   straining,
sedimentation,  inertial   impaction,   interception,   adhesion,
chemical  adsorption (bonding and chemical interaction), physical
adsorption (electrostatic,  electrokinetic,  and  Van  der  Waals
forces),  and  two  accessory  actions  within  the  filter  bed,
biological growth and flocculation.   The  mechanisms  that  will
predominate  depend  on - the  wastewater  characteristics and the
characteristics of the filter  (media  composition;  grain  size,
shape,  density,  and  porosity;  bed depth; and filtration rate).
(20,24)

Filtration systems are broadly classified as  either  surface  or
in-depth.   Surface  filters  include  microscreens, diatomaceous
earth filters and moving  bed  filters.   These  filters  achieve
solids  removal  primarily by surface straining and, as a result,
yield  shorter  runs  between  backwashings.   In-depth   filters
include  deep-bed single,  dual, or multimedia units.  Graded sand
was commonly used in the past for in-depth filtration but  today,
garnet, gravel, resin beads, activated carbon and anthracite coal
are  also commonly used.  The use of multiple layers of different
media having specific gravities increasing in  the  direction  of
flow  permits  gradation  of  the  filter  bed  and  allows  more
efficient utilization of the total bed depth.

     Industry Application - Sixteen mills use filtration as  part
of  their  treatment  systems.  Ten are direct dischargers, three
are indirect dischargers,  and three  practice  complete  recycle.
Nine  of  the  ten  direct  dischargers use activated sludge or a
similar biological process prior to filtration.  Three  of  these
dischargers  also  use chemical coagulation or add coagulants in-
line prior to filtration (precoagulation).  Most  of  the  direct
dischargers   use  multimedia  filters  with  sand,  gravel,  and
anthracite media.  They are operated as tertiary filters and  are
pressurized.

The  filter  systems  used by the indirect dischargers include an
in-depth sand filter, a vacumite filter which separates the  floe
from   a   chemically .  treated  (coagulation  and  flocculation)
wastewater, and a system that included  a  multimedia  (sand  and
charcoal)   filter  following  biological  aeration.   Two  mills
practicing recycle are operated by  the  same  company  and  both
employ  multimedia  in-depth  filters  using  gravel,  sand,  and
anthracite media.  In both cases the  filtration  systems  follow
extended-aeration activated sludge and chemical coagulation.  The
third  recycle  mill  precedes  filtration  with  air  flotation,
biological aeration, and chemical coagulation/flocculation.

     Historical Data - Many of the filtration systems in  use  by
the  textile . industry  are  operated  to  polish biologically or
chemically treated effluents or to allow recycle.  The  available
data from these mills,  i.e.., influent and effluent for the entire
                                309

-------
treatment  system,  do  not  demonstrate the effectiveness of the
filtration systems alone.  However, the data presented  in  Table
VII-44  demonstrate  the  performance  of  the  entire  treatment
systems that include filtration.   The  data,  which  in  general
represent  the  results  jof  monitoring  during 1976, are average
values  for  those  mills  that  provided  historical  monitoring
reports.

     Field  Sampling  -  Little historical or research data exist
that demonstrate the performance of filtration systems.  Sampling
was conducted at five mills during this  study  to  provide  such
information.  The results are summarized in the following cases.

In  case ]_ two knit fabric finishing-simple processing mills that
discharge*~to a common treatment plant were sampled as part of the
EPA/Industry pilot plant field studies (Mill Q).  Descriptions of
the manufacturing operations, wastewater  treatment  system,  and
pilot plant studies are provided in the administrative record.

One 48 hour composite sample was collected at the influent to the
treatment  plant,  and  two  24  hour composite samples following
secondary clarification, and filtration.  The performance of  the
biological   system   and  multimedia  pressure  filter  for  the
treatment of conventional, nonconventional and  toxic  pollutants
is presented in Tables VI1-45.

Case  2_  is  a woven fabric finishing-simple processing mill that
performs flat bed and rotary screen printing to  produce  sheets,
towels,  and  bedspreads.   Rotary  screen  printing accounts for
approximately 90 percent of the production, which was reported as
30,000 kg/day  (approximately  65,000  Ib/day).   The  processing
operations  result in a wastewater discharge rate of 19.2 I/kg of
product (2.3 gal/lb of product) and a wastewater discharge of 570
cu m/day (150,000 gpd).

Wastewater treatment at this mill consists of equalization  (small
holding tank), grit removal, coarse screening, chemical  addition
(alum and caustic), fine screening (vibrating), chemical addition
(cationic polymer) and flocculation, dissolved air flotation  (300
gpm),  biological  aeration  (2  lagoons in series), disinfection
(chlorine), secondary clarification (reactor/clarifier  in  which
alum,  caustic,  and  anionic  polymer are added), and dual media
gravity filtration (sand and carbon).  Aeration detention time  is
approximately 170 hours, and air is provided by surface  aerators
at a power-to-volume ratio of approximately 3.56 kw/1000 cu m (18
hp/million  gal).   The  discharge  from  the  treatment plant  is
reused in the printing operations.

Samples were collected over a typical 48-hour period of operation
at the bar screen  prior  to  the  air  flotation  unit,  at  the
Parshall  flume  prior   to  the  aeration basins, at the chlorine
contact chamber following aeration, and at the effluent from  the
dual  media  filter.  The performance of the biological treatment
                                310

-------
                                    TABLE VII-44
                            EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS FROM
                          TEXTILE MILLS USING FILTRATION AS
                               A FINAL TREATMENT STEP
Subcat-                          Treatment    BOD5,  mg/1     COD,  mg/1     TSS,  mg/1
egory      Mill     Filter Type     Step       Inf*   Eff     Inf*   Eff     Inf*   Eff
5a
5a
5a
5a
5a
7
7
7

4a
50011
50022
50030
50104
50112
70042
70072
70081

40144
Multimedia
In-depth
Dual media
In-depth
-
Sand
In-depth
Multimedia
Pressure
Sand
In-depth
Multimedia
Pressure
Dual media
In-depth

Dual media
Pressure
Direct Discharge
Polishing - 159 -
Polishing - 33 - 188
Polishing 334 24 1265 206
Polishing 327 43 1261 427
Polishing 279 5 934 196
Post - 17 - -
Flotation
Polishing 327 20 1572 480
Polishing 218 23 800 312
Recycle
Polishing 298 10 - 1550
65>
'55
40
119 88
41 7
2,1
26 23
12 93

5
* Inf indicates raw waste concentration not influent to filtration.

Source:  EPA Industry Survey,  1977.
                                        311

-------
                          TABLE VII-A5
            CASE 1 - BIOSYSTEM AND MULTIMEDIA FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTZONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Untreated      Secondary   Filtration
Wastewater*    Effluent**  Effluent**
            Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Oil & Grease, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
_
782
17
324
-
288
„
312
28
303
59
187
                                                          233
                                                            6
                                                          476
                                                           48
                                                          192
                      Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Naphthalene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
2700
101
45
55
41
ND
840
95
14
44
10
36
36
15
12
56
ND
ND
ND
ND
15
17
ND
670#
32#
104#
ND
48#
ND
41#
13#
48#
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
17
ND
700#
32#
79#
10#
33#
ND
102#
TA#
84#
 * 48-hour composite sample
** average of two 24-hour composite samples
 # average of two 24-hour grab samples

Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

       The following pollutants also were detected but at less
       than 10 ug/1 in the raw waste, secondary effluent, and/or
       final effluent:  2,4,6-Trichlorophenol; 2-Nitrophenol.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 50112, October 1977
                             312

-------
system and reactor/clarifier-dual
Table VII-46.
media filter  is  presented  in
Case  3^  is  stock and yarn dyeing facility that performs package
dyeing of polyester, cotton and wool yarn. Dispersed dye  is  the
primary  dye class employed, although some acid and cationia cjyes.
also are used.  The processing results in an  average  wastewater
discharge rate of 154 I/kg of product (18.5 gal/lb of product).

Wastewater  treatment  at this mill consists of coarse screening,
neutralization, aeration [(1 basin with a total volume of 1990 cu
m (5,250,000 gal)], secondary clarification, dual  media  gravity
filtration   (sand   and  carbon)  and  disinfection  (chlorine).
Aeration detention time is approximately 120 hours,  and  air  is
provided  by  eight surface aerators with a total power-to-volume
ratio of approximately 2205 kw/1000 cu m (114  hp/mil  gal).   It
was  reported  that the carbon in the filter had not been changed
within the past two years;  therefore,  the  filter  may  not  be
functioning in an adsorptive capacity.

Samples  were collected over a 72-hour period of operation of the
raw wastewater, the secondary clarifier effluent,  and  the .dual
media  filter  effluent.  The performance of the activated sludge
system and dual media filter is presented in Table VI1-47.

Case £ is a  stock  and  yarn  finishing  mill.   The  processing
operations  result in a wastewater discharge rate of 13.1 I/kg of
product (1.6 gal/lb of product).

Wastewater  treatment  at   this   mill   consists   of   aerated
equalization,  chemical addition (ferric chloride), flocculation,
clarification and filtration.  The discharge from  the  treatment
plant is recycled for reuse in the mill operations,

Samples were collected over a typical 72-hour period of operation
at  the  discharge  from the equalization basin, at the discharge
from the chemical clarifiers and at the discharge from the  clear
well  following  the  filters.   The performance of the filter is
presented in Table VII-48.

Case 5^ is a knit fabric  finishing-simple  processing  mill  that
performs  scouring  and piece dyeing on polyester and arnel/nylon
fabric,  Premetallized  (13 percent) and  dispersed  (81  percent)
dyes  are the primary dyes employed at this mill.  The processing
operations result in a wastewater discharge rate of 83.4 I/kg  of
product (approximately  10.0 gal/lb of product).

Wastewater  treatment  at  this  mill  consists of neutralization
(alkali), equalization, aeration [total volume of 1135 cu m (0.30
million    gal)],    secondary    sedimentation,     coagulation,
clarification   and   filtration.   Aeration  detention  time  is
approximately 6 hours, and air is provided by surface aerators at
                                313

-------
                          TABLE VII-46
  CASE 2 - BIOSYSTEM AND REACTOR/CLARIFIER - DUAL MEDIA FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Biological
Influent*
Biological
Effluent*
Filter
Effluent*
               Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Sulfide, ug/1
(200)
 725
  32
  26
(200)
 (67)
 577
  17
  18
(200)
 (20)
 543
   4
  14
(200)
                      Toxic Pollutants>  ug/1
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl Chloride
4-Nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Toluene
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Thallium (Total)
19
160
56
13
34
32

45
200
81**
NS
Q f\ JLuJL
14**
TA
ND
TA
(10)
ND
24

ND
ND
52**
32**
32**
13**
TA
ND
TA
(10)
ND
16

ND
ND
27**
NS
NS
NS

 * average of two 24-hour samples
** reported as "less than" value

Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
       . NS indicates "no sample."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       ( ) indicated "less than" value.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the biological influent, biological
        effluent, and/or final effluent:  1,2-Dichloroethane;
        1,1,1-Trichloroethane; Tetrachloroethylene; Trichloro-
        ethylene; Beryllium; Cadmium; Chromium; Cyanide;
        Mercury; Silver; Zinc.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 40144, November 1977
                              314

-------
                          TABLE VII-47
            CASE 3 - BIOSYSTEM AND DUAL MEDIA FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Biological
Parameter/Pollutant Influent
Conventional &
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Sulfide, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
Toxic
Acrylonitrile
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Bis(chloromethyl) Ether
2,4, 6-Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa Cresol
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
2 , 4-Dichlorophenol
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Naphthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Clarifier
Effueut
Min Max n
Nonconventional
226
25
810
44
131
Pollutants,
ND
270
59
16
29
56*
20
56
190
18
ND

490
24
18
310
TA
10
116
100
12
6
112
ug/1
ND
19
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

76
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
Filter
Effluent
Min Max
n
Pollutants
150
170
21
8
124

(100)
43
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
13
23

340
TA
ND
TA
38
ND
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
122
38
17
9
105

ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND

80
ND
ND
TA
TA
ND
148
115
19
9
113

(100)
21
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
13

170
TA
ND
TA
TA
ND
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
* Represents sum of concentrations of 1,2-Dichlorobenzene;
  1,3-Dichlorobenzene;  and 1,4-Dichlorobenzene
                              315

-------
                          TABLE VII-47 (cont.)
Parameter
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Biological
Influent
156
19
34
49
(22)
(36)
TA
(50)
493
Clarifier
Effuent
Min Max n
141
TA
68
110
(22)
(36)
TA
ND
228
177
TA
91
132
35
(36)
TA
(50)
283
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Filter
Effluent
Min Max n
150
TA
12
20
(22)
42
11
ND
139
162
TA
57
84
(22)
50
15
(50)
436
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       ( ) indicates "less than" value.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the biological influent, clarifier
        effluent, and/or filter effluent:  Benzene; Hexachloro-
        benzene; Chloroform; Ethylbenzene; Fluoranthane; Methylene
        Chloride; N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine; Phenol; Butyl Benzyl
        Phthalate; Diethyl Phthalate; Anthracene; Fluorene; Pyrene;
        Beryllium; Cadmium; Cyanide; Mercury; Selenium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 70081, July 1978.
                                 316

-------
                          TABLE VII-48
                   CASE 4 - MULTIMEDIA FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Conventional &
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Sulfide, ug/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
Toxic
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
2 , 4 , 6-Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa Cresol
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
1 , 2-Dichl'orobenzene
Naphthalene
2-Nitrophenol
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Clarifier
Effluent
Win Max
n
Filter
Effluent
Min Max n
Nonconventional Pollutants
426
30
25
66
71
75
722
65
170
110
108
108
Pollutants,
ND
TA
ND
m
60
ND
TA
92
ND
TA
10
TA
51
16
TA
48
128
42
42
18
TA
80
TA
60
45
100
92
32
140
190
26
78
24
12
98
148
51
1790
3
3
3
3
3
3
ug/1
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
347
8
3
80
39
42

ND
TA
ND
25
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA
47
TA
48
TA
ND
58
119
41
29
523
27
3
109
92
88

28
14
ND
70
TA
13
100
ND
130
100
150
36
78
24
12
70
187
58
58
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

       The following pollutants also were detected but at
       less than 10 ug/1 in the influent and/or effluent:
       Benzene; Chlorobenzene; 2,4-Dimethylphenol; Ethylbenzene;
       Methylene Chloride; Trichlorofluoromethane; Di-n-butyl
       Phthalate; Diethyl Phthalate; Anthracene; Tetrachloro-
       ethylene; Toluene; Arsenic; Cadmium; Selenium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 70, August 1978.

                               317

-------
                          TABLE VII-49
        CASE 5 - REACTOR/CLARIFIER AND MULTIMEDIA FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
 Biological
  Effluent*
Min       Max
   Final
  Effluent*
Min       Max
             Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants

BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Oil & Grease,
Sulfide, ug/1
Total Phenols,
Color, APHA Units

                      Toxic Pollutants, ug/1



mg/1

> U8/1
nits
116
285
13
14
460
177
750
120
4477
272
44
10,000
214
875
11
238
12
4
130
133
120
14
1822
13
5
190
140
175
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Methylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Zinc (Total)
ND
69
ND
TA
10
140
66
TA
240
ND
130
ND
27
10
150
70
17
240
33
31
ND
TA
23
TA
19
ND
260
110
70
31
12
32
12
19
17
320
* Two 24-hour composite samples except for toxic metals which
  were 24-hour grab samples.

Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the influent and/or effluent:
        Benzene; 1,1-Dichloroethane; Chloroform; 1,1-Dichloro-
        ethylene; Ethylbenzene; Arsenic; Cadmium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 50030, May 1978.
                              318

-------
                          TABLE VII-50
                      CASE 6 - SAND FILTER
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Biological
 Effluent
Min  Max  n*
  Filter
 Effluent
Min  Max
            Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Sulfide, ug/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
154
44
8
TA
75
75
254
60
20
15
89
85
3.
3
3
3
3
3
107
28
ND
TA
70
70
                      Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
                                                        40  3
                                                        ND  3
                                                        14  3
                                                        77  3
                                                        77  3
Acrolein
Methylene Chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
28
TA
ND
81
36
54
14
48
87
28
50
41
87
44
65
17
69
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
ND
33
TA
ND
77
54
46
TA
43
190
33
34
89
84
84
64
15
94
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
* Three 24-hour composite samples except for toxic metals which
  were 24-hour grab samples.

Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the influent and/or effluent:
        Parachlorometa Cresol; Chloroform; Pentachlorophenol;
        Anthracene; Toluene;  Arsenic; Cadmium; Selenium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 50104, August 1978,
                              319

-------
a total power-to-volume ratio of approximately 14.7 kw/1000 cu  m
(750 hp/million gal).

Samples  were collected over a 48-hour period of operation at the
influent to the neutralization tank, at the  discharge  from  the
biological  clarifier and at the discharge from the filters.  The
performance of  the  reactor/clarifier  -  filtration  system  is
presented in Table VII-49.

Case  6  is  a  knit fabric finishing-simple processing mill that
knits, scours and dyes synthetic  bolt  cloth  of  polyester  and
acetate  fiber.   Pressure  piece  dyeing  with dispersed dyes is
performed  on  the  total  production  and  20  percent  of   the
production  is  scoured.   During  the field sampling, wastewater
flow averaged 984 cu m/day (260,000 gpd).

Wastewater treatment at this  mill  consists  of  fine  screening
(vibratory),   equalization   (mixed   with  nitrogen  addition),
aeration (two basins operated in series with  powdered  activated
carbon  added  to the first basin), secondary sedimentation, sand
filtration, disinfection  (chlorine)  and  post  aeration.   Total
detention  time in the aeration basins is approximately 48 hours,
and air is provided by  surface  aerators  at  a  power-to-volume
ratio  of  approximately  (15.7 kw/1000 cu m (80 hp/mil gal).  The
performance of the sand filter is presented in Table VII-50.

     EPA/Industry Field Studies -  In  a  joint  research  effort
between  EPA and the textile industry (ATMI, NTA, and CRI), pilot
plant studies were conducted during 1977 and 1978 at  19  textile
mills  to  evaluate  the  effectiveness  of  alternative advanced
wastewater treatment technologies.  The studies were performed on
the  effluent  from  treatment  systems  using  extended-aeration
activated sludge treatment.  One of the technologies was downflow
multimedia  filtration  using one of two filters 1.60 m in height
             in  diameter  (63  in.  in  height  and  14  in.  in
             The  filter  provided one foot (0.9-1.5 mm effective
and 0.355 m
diameter).
size), 30.5 cm (12 in. of sand, 0.4-0.8 mm effective
40.6 cm (16 in. of gravel 6-16 mm effective size).
                                                      size),  and
Multimedia  filtration  was  included  in  the selected treatment
technology at 18 of the 19 mills.   It  was  used  as  the  first
treatment  step  following  biological  treatment, both alone and
with the aid of a precoagulant.  Multimedia filtration  also  was
used   following  chemical  coagulation.   of  surface  area  and
contained 30.5 cm (12 in. of anthracite coal The  detailed  study
reports and analytical results are included in the administrative
record.

The  data  is  summarized in Tables VII-51 through VII-62 of this
section by subcategory (wool scouring mills, wool finishing mills
and other mills) and placement of the  filter  in  the  candidate
modes   (first   treatment   step,   first  treatment  step  with
precoagulant, and following chemical  coagulation).   The  tables
                                320

-------
                              TABLE VII-51
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CLARIFICATION*)
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter
          Mill
           A
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
          2.0
                      Average Effluent Concentration
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
           29
          807
          102
          289

          619
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
Average Removal, Percent

           37
           11
           45
          7.9

          2.8
Subcategory
  Average

      29
     807
     102
     289

     619

Subcategory
  Average

      37
      11
      45
     7.9

     2.8
* The multimedia filter was not preceded by chemical coagulation at this
  plant and no coagulant was used in the reactor/clarifier.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   321

-------
                              TABLE VII-52
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CLARIFICATION-)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
 Mill
  A
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
2.0
                                                           Subcategory
                                                             Average
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1  %
Phenol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Arsenic (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Zinc (Total)
17 (65)
14 (39)
83 (MR)
120 (MO
260 (NR)
400 (NR)
17
14
83
120
260
400
65
39
NR
NR
NR
NR
* The multimedia filter was not preceded by chemical coagulation at
  this mill and no coagulant was used in the reactor/clarifier.

Note:  NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                            322

-------
                              TABLE VII-53
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (FIRST TREATMENT STEP)
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
 Parameter
           Mill
            0
Loading  rate, gpm/sq  ft
          3.0
                         Average Effluent Concentration
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units  (pH 7.6)
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
*Total Phenols
Color
          2.7
          114
          6.9
           33
           40
           97
Average Removal, Percent

           54
           32
           82
          3.5
           30
           13
Subcategory
  Average

    2.7
    114
    6.9
     33
     40
     97

Subcategory
  Average

     54
     32
     82
    3.5
     30
     13
Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   323

-------
                              TABLE VII-54
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (FIRST TREATMENT STEP)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
Mill
 0
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
 3.0
                                                                Subcategory
                                                                  Average
               Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1   %
Parachlorometa Cresol
Methylene Chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Zinc (Total)
TA
47
42
ND
91
118
489
(78)
(NR)
(92)
(100)
(49)
(NR)
(46)
TA
47
42
ND
91
118
489
78
NR
92
100
49
NR
46
Note:  TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1
       NR indicates "no removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  324

-------
                              TABLE VII-55
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
           MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CHEMICAL COAGULATION)
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
                                       Mill
Parameter
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft


BOD5, mg/1
COD7 mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/I
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
(pH 7.6)

5.4

Average
20
203
15
41
-
-


6.6

7.0

3.0

Effluent Concentration
23*
157
31
69
-
-


Average Removal
BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
25
12
48
36
-
"•
0*
34
59
8.3
.
~
31
174
1.8
65
-
5.5*


, Percent
21
12
43
5.3
-
95*
2.0
84
7.2
27
33
65



13
22
78
11
19
4.0

Subcategory
Average
18
155
14
51
33
65

Subcategory
Average
20
20
57
15
19
4.0
* Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating
  subcategory average.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  325

-------
                              TABLE VII-56
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
           MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CHEMICAL COAGULATION)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
  Mill
   B
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
5.4-7.0
                                                           Subcategory
                                                             Average
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1
1 , 2,4-Trich.lorobenzene
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
94
14
12
12
103
105
41
118
116
73
158
5895
(39)
(68)
(14)
(63)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(8)
(NR)
94
14
12
12
103
105
41
118
116
73
158
5895
39
68
14
63
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
8
NR
Note:  NR indicates "no removal."
Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                              326

-------
                                                    TABLE VII-57
                                            SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                                    MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (FIRST TREATMENT STEP)
                                         TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                                     OTHER MILLS
Parameter
Sub category
Loading rate, gpffl/sq ft
K
4a
5.0
BB
4b
3.0
D
4c
4.4
T Y
4c 4c
5-0 5.0
Mill
Z
4c
3.0
Average Effluent
&BOD5, mg/1
-'COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
14
65
4.6
-
(50)
368

11
15
55
-
-
2.2
23
353
40
93
80
341

12
5.9
21
5.7
23
11
19
630
85
157
-
1035

18
17
36
10
-
0.2
8.5 7.5
478 90
17 10
144 14
530
177 175
Average
47 23
3.7 27
20 67
5.2 6.4
6.9
2.8 1.9
17
461
20
-
-
199
Removal
22
10
42
-
-
9.3
E
5b
3.0
Q
5a
2.0
W
5b
7-0
EE
7
7.0
S
7
5.0
Concentration
11
157
4.3
29
63
140
4.3
206
4.1
22
(20)
226
3.4
55
9.5
11
-
100
2.5
123
8.4
43
(20)
166
7.0
106
12
8.3
-
229
, Percent
29
36
90
4.1
8.3
12
45
24
91
18
-
4.3
26
25
64
18
-
5.4
18
13
46
2.7
-
4.9
78
9.1
65
19
_
9.3



Average
11
248
20
58
127
287
Average
30
17
54
9.9
13
5.8
Note:  ( ) Indicates "less than" value,

Source:   EPA/Industry Field Studies

-------
                              TABLE VII-58
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (FIRST TREATMENT STEP)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                              OTHER MILLS
                                        Mill
Parameter/Pollutant
K
BB
W
Subcategory 4a 4b 5b 5b
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft 5.0 3.0 3.0 7.0
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
Benzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Chloroform
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Methyl Chloride
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
ND
13
ND
ND
TA
ND

12
12
ND
TA
22
TA
77
TA
24
23
ND
TA
209




(46)


(43)


(NR)
(NR)

(33)
(NR)
(NC)
(8)
(69)
(NR)
(NR)

(NR)
(8)
TA
ND
ND
TA
19
ND
ND
ND
TA

TA
ND
ND
ND
55
101
103
18
43
96
ND
30
117
(100)

(100)
(23)
(NR)
(100)


(100)

(40)



(5)
W
0)
(NR)
(NR)
(9)

(8)
(25)
TA
TA
TA
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
212

11
TA
ND
ND
TA
TA
TA
ND
TA
96
TA
27
137
(20)
(NC)
(33)

(NC)

(33)

(NR)

(45)
(NC)


(85)
(31)
(34)

(75)
(18)
(NR)
(10)
(27)
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA

21
TA
ND
TA
763
ND
22
ND
54
86
ND
19
61
(20)
(33)
(50)





(NC)

(11)
(NC)
(100)
(NC)
(2)

(29)

(3)
(9)

(8)
(19)
Average
ug/1 %
TA
TA
TA
TA
TA
ND
TA
TA
58

14
TA
ND
TA
213
30
53
TA
33
75
TA
22
131
47
33
61
23
23
100
33
43
50

24
NR
100
33
23
18
20
35
20
9
NR
7
20
Note:  NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   328

-------
                                                  TABLE VII-59
                                          SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                                    MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (WITH PRECOAGULANT)
                                       TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                                   OTHER MILLS
Parameter
Sub category
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
Alum as AL+3, mg/1
Cationic Polymer, mg/1
Ferric Chloride, mg/1

CO
IS BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
K
4a
2.0
-
-
8


6.3
41
8.9
-
(50)
106
AA
4c
3.0
0.5
-
-


11
292
14
-
21
356
P
4c
3.0
1.5
-
_


15
104
20
23
-
127
P '
4c
5.0 5
1.5 2
-
-
Average

11
118
17
27
20*
-
Mill
P P
4c 4c
.0 7.0
.7 1.5
-
-
Effluent

8* 10
83* 113
12* 20
27* 25
0*
-
Average Removal
BODS
COD
TSS
TOG
Total Phenols
Color
57
44
40
-
NC
72
73
22
81
-
NC
3.8
26
12
23
4.3
-
1.0
0
1.5
46
20
60*
~
69* 10
24* 5.0
0* 45
7* 25
100*
— •*
z
4c
3.0
10
-
-
Q
5a
2.5 5
1
-
-
W
5b
.0
-
3
-
S
7
3-0
-
13
-
S
7
4.5
-
13
-
Concentration

17
438
35
-
-
240


7.1 2.6
258
28
18
-
-
48
13
10
-
68

6.5
59
21
20
-
56*

8.0
123
46
5.3
-
63*
, Percent
27
13
24
-
-
4.3
31
25
70
0
-
~
41
34
48
27
-
30
77
48
33
24
_
74*
86
0
27
25
-
69*






Average

9.5
159
22
18
36
179
Average
43
20
44
18
-
22
*Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating subcategory average

Note:  ( ) indicates "less than" value.
        NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies

-------
                              TABLE VII-60
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (WITH PRECOAGULANT)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                               OTHER MILLS

Parameter/Pollutant
Sub category
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
Polymer, mg/1

K
4a
2.0
-
Mill
DD W
4c 5b
1.0 5.0
3
Ferric Chloride, mg/1
Alum as Al+3, mg/1
                                           12
Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal, %)
Benzene
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Chloroform
Methylene Chloride
Penta chlo r opheno 1
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND

23
ND
16
31
ND
TA
85
18
23
55
13
275


(NC)
(100)
(100)

(NR)

(26)
(NR)

(NC)
(4)
(3)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
(NR)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

TA
ND
ND
ND
TA
110
28
ND
31
67
28
280






(NC)



(NC)
(NR)
(53)

(16)
(7)
(NR)
(NR)
TA
TA
114
ND
ND

21
ND
TA
753
11
ND
21
ND
45
72
15
62
(67)
(66)
(12)



(17)
(100)
(NC)
(1)
(NR)

(37)

(20)
(7)
(8)
(14)
Average
ug/1 %
TA
TA
41
ND
ND

18
ND
TA
261
TA
40
45
TA
33
65
19
206
67
66
12
100
100

9
100
26
1
NR
NR
31
3
12
5
3
5
Note:   NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   330

-------
                                                    TABLE VII-61
                                            SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                                 MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CHEMICAL COAGULATION)
                                         TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                                     OTHER MILLS
Parameter
Subcategory
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
BB
4b
1.5
V
4c
3.0
E
5b
5.0
Q
5a
3.0
Mill
Q
5a
3.0
Average Effluent
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
9.3
147
38
41
54
167

10
6.2
28
6.7
18
11
2.5
331
20
62
-
284

26
5.9
60
14
-
0.6
9.3
104
4.2
22
57
53

14
17
48
8.2
-
5.8
3.4
179
24
(20)*
-
195
Average
43
20
68
-
-
2.2
2.9
138
18
-
-
127
Removal
17
21
65
-
-
13
Q
5a
5.0
Concentration
3.1
134
9.2
20
-
-
, Percent
20
24
83
6.3
-
~
F
6
5.0

6.6
120
8.3
25
42
168

18
16
65
11
31
4.2
EE
7
3.0

(2)
67
7.6
33
(20)
43

_
34
71
9.4
-
8.3
S
7
5.0

5.5
67
12
6.4
(20)
95

18
21
37
8,7
-
2.0



Average
5.0
143
16
30
39
142
Average
21
18
58
9.2
25
5.9
* Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating subcategory average

Note:  ( ) Indicates "less than" value.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies

-------
                              TABLE VII-62
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
           MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION (AFTER CHEMICAL COAGULATION)
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                               OTHER MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
 V
                                       Mill
Subcategory
Loading rate, gpm/sq ft
4c
3.0
5b
5.0
               Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal.%)
                                  Average
                                  ug/1  %
Benzene
Chloroform
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Antimony (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
TA (23)
12 (NR)
19 (NR)
TA (71)
136 (NR)
14 (18)
25 (NR)
64 (NR)
ND
77 (NR)
234 (NR)
18 (NR)
ND (100)
TA (NC)
ND
TA (50)
40 (NR)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
TA (NR)
76 (NR)
29 (NR)
121 (NR)
TA
ND
TA
TA
15
25
73
12
18
37
38
53
178
NR
100
23
NR
25
36
NR
9
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Note:  ND indicates "not detected."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       NR indicates "no removal."
       NC indicates "not able to calculate removal".

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                              332

-------
summarize   the  performance  of  multimedia  filtration  in  the
treatment of traditionally monitored toxic,  nonconventional  and
conventional pollutants.

Hyperfiltration/Ultrafiltration Hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis)
is  a physical separation process that relies on applied pressure
(greater  than  osmotic  pressure)  to  force  flow   through   a
semipermeable  membrane  (permeable  to  water  but not dissolved
materials of a specific-molecular size).  The process is  capable
of  removing  suspended  particles  and  substantial fractions of
dissolved impurities, including organic and inorganic  materials.
The  membranes  are designed so that water and species smaller in
size than the rejection level of  the  particular  membrane  pass
through  while  larger species are rejected.  The process results
in two effluents, one relatively pure, and the  other  containing
the concentrated pollutants.

The  membrane is the most important aspect of the reverse osmosis
system.  Those most widely used are manufactured from  a  mixture
of   cellulose   acetate,   acetone,   formamide   and  magnesium
perchlorate.  Noncellulose synthetic polymer membranes also  have
been developed and are commercially available; however, these are
more  often  applicable  in  ultrafiltration  systems.   The most
common commercially  available  hyperfiltration  systems  include
tubular,  spiral wound and hollow fine fiber.  The tubular system
has a typical membrane area per unit volume of 65.65  sq  m/cu  m
(20  sq  ft/cu  ft)  and the membrane is situated along the inner
wall of a 1.27 cm (0.5 in.)  diameter  tube.   The  spiral  wound
system  utilizes  a  number of flat membranes separated by porous
spacers and rolled into a spiral; these systems typically provide
820 sq m of membrane surface per cu m (250 sq ft per  cu  ft)  of
volume.  The hollow fiber system utilizes microscopic fibers that
are  in  essence  very small tubes with thick walls.  Pressure is
applied from the outside of the tubes and the filtrate  (filtered
effluent)  flows  into  the  tubes.   The hollow fiber system can
provide from 6565 to 16,410 sq m of membrane surface per cu m  of
volume  (2000  to  5000  sq ft per cu ft).  The tubular system is
easiest to clean or replace and is usually employed in wastewater
applications.

Hyperfiltration systems usually operate at a pressure of 20.4  to
102.1 atm (300 to 1,500 psi) and have a flux rate on the order of
407  1/day/sq  m  (10  gal/day/sq  ft).   They  generally require
extensive  pretreatment  (pH  adjustment,  filtration,   chemical
precipitation,  activated  carbon adsorption) of the waste stream
to  prevent  rapid  fouling  or  deterioration  of  the  membrane
surface.

Ultrafiltration  is  similar  to  hyperfiltration and relies on a
semipermeable membrane and an applied driving force  to  separate
suspended and dissolved materials from wastewater.  The membranes
used  in  ultrafiltration  have  pores  large enough to eliminate
osmotic pressure as a factor which allows operation at  pressures
                               333

-------
as  low as 0.352 to 0.703 kg/sq cm (5 to 10 psi).  Sieving is the
predominant  removal  mechanism,  and  the  process  is   usually
applicable  for  removal  of  materials having a molecular weight
greater than 500 and a very small osmotic  pressure  at  moderate
concentrations.  Because of the larger pore sizes, flux rates for
ultrafiltration  are  normally  814  to 2035 1/day/sq m (20 to 50
gal/day/sq ft).  The  systems  have  been  used  for  removal  or
concentration   of  macromolecules  such  as  proteins,  enzymes,
starches, and other organic polymers.

     Industry Application - None of the  textile  mills  surveyed
during   this   study   report  the  use  of  hyperfiltration  or
ultrafiltration  in  their   end-of-pipe   wastewater   treatment
systems.
     Literature/Research
Both
hyperfiltration    and
ultrafiltration of textile wastewater has been studied by EPA and
others for several years.  A research project (25) funded by  the
EPA   Office   of   Research  and  Development  investigated  the
feasibility of hyperfiltration membranes for  the  renovation  of
composite  textile  dyeing  and finishing wastewater from a woven
fabric finishing-simple processing mill.  The processing  at  the
mill is piece dyeing of upholstery fabrics made of cotton, rayon,
and  nylon.   The  general  conclusion  of  the study is that the
product water quality is satisfactory for  direct  reuse  in  all
dyeing and finishing operations at the facility.

A  second research project (26), also funded by the EPA Office of
Research  and  Development,  investigated   hyperfiltration   for
renovation  of  composite  wastewater  at eight textile finishing
mills.   The  objective  of  the  study  was  to  determine   the
applicability  of the hyperfiltration unit used in the previously
mentioned study (25) as a general treatment  technology  for  the
textile industry.  The study involved the measurement of membrane
performance with minimum pretreatment, the evaluation of reuse of
both the purified product water and the concentrated residue, and
the  determination  of  the  treatability  of  the concentrate by
conventional treatment  technologies.   The  conclusions  of  the
study  are  that the product water (filtrate) is satisfactory for
reuse in scouring, bleaching, dyeing and finishing and  that  the
residual  concentrate  is  treatable  by the technology currently
installed at each facility.  Evaluations of equipment performance
and projected treatment cost also are provided.

Based on the finding of these hyperfiltration  studies,  a  full-
scale  demonstration  project  has  been  funded  by  EPA  and is
currently in the design and construction phase.

Research has been conducted on the recovery  of  synthetic  sizes
from  scouring wastes, and a full-scale ultrafiltration system is
in place.
                                  334

-------
Dissolved Air Flotation Dissolved air  flotation  is  a  physical
separation  operation  that  is  used to separate solid or liquid
particles from  a  liquid  phase,   A  portion  of  the  flow  is
pressurized  to  2.7 to 3.4 atm (40 to 50 psi) in the presence of
sufficient air to  approach  saturation.   The  pressurized  air-
liquid  mixture is released in a flotation unit through which the
remaining waste stream flows.   The entrained air is  released  as
fine  bubbles that attach to the particulate matter.  The buoyant
force of the gas bubbles causes the  particles  to  rise  to  the
surface where the solids are removed by skimming.

The  performance of a flotation unit is related to the air-solids
ratio, which is defined as pounds of air released  per  pound  of
solids  in  the  influent  waste.   A typical range of the air to
solids ratio is 0.01 to 0.1.

The design variables for flotation units are the quantity of  air
used,  the  influent solids or oil concentration and the overflow
rate.   When  the  flotation  process  is  used   primarily   for
clarification, a detention period of 20 to 30 minutes is adequate
for separation and concentration.  Rise rates of 61 to 204 1/sq m
(1.5 to 5.0 gpm/sq ft) are commonly employed. (27)

The  principal components of a dissolved air flotation system are
a pressurizing pump, air injection facilities, a retention  tank,
a  back  pressure  regulating  device  and a flotation unit.  The
pressurizing pump creates an elevated pressure  to  increase  the
solubility  of  air.  Air is usually added through an injector on
the suction side of the pump.   Of the total air induced, 30 to 45
percent is usually dissolved.

Chemicals such as aluminum and iron salts  and  activated  silica
commonly  are  used  in  dissolved  air flotation to increase the
flocculent properties  of  the  floated  particles  and  aid  the
capture   of   gas  bubbles.   A  variety  of  organic  chemicals
(polymers) also are used to change the nature of either the  air-
liquid interface or the solid-liquid interface, or both.

     Industry  Application  -  Seven  mills  use air flotation in
their waste treatment systems.  Four are direct dischargers,  two
are  indirect  dischargers,  and  one practices complete recycle.
One of the direct dischargers uses flotation  to  separate  print
pastes from a segregated print department discharge, one reclaims
indigo  dyestuff  for  reuse  from  a  yarn dyeing operation, one
separates wool grease from a wool  scouring  discharge,  and  one
separates  biological  floe  from  the  effluent  of  a secondary
clarifier.  One indirect discharger separates print  pastes  from
the  discharge  of  a  sheet  printing  operation while the other
removes latex  from  a  coating  operation.   The  recycle  plant
separates  print  paste  from the discharge of large woven fabric
printing operation.  Historical monitoring data are not available
to describe the performance of the air flotation units alone.
                                335

-------
     Field Sampling - During this study, sampling  was  conducted
at three of the mills noted above to provide performance data for
air flotation.  The results are discussed in the following cases.

Case  1_  is  a wool scouring mill that scours raw grease wool and
converts it, usually blended with other fibers,  into  fabric  by
combing,  spinning  and  weaving.   The  wool scouring operations
result in a wastewater discharge rate of  33.4  I/kg  of  product
(4.0  gal/lb  of  product) and a wastewater discharge of 2,300 cu
m/day (0.6 mgd).  The mill operates in conjunction  with  a  wool
finishing  mill  that  converts  the product of the wool scouring
mill into finished fabric.

After preliminary dissolved air flotation of  the  wool  scouring
wastewater  and  screening  of the wool finishing wastewater, the
mills  share  an  extended-aeration  activated  sludge  treatment
facility.    The  preliminary  treatment  of  the  wool  scouring
wastewater consists of equalization  (mixed),  chemical  addition
(ferric   chloride,   caustic  and  polymer)  and  dissolved  air
flotation 18.9 Ips (300 gpm).  The  remainder  of  the  treatment
facility  consists  of  aeration  (1 basin with a total volume of
49,211  cu  m  (13  million  gal),  secondary  clarification  and
disinfection    (chlorine).     Aeration    detention   time   is
approximately 60 hours, and air is provided by  surface  aerators
at  a  power-to-volume  ratio of 10.2 kw/1000 cu m (52 hp/million
gal).

Samples were collected over a typical 72-hour period of operation
at the screens before the finishing  plant  effluent  enters  the
aeration  basin, at the equalization basin prior to the dissolved
air flotation unit, at the effluent pipe from the  dissolved  air
flotation   unit,   and   at  the  effluent  from  the  secondary
clarifiers.  The performance of the dissolved air flotation  unit
in treating toxic, nonconventional and conventional pollutants is
presented in Table VII-63.

Case  "l_  is  a woven fabric finishing-simple processing mill that
performs flat bed and rotary screen printing to  produce  sheets,
towels,  and  bedspreads.   Rotary  screen  printing accounts for
approximately  90  percent  of  the  production.   Wastewater  is
discharge  data  rate  of  19.2  I/kg  of  product (2.3 gal/lb of
product).

Wastewater treatment at this mill consists of equalization  (small
holding tank), grit removal, coarse screening, chemical  addition
(alum and caustic), fine screening  (vibrating), chemical addition
(cationic polymer) 'and flocculation, dissolved air flotation (300
gpm),  aeration   (2  lagoons in series), disinfection  (chlorine),
secondary  clarification   (reactor/clarifier   in   which   alum,
caustic,  and  anionic  polymer are added) and dual media gravity
filtration   (sand  and  carbon).   Aeration  detention  time   is
approximately  170 hours, and air is provided by surface aerators
at a power-to-volume ratio of approximately  3.53 kw/1000 cu m  (18
                                336

-------
                          TABLE VII-63
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              CASE 1 - DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION UNIT
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
     Influent
Min     Max    n
    Effluent
Min    Max
              Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Oil & Grease, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug
Color, APHA Units
Color, ADMI Units
       (pH 7.6)



mg/1
ug/1
tits
tits
4,700
10,000
3,700
63
1,900
65
A
9,200
21,000
6,400
2,000
3,200 •
197
*
3
3
3
3
3
3
*
1,000
1,700
32
220
580
9
446
1,900
2,600
76
560
1,400
83
581
                      Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
Acenaphthene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Isophorone
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Di-n-octyl Phthalate
Toluene
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
ND
TA

ND
ND
TA
162
11
240
59
437
81
613
ND
20
23
10
111
24
221

20
10
43
225
13
269
77
491
133
724
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
ND
ND

ND
ND
TA
30
TA
163
ND
154
88
241
16
TA
ND
10
ND
ND
517

50
ND
TA
39
10
391
ND
250
123
382
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
* No analytical result, clear filtrate could not be obtained.

Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the influent or effluent:   Benzene;
        1,2,4-Trichloroethane;  Chloroform; 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine;
        N-nitrosodiphenylamine; Butyl Benzyl Phthalate;  Di-n-butyl
        Phthalate; Tetrachloroethylene; Dieldrin; 4,4'-DDD; Alpha
        Endosulfan; Beta Endosulfan; Heptachlor Epoxide; Alpha-BHC;
        Beta-BHC; Gamma-BHC; Delta-BHC; PCB-1242; Antimony;
        Beryllium; Selenium; Silver; Thallium.
Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 10013, March 1980.
                              337

-------
hp/million gal).   The  discharge  from  the  treatment  plant  is
recycled for reuse in the printing operations.

Samples were collected over a typical 48-hour period of operation
at  the  bar  screen  prior  to  the  air  flotation unit, at the
Parshall flume prior to the  aeration  basins,  at  the  chlorine
contact  chamber following aeration, and at the effluent from the
dual  media  filters.   The  performance  of  the  dissolved  air
flotation   unit   in   treating   toxic,   nonconventional   and
conventional pollutants is presented in Table VII-64.

Case 3, is a knit fabric finishing-complex  processing  mill  that
knits7  scours and piece dyes cloth of wool, cotton, polyester or
nylon.  Wastewater is discharged at a rate of 129 I/kg of product
(15.5 gal/lb of product).

Wastewater treatment at this mill consists of  coarse  screening,
aeration  (1  basin),  secondary sedimentation, chemical addition
(alum,  caustic,    and   polymer),   dissolved   air   flotation,
disinfection   (chlorine),  and  a  polishing  pond.  The aeration
detention time is approximately 24 hours, and air is provided  by
surface aerators at a total power-to-volume ratio of 26.1 kw/1000
cu m  (133 hp/million gal).

Samples were collected over a typical 72-hour period of operation
at   the   bar  screen,  at  the  discharge  from  the  secondary
clarifiers, and at the discharge from the dissolved air flotation
unit.  The performance of dissolved  air  flotation  in  treating
toxic,  nonconventional  and conventional pollutants is presented
in Table VII-65.

Stripping Stripping refers to the removal of relatively  volatile
components  from  a  wastewater  by  the passage of air, steam or
other gas through the liquid.  For example, ammonia nitrogen  has
been  removed  from high pH municipal wastewater by air stripping
in a  limited number of applications.  The exhaust gas usually  is
vented  to  the atmosphere without treatment.  Steam stripping of
ammonia-rich  water  followed  by  recovery  of  the  ammonia  as
ammonium  salt  in  an acidic absorbing  liquid is a newer process
under development.  (28,29)   Stripping   odorous  substances  from
kraft pulp mill waste streams by steam is another example  (30).

Stripping   of   volatile   toxic   pollutants  under  controlled
conditions  that  prevent  release  to   the   atmosphere   could
theoretically   be  used  as  a  treatment  process  for  textile
wastewater.  However, this is an expensive process because of the
relatively  low  volatile  pollutant   concentrations   typically
present.   There  is  no  information  available providing design
criteria, performance, or detailed costs  for  treatment  systems
using stripping of volatile pollutants from industrial wastewater
similar to that produced by the textile  industry.
                                  338

-------
                          TABLE VII-64
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
              CASE 2 - DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION UNIT
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant -
            Influent*
Effluent*
              Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Sulfide, ug/1
                400
               1050
                195
                 92
               (200)

Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
   (200)
    725
     32
     26
   (200)
Benzene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Penta chlo r opheno 1
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
Toluene
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
18
11
460
26
250
37
94
570
13
320
323
14
28
TA
25
12
TA
160
30
ND
30
26
45
ND
132
81
ND
32
14
TA
 * average of two 24-hour samples

Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       ( ) indicates "less than" value.

       The following pollutants also were detected at less than
       10 ug/1 in the influent or effluent:  1,2-Dichloroethane;
       Chloroform; Tetrachloroethylene; Beryllium; Cadmium;
       Chromium; Cyanide; Mercury; Selenium; Silver; Thallium.

Source:   EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 40144, November 1977
                              339

-------
                          TABLE VII-65
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                CASE 3 - DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL, AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Biological
 Effluent
Min  Max  n
  Final
 Effluent
Min  Max  n
            Conventional & Nonconventional Pollutants
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
314
16
13
77
74
706
36
33
87
95
3
3
3
3
3
146
ND
21
46
46
                      Toxic Pollutants, ug/1
                                                         9  3
                                                        48  3
                                                        52  3
Chloroform
1 , 2-Trans-dichloroethylene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
TA
ND
270
ND
436
12
46
136
12
47
81
TA
15
370
47
478
16
48
164
20
64
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
ND
14
11
200
ND
364
ND
18
76
ND
44
25
14
540
250
TA
393
TA
39
146
28
45
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Notes:  ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

        The following pollutants also were detected but at
        less than 10 ug/1 in the influent or effluent:
        Benzene; 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane; 2,4-Dimethylphenol;
        Methylene Chloride; Phenol; Di-N-butyl Phthalate; Anthracene;
        Toluene; Arsenic; Cadmium; Chromium; Cyanide.

Source:   EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 50013, August 1978.
                                340

-------
Electrodialysls  Electrodialysis is a membrane separation process
that is used to separate ionic components from  a  liquid  phase.
The  process makes use of an induced electric current that causes
migration of cations toward a negative electrode and migration of
anions toward a positive electrode.  Separation  is  accomplished
by  alternately  placing  membranes  which  preferentially  allow
passage of anions or cations across the current path.  Because of
the alternate spacing, cells of concentrated and dilute solutions
are  formed.    Electrodialysis   shares   the   same   operating
difficulties  as  hyperfiltration  and ultrafiltration systems in
that pretreatment is usually necessary to prevent  rapid  fouling
of the membranes.

     Industry  Application - There are currently no known textile
mills that  use  electrodialysis  as  part  of  their  wastewater
treatment  systems.    Because the process primarily is applicable
to the separation of soluble inorganic  ions,  it  has  not  been
given  much  consideration  except  in  the  case  of  wastewater
renovation for reuse.

Sorption Systems

Activated Carbon Adsorption  Activated  carbon  adsorption  is  a
physical  separation  process  in  which  substances in water are
removed  on  the  surface  of  highly  porous  carbon  particles.
Various  raw  materials  are  used in the production of activated
carbon.  The carbonized material is activated, usually by  steam,
to  remove  tars and other impurities and open up and enlarge the
pores.  Pore size depends, in part, on the source material and is
increased  through  regeneration  (31).    Therefore,   different
activated  carbons  are  used for different applications, such as
gaseous versus liquid systems for example.

The primary removal  mechanism of activated carbon is  adsorption,
the  physical attraction and accumulation of the removed material
on the surface of the carbon.  Activated carbons  typically  have
surface  areas  of  500  to  1,400  sq m/g (152,700 to 427,600 sq
ft/oz).

Many factors have been identified as important in describing  the
adsorption   of   materials  on  activated  carbon.   It  is  not
appropriate for this discussion to include  all  of  the  factors
relating  to  the  nature  of  the  carbon  and its surface area,
particle size, pore size, etc.  Instead,  the  focus  is  on  the
materials in the wastewater that are to be adsorbed.  Information
has  been  developed  about  the molecular structure of compounds
which  relates  to  adsorbability,  polarity,   and   degree   of
ionization  (32).   Molecular  structure also is reflected in the
solubility of the compound.  As a result, materials that are less
attracted to water tend to be more attracted to activated  carbon
surfaces.
                                341

-------
In  general,  molecules  are  more  readily adsorbed than ionized
compounds.  The  aromatic  compounds  tend  to  be  more  readily
adsorbed  than the aliphatics.  Larger molecules are more readily
adsorbed then smaller ones,  although  extremely  high  molecular
weight  materials  are  too  large  to penetrate the pores in the
carbon.  Treatment of wastes with activated carbon  is  generally
considered for organic rather than inorganic components, although
metals and other inorganics are adsorbed on carbon surfaces or on
organic solids that are removed in granular carbon filters.

The  concentration  of  the  constituents removed is important in
several ways, including competition for sites with other  organic
materials  in  the  water  and  displacement of molecules already
adsorbed by compounds more favored by the carbon.   An  important
consideration  related  to  toxic pollutant concentration is that
the behavior of many of the 129 toxic  pollutants  have  not  yet
been widely studied at the concentrations that have been observed
in  textile  wastewaters.   A  last  but very important factor in
adsorption phenomena is the pB of  the  solution.   Usually,  the
lower  the  pH of the solution the greater the adsorption of many
materials.

As pointed out by Ford (33) and others, adsorption with activated
carbon has limitations  and  must  be  evaluated  for  particular
situations.   Preliminary treatment of the wastewater, such as pH
adjustment, coagulation, or chemical oxidation  may  improve  the
adsorbability of some pollutants.

There  are  two forms of activated carbon in common use, granular
and powdered.  To date, the granular form has been preferred  for
most   wastewater   applications   because   it  can  be  readily
regenerated.  Regeneration of powdered activated carbon by  steam
is currently under development.  Granular carbon is commonly used
in columns operated in series.  The columns are operated downflow
packed  bed, upflow packed bed, or upflow expanded bed.  Although
the upflow expanded bed theoretically  is  the  best  alternative
because of its ability/to process more turbid wastewaters without
clogging,  operational difficulties have limited its development.
The upflow packed bed offers an important advantage.  The  column
is operated continuously, with the exhausted carbon being removed
at  the   bottom of the column with virgin, or regenerated, carbon
added at  the top.  This eliminates  the  need  for  an  auxiliary
column for use when an exhausted column is being serviced.

Spent  carbon is commonly regenerated thermally at 815°C  (1500°F)
in a multiple hearth furnace  in the presence of steam.    In  this
process,  the adsorbed organics are oxidized to gases in  the form
of either CO or C02_.   Some  elemental  carbon   is  lost   in  the
process,  but  this is usually limited to less than 10  percent by
weight.   After  regeneration,  the  carbon  is  returned   to  the
columns for reuse.
                                342

-------
An  aspect of granular carbon columns that is currently receiving
attention is the role and possible benefits of biological growths
on the carbon  surfaces.   In  some  applications,  much  of  the
pollutant  removal  has  been found to result from biodegradation
rather than adsorption.

Powdered activated  carbon  (PAC)  use  in  wastewater  treatment
applications  has  increased rapidly in the past decade.  Various
application points in the treatment sequence have been used, with
the activated sludge aeration tank being the  most  common.   The
spent  carbon  is discarded without regeneration in most systems.
This process results in a transfer of  the  pollutants  from  the
water  to  the  carbon.  Biorefractory materials remain intact in
the  sludge  or  other  residue  containing  the  spent   carbon.
Treatment  using  powdered  activated  carbon  is  discussed as a
separate topic below.

     Industry Application - Only one of  the  mills  surveyed  in
this  study  reports  the use of granular activated carbon in its
wastewater treatment system.  Several  additional  textile  mills
also  are  using  activated  carbon  as  part of closed (recycle)
systems for at least a part of their  wastewater.   However,  the
application   at  these  mills  is  not  considered  typical  and
information on the  characteristics  of  these  systems  was  not
obtained during this study.

     Literature/Research   -   Activated  carbon  adsorption  has
received  considerable  attention  as  an  industrial  wastewater
treatment  technology.   Much  of  the  information  available on
textile wastewater has to do with treatment of  individual  waste
streams discussed in the next section.

     EPA/Industry  Field  Studies  -  In  a joint research effort
between EPA and the textile industry (ATMI, NTA, and CRI),  pilot
plant  studies  were conducted during 1977 and 1978 at 19 textile
mills to  generate  performance  data  for  alternative  advanced
wastewater treatment technologies.  The studies were performed on
secondary   clarifier   effluent  from  treatment  systems  using
extended-aeration activated  sludge.   One  of  the  pilot  scale
technologies was granular activated carbon adsorption using three
carbon  columns  operated  in  series in the downflow mode.  Each
column was 2.36 m (7.75 ft) in height and 19.0  cm  (7.5  in)  in
diameter.   They were constructed of Schedule 80 PVC pipe and had
a carbon capacity of 18.2 kg (40 Ibs),  allowing  for  sufficient
expansion volume during backwashing.  Depending on the results of
isotherm  testing,  either  Westvaco  WV-L, Westvaco WV-I, or ICI
Hydrodarco granular carbon was utilized.

Activated  carbon  was  included  in  the  treatment   technology
selected  for  further  study at 18 of the 19 mills.  The columns
were  designed  to  remove  soluble  organic  material  and  were
preceded  by either multimedia filtration or chemical coagulation
plus multimedia filtration.  In addition  to  the  regular  pilot
                                 343

-------
plant  testing,  sampling  was  conducted  at  selected  mills to
determine the performance of activated carbon in the treatment of
toxic pollutants.

The data generated for granular activated  carbon  technology  is
summarized  in  Tables  VII-66  through VII-71 of this section by
subcategory grouping (wool scouring mills, wool finishing  mills,
and  other  mills).   The  data  are  presented in aggregate form
without regard to location of the carbon  columns  in  the  pilot
scale   treatment   technology.    The  aggregation  of  data  is
appropriate because the preceeding treatment  steps  sufficiently
reduced  the  TSS  in  the  influent to the carbon columns in all
cases.  Therefore, the  performance  of  the  carbon  is  related
solely  to  its  ability  remove  soluble  organic material.  The
summaries demonstrate the effectiveness of  activated  carbon  in
the   treatment   of  conventional,  nonconventional,  and  toxic
pollutants.

Powdered Activated  Carbon  (PAC)  Treatment  Powdered  activated
carbon  treatment  typically  refers  to the addition of powdered
activated carbon to  the  activated  sludge  process.   It  is  a
recently  developed  process  that  has shown to upgrade effluent
quality in  conventional  activated  sludge  plants.   A  general
discussion  of  powdered  activated  carbon  is  provided  in the
previous activated carbon section.   In  the  PACT  process,  the
carbon concentration in the mixed liquor is generally equal to or
greater  than  the  MLSS  concentration.  The carbon and adsorbed
substances are discarded as part of the biological sludge.

     Industry Application -  Three  of  the  mills  surveyed  use
powdered  activated carbon in their wastewater treatment systems.
Two mills manually add powdered carbon to the aeration basins and
maintain a specified concentration of carbon in  the  MLSS.   The
other  mill  operates  a  semi-continuous  system  in  which  raw
dyehouse wastewater is pumped to a tank containing  a  designated
amount  of  powdered  carbon,  mixed to form a slurry, and pumped
through a filter press.  The filter cake is  discarded  as  solid
waste.   The operation and effectiveness of one continuous system
and the semi-continuous system are discussed as case  studies  in
the next section.

     Literature/Research  -  Bench-scale  laboratory studies have
been conducted by EPA (34) on the  wastewaters  from  10  textile
finishing  mills  and  the  results  are  presented later in this
section.  The treatment process  at  one  of  the  textile  mills
reporting full scale use of powdered activated carbon addition to
the  activated  sludge  process  and  the  semi-continous  system
treating raw textile wastewater were sampled during  this  study.
The  results  also are presented below.  In addition to the field
sampling, information is presented on an existing  municipal  PAC
treatment system that treats textile mill wastewater.
                                 344

-------
                              TABLE VII-66
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                          "WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter
              Mill
               A
Contact time, minutes
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
              45
Average Effluent Concentration

              13
             431
              31
             191

             307
   Average Removal, Percent

              43
              47
              66
              34

              51
Subcategory
  Average

      13
     431
      31
     191

     307

Subcategory
  Average

      43
      47
      66
      34

      51
Source;  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                  345

-------
                              TABLE VII-67
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter/Pollutant
Mill
 A
Contact time, minutes
                                                            Subcategory
                                                              Average
          Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal,%)  ug/1
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Arsenic (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Zinc (Total)
17 (NR)
26 (NR)
42 (49)
ND (100)
40 (85)
120 (70)
17
26
42
ND
40
120
NR
NR
49
100
85
70
Note;  ND indicates "not detected,"
       NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                   346

-------
                              TABLE VII-68
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                   TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
Parameter
                                        Mill
 B
B
B
0
Contact time, minutes
BOD5, rag/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units
  (pH 7.6)
25         28        30        45

  Average Effluent Concentration
8.3
40
2.1
18
20
11*
20
4.8
17
20
16
26
0.9
15
20
2.2
18
2.9
6.7
24
           30*
         16
         29
                                                                 Subcategory
                                                                   Average
             26
            2.7
             14
             21

             23
Average Removal, Percent
BODS
COD •
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
61
79
57
46
-
—
52*
75
86
68
-
—
47
84
28
73
-
^
16
84
52
80
37
65
Subcategory
Average
41
81
56
67
37
65
* Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating
  subcategory average.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                    347

-------
                              TABLE VII-69
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
                                          Mill
Parameter/Pollutant
   B
Contact time, minutes
25-30
                                                                 Subcategory
                                                                   Average
               Average Effluent Concentration, ug/1 (Removal>%)  ug/1
1,2, 4-Trichlorobenzene
Methylene Chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
Toluene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Zinc (Total)
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
ND
13
29
51
12
82
151
5964
(100)

(29)
(100)
(17)
(100)
(88)
(29)
(57)
(90)
(NR)
(4)
(NR)
ND
27
33
ND
ND
TA
ND
TA
11
ND
ND
ND
374

(43)
(41)


(NC)

(93)
(91)



(22)
ND
14
17
ND
TA
TA
TA
20
31
TA
41
76
3170
100
43
35
100
17
100
88
61
74
90
NR
4
11
Note:  NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.

Source:   EPA/Industry Field Studies
                                 348

-------
                                                TABLE VII-70
                                        SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                                    GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                                     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED POLLUTANTS
                                                 OTHER MILLS
Parameter
Subcategory
Contact time, minutes
K
4a
35
BB
4b
45
AA
4c
45
D
4c
45
Mill
P
4c
15
P
4c
25
Average Effluent
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, rag/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
9.4
21
2.5
-
(50)
59

34
70
39
_
_
84
19
210
28
44
53
197

20
41
27
53
28
41
8.8
169
13
-
20
167

19
44
19
_
-
54
13
422
23
101
-
820

44
33
51
37
-
4.3
8.4
93
-
12
20
51
Average
5.0
7
-
49
-
60
15* 6
70*
-
11* 7
10*
-
Removal
61*
46*
-
56*
-
~
P
4c
45
T
4c
60
V
4c
45
Y
4c
45
Concentration
.0
37
19
.0
20
-
,
41
53
14
74
0
~*
6
411
* 16
98
* 237
49
Percent
32
21
* 28
28
* 56
70
1.2
176
20
36
-
79

48
48
11
42
-
72
6.1
33
2.1
4.4
-
43

18
64
42
70
-
74
* Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating subcategory average.

Note:  ( ) Indicates "less than" value.

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies

-------
                                                 TABLE VII-70 (Cent.)
Parameter
Subcategory
Contact time, minutes
Z
4c
49
E
5a
45
Q
5a
22
Mill
Q W
5a 5a
30 45
F
6
45
EE
7
45
S
7
45
Average Effluent Concentration
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
w Total Phenols, ug/1
g Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Total Phenols
Color
12
346
11
—
—
127

30
23
43
—
—
35
3.8
32
2.3
5.3
50
57

62
78
35
82
1.5
57
1.7
74
2.3
—
(20)*
109
Average
55
64
38
—
—
36
2.1 1.5
70 19
2.5 2.1
14 2.9
—
97 27
Removal,
55 55
67 65
33 75
37 78
__
64 70
5.9
45
4.7
4.9
22
35
Percent
16
67
54
80
32
80
(2)
29
4.3
10
(20)
23

12
76
45
75
—
87
6.0
72
6.1
4.4
22
103

19
36
44
45
—
43



Average
6.6
133
9.3
26
55
128
Average
33
51
39
58
31
58
* Value represents a single data point and was not included in calculating subcategory average.




Note:  ( ) Indicates "less than" value.




Source:   EPA/Industry Field Studies

-------
                              TABLE VII-71
                      SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                  GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION
                            TOXIC POLLUTANTS
                               OTHER MILLS
Pa rame te r/Pol lutant
K

BB
Mill
V
Subcategory 4a 4b 4c
Contact time,
minutes 35 45 45
Average Effluent Concentration,
Benzene
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Trichlorofluoro-
me thane
N-nitrosodi-n-
propylamine
Pent a chl o r opheno 1
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
Di-n-butyl
Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Arsenic (Total)
Cadmium (Total)
Chromium (Total)
Copper (Total)
Cyanide
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Selenium (Total)
Silv«r (Total)
Zinc (Tbtal)
ND
ND
17

ND

ND
ND
ND

TA

ND
ND
35
TA
ND
TA
•15
ND
26
55
ND
15
70


(NR)




(100)


(33)

(100)
(100)
(NR)
(NC)

(NC)
(80)

(8)
(NR)

(NR)
(66)
TA
ND
19

ND

ND
ND
ND

23

ND
ND
(NR) ND
ND
(NR) ND

ND

ND
ND
ND

(13) 11

TA
ND
39(27) 116
ND
ND
93
94
TA
TA
121
ND
36
306
ND
10
(8) 15
(8) 35
(86) ND
(50) 64
(4) 32
ND
(4) 91
(NR) 83







(100)
(100)

(NR)

(NC)

(15)

(NR)
(NR)
(NR)

(NR)
(NR)

(NR)
(65)
E

W

5b 5b
45 45
ug/1 (Removal, %)
ND
ND
TA

ND

ND
ND
ND

38

ND
ND
TA
12
TA
TA
TA
ND
ND
85
ND
28
19

(100)
(NC)



(100)

(100)

(5)



(2)
(NR)
(NR)
(1)
(17)

(100)
(13)
(100)
(4)
(86)
ND
TA
ND

69

ND
ND
ND

69

ND
TA
747
11
TA
ND
15
ND
54
84
ND
20
39

(67)


(NR)





(2)


(NC)
(8)
(NR)
(NC)

(36)

(15)
(18)

(22)
(38)


Average
ug/1 %
TA
TA
TA

14

ND
ND
ND

30

TA
TA
189
TA
TA
26
34
TA
31
75
ND
38
103
NR
84
NR

NR

100
100
100

11

100
100
10
NR
NR
1
28
86
35
7
100
6
51
Note:  NC indicates "not able to calculate removal."
       ND indicates "not detected."
       NR indicates "no removal."
       TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1

Source:  EPA/Industry Field Studies

                                  351

-------
Case  J_  is  a  knit fabric finishi-ng-simple processing mill that
knits, scours and dyes synthetic  bolt  cloth  of  polyester  and
acetate  fiber.   Pressure  piece  dyeing  with dispersed dyes is
performed  on  the  total  production  and  20  percent  of   the
production is scoured.  During the field sampling, the wastewater
discharge averaged 984 cu m/day (260,000 gpd).

Wastewater  treatment  at  this  mill  consists of fine screening
{vibratory),  equalization  (mixed,  with   nitrogen   addition),
aeration  (two  basins operated in series with powdered activated
carbon added to the first basin), secondary  clarification,  sand
filtration,  disinfection  (chlorine)  and  post aeration.  Total
detention time in the aeration basins is approximately 48  hours,
and  air  is  provided  by  surface aerators at a power-to-volume
ratio of approximately 15.7 kw/1000 cu  m  (80
The   results   presented   in   Table   VI1-72
effectiveness  of  the  full-scale  process  in
nonconventional and conventional pollutants.
hp/million  gal).
 demonstrate  the
 treating  toxic,
Case  2_  a  carpet finishing mill that piece dyes and backs (jute
using latex  adhesive)  carpet  made  from  polyester  and  nylon
fibers.  The processing results in a wastewater discharge rate of
36.7 I/kg of product  (4.4 gal/lb of product).

Wastewater  treatment  at this mill consists of coarse screening,
equalization (storage  tank),  mixing  (wastewater  and  powdered
activated  carbon)  and  solids  separation  (filter press).  The
results presented in Table VII-73 demonstrates the performance of
the system in treating toxic pollutants.

Case 3. is a municipal PAC treatment system   in  the  northeastern
United States.  A sizeable portion of the wastewater comes from a
woven  fabric  finishing-desizing  mill that desizes, scours, and
dyes synthetic cloth comprised of polyester,  rayon,  nylon,  and
acetate.  Wastewater discharge averages 2,840 cu m/day  (0.75 mgd)
at this mill.  This is approximately 20 percent of the total flow
to the POTW,  The organic loading contributed by the textile mill
is greater than 20 percent.

Wastewater  treatment  at  the POTW consists of coarse screening,
comminution, aerated grit removal, primary clarification, PAC and
polymer   addition,    aeration    (four     basins),    secondary
clarification,  filtration   (dual media filters) and disinfection
(chlorine).  Total detention time is approximately 4.5  hours  at
the current flow, and air is provided by coarse bubble diffusers.
Waste  activated  sludge  and  spent PAC are treated by a wet air
oxidation unit that oxidizes the organic material in  the  sludge
and  regenerates the PAC.  The performance of the system is shown
in Table VI-74.

     EPA/Industry Field Studies - As part of the  joint  research
effort between EPA and the textile industry  (ATMI, NTA, and CRI),
bench-scale   laboratory   studies  were  conducted  on  the  raw
                               352

-------
                          TABLE VII-72
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                      CASE 1 - PAC  PROCESS
       CONVENTIONAL, NONCONVENTIONAL,  AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Parameter/Pollutant
Conventional &
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Total Phenols, ug/1
Sulfide, ug/1
Color, ADMI Units (pH 7.6)
Toxic
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Chloroform
Methylene Chloride
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony (Total)
Copper (Total)
Lead (Total)
Nickel (Total)
Silver (Total)
Thallium (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Biological
Influent*
Clarifier Effluent**
Min Max n
Nonconventional Pollutants
1744
204
34
50
158
Pollutants,
199
90
ND
30
430
TA
186
17
99
69
19
(50)
343
154
44
TA
8
75
us/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
TA
ND
81
TA
36
54
14
(50)
48
254
60
15
20
89

87
(100)
TA
28
50
41
87
TA
44
65
17
(50)
69
3
3
3
3
3

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
 * 72-hour composite sample
** 24-hour composite samples

Notes:   ND indicates "not detected."
        TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       ( ) indicates "less than" value.

       The following pollutants also were detected but at less
       than 10 ug/1 in the biological influent or secondary
       clarifier effluent:  Benzene; 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene;
       2,4,6-Trichlorophenol;  Parachlorometacresol; 1,2-Dichloro-
       benzene; Ethylbenzene;  Naphthalene; N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine;
       Pentachlorophenol; Phenol; Anthracene; Tetrachloroethylene;
       Toluene; Trichloroethylene; Arsenic; Beryllium; Cadmium;
       Chromium; Cyanide; Mercury; Selenium.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 50104, August 1978.
                             353

-------
                          TABLE VII-73
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                      CASE 2 - PAC  PROCESS
                        TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Pollutant
Naphthalene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Antimony (Total)
Zinc (Total)
Influent*
240
67
400
(12)
20
Effluent**
Min Max n
TA
TA
TA
140
40
TA
TA
TA
160
120
2
2
2
2
2
 * composite and grab samples during a 24-hour period; concentrations
   expressed in ug/1
** two grab samples during 24-hour period; concentrations expressed in ug/1

Notes:  TA indicates "trace amount," less than 10 ug/1.
       ( ) indicates "less than" value.

       The following pollutants also were detected but at less
       than 10 ug/1 in the influent or effluent:  1,1,1-Tri-
       chloroethane; Methylene Chloride; Cadmium; Copper; Mercury.

Source:  EPA Field Sampling Results for Mill 60031, December 1977.
                          TABLE VII-74
                  SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                      CASE 3 - PACT PROCESS
            TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND
                   NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

Pollutant
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Turbidity, NTU
Raw
Waste*
217
789
406
^ ™
Primary
Effluent**
79
322
97
50
Clarifier
Effluent**
1.5
80
24
6.5
 * One month average.
** Two month average.

Source:  Reference 71
                              354

-------
wastewater (influent to the biological aeration system) at 10  of
the  19  pilot  plant  locations  to  evaluate the performance of
powdered activated carbon treatment.  Each textile  mill  shipped
wastewater  to  the  laboratory each week during a six-week study
period.  A description of the experimental procedures employed on
the waste from each mill is summarized below.
1
Three  10-liter  plexiglas  bioreactors  were  seeded   with
activated    sludge    from    the    study   mill   and   a
municipal/industrial treatment plant and acclimated  to  the
textile waste.
     Following acclimation, the residual TOC
     effluents was established.
                                         of  the  bioreactor
3.
4.
5.
6.
Carbon adsorption isotherms were performed on the bioreactor
effluent, and based on several considerations  (the  effects
on  residual TOC, experience gained in past studies, flow of
full-scale plant, sludge age, economics),  a  high  and  low
carbon make-up dosage was selected.

Two or three types of carbons were evaluated on an  isotherm
level and the most effective was used in the experiments.

The three bioreactors were designated as control (no  carbon
addition),  high  carbon,  and low carbon, and were operated
for approximately  three  weeks  with  carbon  addition  and
sludge wastage each day.

Following  the  initial  three-week  period   of   operation
(equilibrium  period),  two  weeks  of  analytical data were
generated to evaluate performance.
It  should  be  stressed  that  the  testing  performed  was  for
determination   of   technical  feasibility  and  to  provide  an
indication  of  the  achievable  effluent  quality.   Long   term
operating characteristics and costs were not considered.

Results  from the laboratory studies of PACT for the treatment of
conventional and  nonconventional  pollutants  are  presented  in
Tables  VII-75  through VII-77.  The data are aggregated for wool
scouring mills, wool finishing mills, and all other mills.

Development of_ Treatment and Control Options

Many demonstrated control and treatment  technologies  have  been
discussed  and  information  presented  on their capabilities for
removal of toxic,  nonconventional  and  conventional  pollutants
from  textile  industry  wastewaters.   Alternative  control  and
treatment technology options that represent a range of  pollutant
removal  capability and cost were selected for detailed analysis.
The options that were considered in determining BPT,  BAT,  NSPS,
PSES  and  PSNS  limitations and standards are presented below as
                                355

-------
                                TABLE VII-75
                        SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                     POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT
     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                             WOOL SCOURING MILLS
Parameter
             Mill
              A
Carbon:
  Type
  Cone.,  mg/1  (low)
               (high)
  Dosage, mg/1 (low)
               (high)
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1 (control)
          (low)
          (high)
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7
 6)
             w-sc*
             2000
            10000
              139
              694

           Influent

             2580
             5542
             2977
             5295
            14837
             1784
   Control Reactor Effluent

               69
              543
              568
              373
              705
6)
  Low Carbon Reactor Effluent

               54
              563
              366
              387
.6)            629

 High Carbon Reactor Effluent
                                             Subcategory
                                               Average

                                                 2580
                                                 5542
                                                 2977
                                                 5295
                                                14837
                                                 1784
 69
543
568
373
705
                                                   54
                                                  563
                                                  366
                                                  387
                                                  629
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7.6)
51
457
402
336
253
51
457
402
336
253
* Westvaco SC carbon
                                    356

-------
                                TABLE VII-75 (Cont.)
Parameter
            Mill
             A
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Color
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Color
BOD5
COD
TSS
TOC
Color
Control Reactor, % Removal

             97
             90
             81
             79
                        Low Carbon Reactor, % Removal
             98
             90
             93
             78
                       High Carbon Reactor, % Removal
             98
             92
             97
             81
Subcategory
  Average

     97
     90
     81
     79
     98
     90
     93
     78
     98
     92
     97
     81
Source:  Reference 34.
                                   357

-------
                                TABLE VII-76
                        SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                     POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT
     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                            WOOL FINISHING MILLS
Parameter
                                     Mill
Carbon:
  Type                       W-SA*
  Cone., mg/1  (low)         2000
               (high)        8000
  Dosage, mg/1 (low)           97
               (high)         388
W-SC**
1000
5000
  25
 125
                                  Influent
BOD5, mg/1                    407
COD, mg/1                    1919
TSS, mg/1 (control)          2986
          (low)              7012
          (high)             9774
TOC, mg/1                     461
Color, ADMI units (pH 7.6)     71
 247
1098
3360
4373
7792
 344
                          Control Reactor Effluent
BOD5, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7.6)
27
148
29
41
114
16
102
30
30
105
                         Low Carbon Reactor Effluent
BOD5, mg/1                     29
COD, mg/1                     107
TSS, rag/1                      33
TOC, mg/1                      44
Color, ADMI units (pH 7.6)     81
  63
  16
  23
  66
                        High Carbon Reactor Effluent
   Westvaco SA carbon
   Westvaco SC carbon
Subcategory
  Average

     327
    1509
    3173
    5693
    8783
     403
      71
                               22
                              125
                               30
                               36
                              110
      19
      85
      25
      34
      74
BODS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
Color, ADMI units (pH 7.6)
18
73
23
38
64
6.5
33
11
11
43
12
53
17
25
54
                                     358

-------
Parameter
                                TABLE VII-76 (Cont.)
      Mill
B             0


BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color '
Note:

Control Reactor, %
93
92
99
91
0
Low Carbon Reactor,
93
94
(99)
90
0
High Carbon Reactor,
96
96
(99)
92
10
( ) indicates a "greater than" value

Removal
94
91
99
91
-
% Removal
97
94
(99)
93
-
% Removal
97
97
(99)
97
**

Subcategory
Average
94
92
99
91
0

95
94
(99)
92
0

97
97
(99)
95
10

Source:  Reference 34.
                                    359

-------
                                TABLE VII-77
                        SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS
                     POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT
     TRADITIONALLY MONITORED CONVENTIONAL AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                 OTHER MILLS
Parameter
D
P
Y
Mill
E
Q
F
S
                        4c
4c
4c
5b
5a
Subcategory
Carbon:
  Type                W-SA*  W-SC#  ICI-H** W-SC# W-SC#  ICJ-K## W-SC##
  Cone., mg/1  (low)  3000   1000   2000    2000  1000   2000    2000
               (high) 6000   5000   5000    5000  5000   5000    5000
  Dosage, mg/1 (low)   105    122    210     216    35    277     122
               (high)  210    608    526     540   173    694     304
Influent
BODS,
COD,
TSS,


TOC,
mg/1
rag/1
mg/1 (control)
(low)
(high)
mg/1
1169
2115
4121
5686
8514
624
400
572
2310
4052
4610
243
Color, ADMI units+

BODS,
COD,
TSS,
TOC,

mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1

46
556
15
157
Color, ADMI units+

BODS,
COD,
TSS,
TOC,
Color

mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
, ADMI units*

24
390
45
113
-

8
119
30
57
324
Low
8
96
18
42
293
114
301
1538
2070
4657
91
268
Control
6
98
29
24
198
Carbon
5
60
51
12
88
505
1737
6086
5978
8818
446
61
Reactor
57
1765
26
91
85
Reactor
21
103
17
52
36
318
963
4687
5435
6577
383
-
Effluent
17
215
24
99
387
Effluent
14
175
17
56
325
471
1454
5128
6318
8488
390
100

11
127
43
57
236

6
67
50
35
125
Average
95
956
3168
4585
7183
390
-

8.5
143
4
57
512

8.5
74
25
35
263
439
1157
3863
4875
6978
367
443

22
432
24
77
290

12
138
32
49
188
High Carbon Reactor Effluent
BODS,
COD,
TSS,
TOC,
rag/1
rag/1
mg/1
mg/1
24
447
38
105
Color, ADMI units+
8.5
82
10
34
236
4
37
60
9
148
21
69
28
40
49
11
119
24
44
242
4
40
19
18
77
6
35
16
18
140
11
118
28
38
149
 * Westvaco SA carbon
 # Westvaco SC carbon
** ICI Hydrodarco carbon
## ICI-KB carbon
 + pH = 7.6
     360

-------
                                TABLE VII-77  (Cont.)

Parameter

D

P

Y
Mill
E
Control Reactor, %
BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color

BODS
COD
TSS
TOC
Color
Note: ( )
96
74
(99)
75
-

98
82
99
82
-

98
79
(99)
83
_.
98
79
99
77
-
Low
98
83
(99)
83
-
High
98
86
(99)
86
*•
95
67
98
Ik
26
Carbon
96
80
98
87
67
Carbon
96
88
99
90
45
89
0
(99)
80
0
Reactor,
96
94
(99)
88
41
Reactor,
96
96
(99)
91
20

Q F
Removal
95 98
78 91
99 99
74 85
76
% Removal
96 99
82 95
(99) 99
85 91
88
% Removal
97 99
88 97
(99) (99)
89 95
92

S

91
85
(99)
85
-

91
92
99
91
-

94
96
(99)
95
~


Average
95
68
99
79
34

96
87
99
87
65

97
90
(99)
90
52
indicates a "greater than" value.
Source: Reference 34.
                                    361

-------
are the methodology and calculation of raw waste loads and  final
effluent limitations and standards for each option.

Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT

General

Two  new  subcategories  and  a  new  subdivision  of an existing
subcategory have been identified:  the nonwoven manufacturing and
felted fabric processing subcategories and the water jet  weaving
subdivision of the low water use processing subcategory.

As  stated  previously,  the Act establishes the requirements for
the development of BPT limitations, which are generally based  on
the  average of best existing performance within that category or
subcategory.  Where existing performance is uniformly inadequate,
BPT may be transferred from a different subcategory or  category.
Limitations  based  on transfer technology must be supported by a
conclusion that the technology is,  indeed,  transferable  and  a
reasonable  prediction  that  it will be capable of achieving the
prescribed  effluent  limits.   The  best   practicable   control
technology  currently  available  for water jet weaving, nonwoven
manufacturing and felted fabric processing has been identified as
biological treatment, the technology on which BPT limitations are
based for all other subcategories  of  the  textile  mills  point
source category.

Raw  Waste  Loads Raw waste loads for these two new subcategories
and the new subdivision have been determined to be the medians of
historical  and  field  sampling   data   for   mills   in   each
subcategory/subdivision.   (Table  V-19).   These raw waste loads
have been used to calculate costs and pollutant removals.
BPT Limitations The final effluent limitations are
                 The
                     presented  in
methodology for the development of
Section  VIII.   The  general
these limitations is discussed below.

     Water Jet Weaving  Subdivision  -  Long-term  average  final
effluent  characteristics  have been calculated as the average of
the two mills where biological treatment systems are employed.
                                362

-------
   '  Nonwoven   Manufacturing   Subcategory   -   BPT    effluent
limitations  are  based  on  the  transfer  of the performance of
biological  treatment  from  the  carpet  finishing   subcategory
because  currently  existing  wastewater treatment systems in the
nonwoven manufacturing subcategory are not representative of best
practicable control technology currently available.

Raw material and production processes are similar in the nonwoven
manufacturing and carpet finishing subcategories.   In  addition,
raw waste characteristics of wastewaters discharged from mills in
the  nonwoven  manufacturing  subcategory  are  similar  to those
discharged from mills in the carpet finishing  subcategory.   (As
shown  in  Table VIII-3, BOD5. and COD raw waste concentrations in
the nonwoven manufacturing subcategory are equal to or lower than
BOD5. and COD concentrations in the carpet finishing subcategory.)

     Felted  Fabric  Processing  Subcategorv   -   BPT   effluent
limitations  are  based  on  the  transfer  of the performance of
biological treatment from the wool finishing subcategory  because
currently  existing  wastewater  treatment  systems in the felted
fabric processing subcategory are uniformly  inadequate  and  not
representative   of   the  best  practicable  control  technology
currently available.

Raw material and production processes are similar in  the  felted
fabric  processing  subcategory and wool finishing subcategories.
In addition, raw was.te characteristics of wastewaters  discharged
from  mills  in  the  felted  fabric  processing  subcategory are
similar to those discharged from  mills  in  the  wool  finishing
subcategory.   (As  shown in Table VIII-3, BOD5. and COD raw waste
concentrations in the felted fabric  processing  subcategory  are
equal  to  or  lower than BOD5. and COD concentrations in the wool
finishing subcategory.)

Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)

General

The factors considered in establishing best available  technology
economically  achievable  (BAT)  limitations  include the cost of
applying the control technology, the age of process equipment and
facilities,  the   process   employed,   process   changes,   the
engineering   aspects   of  applying  various  types  of  control
techniques  ajid  environmental   considerations   such   as   air
pollution, energy consumption and solid waste generation (Section
304(b)(2)(B).   In  general, the BAT technology level represents,
at  a  minimum,  the  best   existing   economically   achievable
performance  of plants of shared characteristics.  Where existing
performance is uniformly inadequate, BAT may be transferred  from
a  different subcategory or industrial category.  BAT may include
process changes  or  internal  controls,  even  when  not  common
industry practice.
                                363

-------
The  primary  determinant of BAT is effluent reduction capability
using economically achievable technology.  As  a  result  of  the
Clean  Water  Act  of 1977, the achievement of BAT has become the
national means of controlling the discharge of toxic  pollutants.
Best  available treatment technology must be implemented no later
than July 1, 1984, for the control of toxic  and  nonconventional
pollutants.

As  a  result  of  the toxic pollutant screening and verification
sampling program, 15  toxic  organics  pollutants  and  12  toxic
metals  were  identified as being present at levels of 10 ug/1 or
greater  in  textile   industry   wastewaters.    Nonconventional
pollutants  which  were  identified  as being of concern included
those previously regulated under BPT, and color  which  had  been
regulated  under  previously  remanded  BAT (See Section VI).  In
addition, EPA considered regulating TSS as an indicator of  toxic
pollutants during the development of the final rules.  (See 44 FR
62204, October 29, 1979.)

From  the control and treatment technologies previously discussed
four technology options were identified  for  the  evaluation  of
pollutant  removal capability and calculation of costs.  The four
options were:

               OPTION 1 - The current level of control
                          based on biological treatment.


               OPTION 2 - The level of control achievable by
                          biological treatment (Option 1) plus
                          the addition of multimedia filtration.

               OPTION 3 - The level of control achievable by
                          biological treatment (Option 1) plus
                          the addition of chemical coagulation/
                          sedimentation.

               OPTION 4 - The level of control achievable by
                          biological treatment (Option 1) plus
                          the addition of chemical coagulation/
                          sedimentation followed by multimedia
                          filtration.

Assessment of Treatment Capability  Options 2, 3 and 4 were based
on the  addition  of  end-of-pipe  technology  to  treat  further
biologically  treated  effluent.  The methodology for determining
the capability of each technology option included identifying the
effluent quality resulting from  the  application  of  biological
treatment  technology in each subcategory of the textile industry
and then applying  appropriate  reductions  associated  with  the
technologies included in each treatment option.
                                 364

-------
     Option 1 - Effluent characteristics for BOD_5, COD,  TSS  and
phenol sin  each  subcategory  were calculated as the product of
long-term average effluent concentrations  and  wastewater  flows
for  that subcategory.  Effluent concentrations used were medians
from each subcategory  from  a  data  base  of  72  plants  where
biological treatment was employed.
The  following  criteria  were  used  in
plants to be included in the data base:
the selection of the 72
     1.   Biological treatment generally  representative  of  the
          type that formed the basis of BPT is used.

     2.   Treatment  system  performance  is  characteristic  of,
          although not necessarily achieving, BPT limitations.

     3.   Sufficient long-term data  were  available  to  reflect
          seasonal variability.

     4.   Overall response  to  the  industry  data  request  was
          accurately and conscientiously prepared.

     5.   Production and flow data were available.

This 72 plant data base is presented in Table VII-78.  Table VII-
79 presents the  medians  used  for  each  subcategory.   Because
biological treatment data for mills meeting the above criteria in
the  hosiery  products,  nonwoven manufacturing and felted fabric
processing subcategories is not  available,  concentrations  were
transferred  f-rom appropriate subcategori es.  As discussed above,
and later in Section VIII, raw materials,  production  processes,
and raw waste characteristics for these subcategories are similar
to  those „ from  which the performance of biological treatment is
transferred.  In addition, raw waste concentrations of  BOD£  and
COO are equal to or less than those in the similar subcategories.

Wastewater  flows  used in the calculation are subcategory median
flows for all the plants that submitted  raw  was  data  and  are
presented in Table V-ll.

A  similar  approach  was  used  for  the development of effluent
characteristics for the toxic metals total chromium, total copper
and total zinc as well as total  toxic  metals  and  total  toxic
organics.  Effluent concentrations utilized in the calculation of
toxic  pollutant  discharge  are  presented in Table VII-80.  The
concentrations are average values rounded to the closest 10 ug/1,
for the data collected during the toxic pollutant field  sampling
program.   As  presented  in Tables VII-81 to VII-83, total toxic
organics are the summation of all the detected toxic organics and
total  toxic metals are the summation of all  the  detected  toxic
metals.
                            365

-------
              TABLE VII-78
LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
    72 SELECTED TREATMENT FACILITIES
Subcategory
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
4a
4a
4a
4a
4a
4a
4a
4b
4b
4b
4b
4b
4b
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
4c
Report
No.
10006
10015
20005
20009
20011
20020*
20021
40023
40035
40050
40098
40100
40109
40143
40022
40091
40111
40148
40154
40160
40012
40017
40034
40037
40059
40064
40072
40074
40087
40097
40099
40103
40120
40140
40145
40151
40153
BODS
(mg/1)
61
42
24
26
26
12
154
5
22
15
12
46
124
9
15
69
24
5
6
44
20
27
15
27
24
43
8
11
31
23
16
20
7
106
7
43
62
COD
(mg/1)
1443
810
-
-
212
183
800
139
307
384
177
409
-
159
152
301
426
-
126
452
-
155
254
214
336
-
252
272
-
594
252
-
181
664
164
199
464
TSS
(mg/1)
166
297
49
64
61
23
80
19
38
36
56
49
55
18
35
95
24
48
15
105
91
21
54
15
27
148
8
69
41
44
49
21
57
176
54
67
132
Total Phenols
(ug/1)
_
37
-
Ill
45
76
-
114
56
13
17
35
87
20
250
-
25
'
-
30
-
15
-
-
2
-
.
347
22
-
17
47
-
-
18
-
132
                  366

-------
                               TABLE VII-78 (Cont.)
Subcategory
5a
5a
5a
5a
5a
5a
5a
Sa
5a
5b
5b
5b
5b
5b
5c
5c
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Report
No,
50008
50015
50057
50081
50082
50098
50108
50113
50116
50035
50056
50065*
50099
50123
5H028
5H029
60001*
60005
60013
60018
60021*
60034
60037
60039
70009
70031
70036
70075
70084
70087
70089
70096
70104
70106
70126
BODS
(mg/D
15
12
21
20
13
139
7
13
6
22
45
63
12
6
64
106
21
27
54
34
78
30
37
38
6
6
15
8
21
22
5
29
3
7
74
COD
(ng/D
_
277
744
164
250
533
154
226
124
277
354
491
174
145
596
592
133
546
311
286
376
227
-
274
106
124
203
146
268
148
158
204
96
119
176
TSS Total Phenols
(mg/1) (ug/1)
20
22
35
63
71
180
11
62
18
116
55
52
26
27
99
107
25
113
57
70
85
50
33
91
9
27
35
36
71
24
21
24
20
10
60
^
41
-
-
32
-
-
72
-
_
100
15
83
-
28
21
84
100
80
. -
285
128
100
370
41
186
91
-
40
56
-
-
-
-
12
* Aerated Lagoon



Note:  A dash indicates "no historical data available."




Source:  EPA Industry Surveys, 1977 & 1980.




                                  367

-------
                                 TABLE VII-79
           MEDIAN LONG-TERM AVERAGE TREATED EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
Subcategory
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
a. General Processing
b. Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
Knit Fabric Processing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock & Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BOD5
(mg/1)
50
25
(No
(No
15
20
25
15
20
15*
35
10
35**
25#
COD
(mg/D
1,125
215
BAT Effluent
BAT Effluent
245
300
255
240
280
240*
285
150
285**
215#
TSS Total Phenols
(mg/1) (ug/1)
230
60
Limitations)
Limitations)
40
40
55
35
50
35*
65
25
65**
60#
40
80

35
30
20
40
85
40*
100
50
100**
80#
 * Concentrations transferred from Knit Fabric Finishing - Simple
   Processing Subcategory,
** Concentrations transferred from Carpet Finishing Subcategory.
 # Concentrations transferred from Wool Finishing Subcategory.

Note:  All concentrations rounded to the nearest 5 units/liter.

Source:  Table VII-78 and EPA Engineering Analysis.
                                    368

-------
                                          TABLE VII-80
                          BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
                                 AVERAGE OF FIELD SAMPLING DATA
                                                          Concentration

Subcategory
1. Wool Scouring
2. Wool Finishing
4. Woven Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Desizing
5. Knit Fabric Finishing
a. Simple Processing
b. Complex Processing
c. Hosiery Products
6. Carpet Finishing
7 . Stock & Yarn Finishing
8. Nonwoven Manufacturing
9. Felted Fabric Processing
Total
Chromium
(mg/1)
0.040
0.360
ND
0.090
ND
0.060
0.030
0.200
0.220
0.070
0.010
0.035
* Atypical maximum value of 38.4 mg/1 was not
# Values are for untreated wastewater since no
Total
Copper
(mg/1)
0.080
0.020
0.090
0.120
0.030
0.060
0.040
0.010
0.040
0.090
0.030
ND
included in
biological
Total Total Toxic
Zinc
(mg/1)
0.300
2 . 320*
0.250
0.190
0.500
0.150
0.610
0.110
0.200
0.340
0.070
0.040
the average.
treatment is
Organics
(mg/1)
0.260
1.600
0.190
0.300
1.860
0.330
0.920
0.590
0.060
0.230
0.440
0.080
performed.
Total Toxic
Metals
(mg/1)
2.150
3.020
0.450
0.600
0.750
0.730
1.320
0.420
0.620
0.810
0.310
0.110

Note: ND indicates "not detected."
Source:   Field Sampling Program.

-------
                              TABLE VIJ-81
    SUMMARY OF POLLUTANT REMOVALS FOR ADD-ON COMPONENTS OF CONTROL OPTIONS
                           WOOL SCOURING MILLS

Technology
                          Total    Total
                Total     Toxic    Toxic
BOD5 COD  TSS  Phenols   Organics  Metals
Multimedia Filtration (MMF)

Chemical Coagulation (CC)

MMF After CC

CC + MMF After CC- (CC + MMF)
 35   10   45    30*
50
NR
* Value transferred from wool finishing data base,

Notes:  1.  A dash indicates that no data are available to calculate
            a removal.
        2.  NR indicates "no removal."

Source;  Table VII-50.
                                  370

-------
                               TABLE VII-82
SUMMARY OF POLLUTANT REMOVALS FOR ADD-ON COMPONENTS OF CONTROL OPTIONS
                          WOOL FINISHING MILLS
Technology
                          Total    Total
                Total     Toxic    Toxic
BOD5 COD  TSS  Phenols   Organics  Metals
Multimedia Filtration (MMF)
Chemical Coagulation (CC)
MMF After CC
CC + MMF After CC (CC + MMF)*
55
70
20
75
30
70
15
75
80
70
55
85
30
25
20
40
55
60
40
75
50
15
10
40
* Removal for CC + MMF calculated by applying removal for MMF after CC to
  the percentage of each pollutant (parameter) remaining after CC, except
  for toxic organics and toxic metals.

Source:  Tables VII-34, -35, -37, -49,  -53, -54, -55, -56, -62, and
         Field Sampling Data for Mills  BB and Q.
                                  371

-------
                               TABLE VII-83
  SUMMARY OF POLLUTANT REMOVALS FOR ADD-ON COMPONENTS OF CONTROL OPTIONS
                             ALL OTHER MILLS
Technology
                          Total    Total
                Total     Toxic    Toxic
BOD5 COD  TSS  Phenols   Organics  Metals
Multimedia Filtration (MMF)
Chemical Coagulation (CC)
MMF After CC
CC + MMF After CC (CC + MMF)*
25
50
20
60
15
45
20
55
45
40
65
80
10
15
25
35
30
15
30
50
10
40
NR
40
* Removal for CC + MMF calculated by applying removal for MMF after CC to
  the percentage of each pollutant (parameter) remaining after CC, except
  for toxic organics and toxic metals.

Note:  NR indicates "no removal."

Source:  Tables VII-31, -32, -35, -36, -37, -45, -47, -49, -56, -57, -58,
         -59, -60, -61, -62, and Field Sampling Data for Mills BB and Q,
                                   372

-------
     Options 2., 3, and £ - Effluent quality for options 2, 3 and 4
were determined by applying appropriate percent removals from the
biological   treatment   effluent   quality   determined   to  be
representative of biological treatment in each subceitegory.

Percent removals for each  technology  option  are  presented  in
Table  VII-81  for  wool scouring subcategory mills. Table VII-82
for wool finishing subcategory mills and in Table VII-83 for  all
other  subcategories.   The  percent  removals are median percent
removals for mills in the EPA/Industry  field  studies.   Percent
removals  for  each  mill  and  each  technology are presented in
Section VII.  The detailed analysis is included in the record for
this rulemaking.

Summary of BAT Effluent Quality - The long-term average  effluent
characteristics  developed  for  each  technology  option in each
subcategory are presented in Tables VII-84 and VII-85 for  toxic,
nonconventional and conventional pollutants.  The design criteria
for each technology option are presented in detail in Appendix-A,
Cost of Treatment and Control Systems.

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS-)

General

Section  306  of  the  Clean  Water Act of 1977 requires that new
source performance standards (NSPS) be established for industrial
dischargers based on  the  best  demonstrated  technology.   NSPS
establish  control  of  toxic,  'nonconventional  and conventional
pollutants.  The same pollutants considered for control under BAT
were considered for control under NSPS.

Control and treatment technologies that were considered include:

               OPTION 1 - Biological treatment as demonstrated
                          by best performing mills.

               OPTION 2 - Multimedia filtration

               OPTION 3 - Extended aeration activated sludge
                          treatment (Option 1} followed by
                          chemical coagulation/sedimentation
                          and multimedia filtration.
Assessment  of  Treatment
calculation  of
	   Capability    The   methodology   and
effluent  characteristics  for  each of the NSPS
control and treatment options is discussed below.

     Option 1_ - Long-term average  effluent  characteristics  for
BOD, COD, and TSS for option 1  were calculated as the median mass
discharge  of  best performers in each subcategory.  Using the 72
plant data base presented in  Table  X-2,  best  performers  were
identified  as  those  where  long-term average BOD^, TSS and COD
                                373

-------
                                 TABLE VII-84

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                        OPTION 1 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
Subcategory

1.   Wool Scouring

2.   Wool Finishing
    Low Water Use Processing*
    a.  General Processing
    b.  Water Jet Weaving

    Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

    Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

    Carpet Finishing

    Stock & Yarn Finishing

    Nonwoven Manufacturing
9.  Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(kg/kkg)
0.59
7.61
1.15
1.95
2.65
1.76
2.45
1.13
1.63
0.97
1.40
5.32
COD
(kg/kkg)
13.16
65.45
18.80
29.28
27.00
28.22
34.33
18.02
13.31
14.51
11.40
45.73
TSS
(kg/kkg)
2.70
18.26
3.07
3.90
5.82
4.12
6.13
2.63
3.04
2.42
2.60
12.76
Total
Phenols
(g/kkg)
0.47
24.35
2'.69
2.93
2.12
4.70
10.42
3.00
4.67
4.84
4.00
17.02
     *  BAT Options beyond BPT were not considered for low water use
        processing.
                                      374

-------
                           TABLE VII-84 (continued)

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                        OPTION 1 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring

2-.  Wool Finishing

4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desiziag

5.  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8. "NonW6vfn*Mariufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
Total Toxic
Organics
(s/kkg)
3.05
487.04
14.58
29.28
196.97
38.81
112.79
44.31
2.80
22.24
17.60
17.02
Total Toxic
Metals
(*/kkg)
25.24
919.29
34.53
58.56
79.43
85.85
161.83
31.54
28.95
78.33
12.40
23.40
                                      375

-------
                                 TABLE VII-85

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 2 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                             MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring

2.  Wool Finishing
    Low Water Use Processing*
    a.  General Processing
    b.  Water Jet Weaving
4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5.  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.  Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(kg/kkg)
0.38
3.43
0.86
1.46
1.98
1.32
1.84
1.13
1.23
0.73
1.05
3.99
COD
(kg/kkg)
11.85
45.81
15.98
24.89
22.95
23.99
29.18
18.02
11.31
12.33
9.69
38.87
TSS
(kg/kkg)
1.49
3.65
1.69
2.15
3.20
2.26
3.37
2.63
1.67
1.33
1.43
7.02
Total
Phenols
(g/kkg)
0.33
17.08
2.42
2.64
1.91
4.23
9.38
3.00
4.20
4.36
3.60
15.30
     *  BAT Options beyond BPT were not considered for low water use
        processing.
                                      376

-------
                           TABLE VII-85 (continued)

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 2 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                             MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring

2.  Wool Finishing

4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5.  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.  Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
Total Toxic
Organics
(g/kkg)
1.53
21.92
10.22
20.51
137.90
27.16
78.95
1.96
15.57
12.32
11.91
Total Toxic
Metals
(g/kkg)
25.0
45.95
31.05
52.74
71.10
77.22
145.65
26.06
70.50
11.16
21.05
                                     377

-------
effluent discharges were less than the maximum 30-day average BPT
effluent limitations for these parameters.  The  best  performers
are identified and the median subcategory long-term averages used
as  the  basis for NSPS are presented in Table X-3.  As discussed
in  Section  VIII,  insufficient  data  are  available   on   the
performance   of   biological   treatment  in  the  new  nonwoven
manufacturing and felted fabric processing subcategories.   Long-
term  averages  for these subcategories were, therefore, based on
flow-adjusted long-term averages for  the  carpet  finishing  and
wool finishing subcategories for the reasons presented in Section
VIII,    Similarly,  as described in Section X, in the knit fabric
finishing subcategory performance levels for the hosiery products
subdivision have been  transferred  from  the  simple  processing
operations subdivision.

     Options 2., and 3. - NSPS Options 2 and 3 are identical to BAT
options  2  and  4. "" The methodology and development of effluent
characteristics are presented above under BAT.

Summary of. NSPS Effluent Characteristics - The long-term  average
effluent  characteristics developed for each subcategory and each
technology option are presented in Table VI1-86 for  conventional
and  nonconventional  pollutants  and  in  Table VII-87 for toxic
pollutants.  Design details and costs for each technology  option
are  presented  in  Appendix-A,  Cost  of  Treatment  and Control
Systems.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing and
PSNS)

General
New  Sources  (PSES  and
The  Clean Water Act requires that pretreatment standards prevent
the discharge of pollutants which pass through, interfere with or
are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs.  The  Act
also  requires  pretreatment  for  pollutants  that  limit sludge
management alternatives at POTWs, including the beneficial use of
sludges on agricultural lands.

Three toxic pollutants, total chromium, total  copper  and  total
zinc  that  can pass through POTWs or could cause sludge disposal
problems have been identified in  textile  industry  wastewaters.
Two  pretreatment  options  were  considered for control of these
toxic metals.  They were:

               OPTION  1 - Screening, equalization and/or
                          neutralization as required to
                          meet General Pretreatment
                          Regulations.

               OPTION  2 - Screening, equalization and/or
                          neutralization (Option 1) plus
                          chemical coagulation/precipitation.
                                378

-------
                                 TABLE VII-86

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 3 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                             CHEMICAL COAGULATION
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring**

2.  Wool Finishing

3.  Low Water Use Processing*
    a.  General Processing
    b.  Water Jet Weaving

4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5.  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.  Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(kg/kkg)
2.28
0.58
0.98
1.33
0.88
1.23
0.56
0.82
0.48
0.70
2.66
COD
(kg/kkg)
19.64
10.34
16.10
14.85
15.52
18.88
9.91
7.32
7.98
6.27
24.69
TSS
(kg/kkg)
5.48
1.84
2.34
3.49
2.47
3.68
1.58
1.82
1.45
1.56
7.66
Total
Phenols
(g/kkg)
18.30
2.29
2.49
1.80
3.99
8.86
2.55
3.97
4.11
3.40
14.46
     *  BAT Options beyond BPT were not considered for low water use
        processing.

     ** Chemical coagulation was not considered for wool scouring.
                                      379

-------
                           TABLE VII-86 (continued)

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 3 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                             CHEMICAL COAGULATION
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring

2.  Wool Finishing

4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5-  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.  Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
Total Toxic
 Organics
  (8/kkg)
  194.80
   12.41
   24.91
  167.45
   32.98
   95.87
   37.66

    2.38

   18.90

   14.96

   14.46
                                                        Total Toxic
                                                           Metals
781.20
 20.70
 35.16
 47.40
 51.48
 97.10
 18.92

 17.37

 47.00

  7.44

 14.04
                                     380

-------
                                 TABLE VII-87

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 4 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                           CHEMICAL COAGULATION PLUS
                             MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

1.  Wool Scouring**

2.  Wool Finishing

3.  Low Water Use Processing*
    a.  General Processing
    b.  Water Jet Weaving

4.  Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5.  Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.  Carpet Finishing

7.  Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.  Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.  Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
(kg/kkg)
1.90
0.46
0.78
1.06
0.71
0.98
0.45
0.65
0.39
0.55
2.13
COD
(kg/kkg)
16.36
8.46
13.18
12.15
12.70
15.45
8.11
5.99
6.53
5.13
20.58
TSS
(kg/kkg)
2.74
0.61
0.78
1.16
0.82
1.23
0.53
0.61
0.48
0.52
2.55
Total
Phenols
(g/kkg)
14.64
1.75
1.90
1.38
3.06
6.77
1.95
3.04
3.15
2.60
11.06
     *  BAT Options beyond BPT were not considered for low water use
        processing.

     ** Option 4 not considered for wool scouring.
                                     381

-------
                           TABLE VII-87 (continued)

                  LONG-TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
                     OPTION 4 - BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PLUS
                           CHEMICAL COAGULATION PLUS
                             MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

1.   Wool Scouring

2.   Wool Finishing

4.   Woven Fabric Finishing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Desizing

5.   Knit Fabric Processing
    a.  Simple Processing
    b.  Complex Processing
    c.  Hosiery Products

6.   Carpet Finishing

7.   Stock & Yarn Finishing

8.   Nonwoven Manufacturing

9.   Felted Fabric Processing
Total Toxic
 Organics
  (8/kkg)
  121.80
    7.30
   14.65
   98.50
   19.40
   56.40
   22.15

   14.01

   11.12

    8.80

    8.51
Total Toxic
   Metals
  (8/kkg)
  551.40
   20.70
   35.16
   47.40
   51.48
   97.10
   18.92

   17.37

   47.00

    7.44

   14.04
                                      382

-------
Assessment of Treatment Capability - Under option 1  no  specific
limitations for toxic or nonconventional pollutants are developed
beyond requirements of the General Pretreatment Regulations found
at  40  CFR  Part  403  {43  FR 27736, June 26, 1978; 46 FR 9462,
January 28, 1981 ).

Final effluent characteristics resulting from the application  of
Option   2   were  developed  based  on  effluent  concentrations
determined to  be  representative  of  the  application  of  lime
settling  technology  in  treating  metals  in the electroplating
industry  (88).   These  studies  have  demonstrated   that   the
technology  can achieve 30-day average concentrations of 0.8 mg/1
for copper and  0.7  mg/1  for  chromium  and  zinc.   Achievable
maximum  day concentrations are 2.0 mg/1 for copper, 1.8 mg/1 for
chromium and 1.5 mg/1 for zinc.  Effluent  limitations  for  each
subcategory   were  then  calculated  as  the  product  of  these
concentrations and median subcategory wastewater flows.  PSES and
PSNS effluent characteristics for Option 2 are presented in Table
VII-88.
                                383

-------
                                      TABLE VII-88
                                PSES and PSNS - OPTION 2
                           CHEMICAL COAGULATION/PRECIPITATION
                                EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS*
                                     Average of
                                     30 days Maximum
1.  Wool Scouring
2.  Wool Finishing
3.  Woven Fabric
     Finishing
    a. Simple Processing
    b. Complex Processing
    c. Desizing
4.  Knit Fabric Finishing
    a. Simple Processing
    b. Complex Processing
    c. Hosiery Products
5.  Carpet Finishing
6.  Stock and Yarn
     Finishing
7.  Nonwoven Manu-
     facturing
8.  Felted Fabric
     Processing
Total
Copper


  9.4
243.5
 61.4
 78.1
 84.7

 94.1
 98.1
 60.1
 37.4

 77.4

 32.0

170.2
Total
Chromium
8.2
213.1
53.7
68.3
74.1
82.3
85.8
52.6
32.7
67,7
28.0
148.9
Total
Zinc
8.2
213.1
53.7
68.3
74.1
82.3
85.8
52.6
32.7
67.7
28.0
148.9
                                        Maximum Day
                                                              Total
                                                              Copper
 23.4
608.8
153.4
195.2
211.8

235.2
245.2
150.2
 93.4

193.4

 80.0

425.4
Total
Chromium
21.1
547.9
138.1
175.7
190.6
211.7
220.7
135.2
84.1
174.1
72.0
382.9
Total
Zinc
17.6
456.6
115.1
146.4
158.9
176.4
183.9
112.7
70.1
145.1
60.0
319.1
*Eff1uent characteristics in g of pollutant per kkg of product.
                                           384

-------
                          SECTION VIII

    EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
     BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

GENERAL

The best practicable control technology currently available (BPT)
generally  is  based  on  the  average  of  the   best   existing
performance,  in  terms of treated effluent discharged, by plants
of various sizes, ages and unit processes within an  industry  or
subcategory.  Where existing performance is uniformly inadequate,
BPT  may be transferred from a different subcategory or category.
Limitations based on transfer of technology must be supported  by
a  conclusion  that the technology is, indeed, transferable and a
reasonable prediction that it will be capable  of  achieving  the
prescribed  effluent  limits (see  Tanners' Council of America v.
Train.  540  F.  2d  1188  (4th  Cir.  1976)).   BPT  focuses  on
end-of-pipe  treatment  technology rather than process changes or
internal controls, except where  such  changes  or  controls  are
common industry practice.

BPT  considers the total cost of the application of technology in
relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be  achieved  from
the  technologies.  The cost/benefit inquiry for BPT is a limited
balancing, which does not require the Agency to quantify benefits
in monetary terms (see, e.g., American Iron and  Steel  Institute
v.  EPA,  526  F.2d 1027 (3rd Cir. 1975)).  In balancing costs in
relation to effluent reduction benefits, EPA considers the volume
and nature of existing  discharges,  the  volume  and  nature  of
discharges  after  application  of BPT, the general environmental
effects of the pollutants and the costs and economic  impacts  of
the  required  pollution control level.  The Act does not require
or permit consideration of water quality problems attributable to
particular  point  sources  or  industries,  or   water   quality
improvements in particular water bodies (see Weyerhaeuser Company
v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1101 (D.C.  Cir. 1978)).

REGULATED POLLUTANTS
                                                         i
Pollutants regulated under BPT are BOD5., TSS and pH (conventional
pollutants),  and COD (a nonconventional pollutant) for the water
jet  weaving  subdivision  of  the  low  water   use   processing
subcategory,  the  nonwoven  manufacturing  subcategory  and  the
felted  fabric  processing   subcategory.    In   addition,   the
nonconventional  pollutants  sulfide  and  phenols  and the toxic
pollutant  total  chromium  are   regulated   in   the   nonwoven
manufacturing and felted fabric processing subcategories.
                                385

-------
IDENTIFICATION   OF   THE  BEST  PRACTICABLE  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

BPT for the water jet weaving subdivision of the  low  water  use
processing  subcategory,  the  nonwoven manufacturing subcategory
and the felted fabric processing subcategory has been  identified
as  biological  treatment,  which is the same technology on which
BPT limitations are based for  all  other  subcategories  of  the
textile industry.

BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

BPT effluent limitations are presented in Table VIII-1.

RATIONALE   FOR   THE   SELECTION  OF  BEST  PRACTICABLE  CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

As discussed in Section IV, the Agency  has  identified  two  new
subcategories   (nonwoven   manufacturing   and   felted   fabric
processing) and one new subdivision of  an  existing  subcategory
(water  jet  weaving in the low water use processing subcategory}
of the textile mills point source category.  The Clean Water  Act
requires  the  establishment  of  BCT  limitations  for  industry
subcategories from which conventional pollutants are  discharged.
In   order   to   develop  BCT  limitations,  a  base  level  BPT
determination  is  necessary  because  the   "cost-reasonableness
test,"  required  as  part of the BCT determination, rests on the
incremental cost of removal of BOD5. and  TSS  from  BPT  to  BCT.
Therefore,  to  aid  in  development  of  BCT  limitations and to
provide  uniform  national  BPT  effluent  limitations  for   all
segments  of the textile industry, the Agency is establishing BPT
effluent limitations for the nonwoven manufacturing  subcategory,
the  felted  fabric  processing  subcategory  and  the  water jet
weaving subdivision of the low water use processing subcategory.

EPA did not specifically propose BPT effluent limitations for the
two new subcategories or the  new  subdivision;  the  Agency  did
propose BAT limitations and provided information on the pollutant
removal  effectiveness  of  biological  treatment  and multimedia
filtration of biologically-treated effluents.  Public comments on
the proposed BAT limitations predominantly  favored  establishing
BAT  limitations based on the performance of biological treatment
alone.  As discussed in  Section  IX,  EPA  is  establishing  BAT
effluent  limitations  for  the  textile  industry  based  on the
performance of biological treatment.  Therefore,  the  technology
basis  of  BPT  and  BAT  effluent  limitations  for the nonwoven
manufacturing and the felted fabric  processing  subcategory  and
for  the  water  jet  weaving  subdivision  of  the low water use
processing subcategory are identical.
                                 386

-------
CO
    Subcategory

    Low Water Use Processing
      Water Jet Weaving

    Nonwoven Manufacturing

    Felted Fabric Processing
                                                       TABLE VIII-1
                                                 BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS*

Maximum
any one
BODS
8.9
4.4
15-2
Conventional
for
day
TSS
5.5
6.2
55.4
Pollutants
Average of daily values
for 30 consecutive days
BODS TSS
4.6 2.5
2.2 3.1
17.6 27.7
                                  pH shall be within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times.
                                           Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants
    Subcategory

    Low Water Use Processing
      Water Jet Weaving

    Nonwoven Manufacturing

    Felted Fabric Processing
            Maximum for
            any one day

                                Total
      COD    Sulfide  Phenols  Chromium
                                                                                Average of daily values
                                                                                for 30 consecutive days
COD
Sulfide   Phenols
 Total
Chromium
     21.3      ~        --        --        13.7

     40.0    0.046     0.023     0.023       20.0    0.023

    256.8    0.44      0.22      0.22       128.4    0.22

* Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib)
                  0.011

                  0.11
                     0.011

                     0.11

-------
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT LIMITATIONS

Water Jet Weaving Subdivision

The  water  jet  weaving  process  is  a   recent   technological
development.    In   fact,  sufficient  data  on  which  effluent
limitations and standards can be based are  available  from  only
two  mills.   At  both  of.  these  mills, biological treatment is
employed.  EPA is  establishing  BPT  limitations  equal  to  the
average performance levels achieved at these two mills.

Long-term  average  effluent  discharges for the pollutants BOD5.,
TSS and COD were calculated based  on  treatment  performance  at
these  two  mills.   Maximum  30-day  and  maximum  day  effluent
limitations  were   then  calculated  by  multiplying   long-term
average   effluent   limitations   by   the  variability  factors
determined   through   statistical   analysis    of    individual
conventional   pollutant   data.   The  statistical  analysis  is
described in detail in Section X.  The data on which BPT effluent
limitations are based is presented in Table VIII-2.

Nonwoven Manufacturing and Felted Fabric Processing

Sufficient data on the performance of biological treatment is not
available for these new subcategories.  BPT effluent limitations,
therefore, are based on the transfer of performance of biological
treatment from subcategories with similar raw wastes.

Raw material usage and production processes are  similar  in  (a)
the nonwoven manufacturing and carpet finishing subcategories and
(b)   the   felted  fabric  processing  and  the  wool  finishing
subcategories.   In  addition,  raw  waste   characteristics   of
wastewaters  discharged  from mills in the nonwoven manufacturing
subcategory and the  felted  fabric  processing  subcategory  are
similar  to  those  discharged from mills in the carpet finishing
and wool finishing subcategories,  respectively.   (As  shown  on
Table  VIII-3,  BOD5.  and  COD  raw  waste  concentrations in the
nonwoven manufacturing and felted fabric processing subcategories
are equal to or lower than BOD5. and  COD  concentrations  in  the
subcategories to which they are compared.)

BPT  limitations  were  calculated as the product of median flows
for the new subcategories and BPT final  effluent  concentrations
for  the  subcategory  used as the basis for technology transfer.
The computation of BPT limitations is presented in Table VIII-4.

In making the decision to base BPT effluent limitations for these
two new subcategories on the performance  of  technology  in  two
existing  subcategories,  the  Agency  determined that biological
treatment is clearly available and could be employed at the mills
in  the  nonwoven  manufacturing  and  felted  fabric  processing
subcategories.   The  BPT limitations are based on the ability of
biological  treatment  to  remove  the   same   pollutants   from
                                388

-------
                                TABLE VIII-2

                     CALCULATION OF BPT LIMITATIONS*
                      Water Jet Weaving Subdivision
                    Long Term Average
Effluent Limitation**
Pollutant
BOD5
COD
TSS
Mill
G3114
3.54
8.94
1.86
Mill
G3117
1.91
9.14
0.97
Average
2.72
9.04
1.42
Maximum
8.9
21.3
5.5
Average of 30
days maximum
4.6
13.7
2.5



*  Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg (Ib pollutant/1000 Ib of product)

** Effluent limitations are the product of the subcategory long-term
   average and the variability factors developed in Section X.
                                  389

-------
                                                     TABUS VIII-3

                                             COMPARISON OF RAW WASTE LOADS

                           Felted Fabric Processing and Noawoven Manufacturing Subcategories
  Subcategory

  Wool Finishing
  Felted Fabric Processing

  Carpet Finishing
  Nonwoven Manufacturing
FLOW
I/kg
135.0
212.7
70.0
40.0
k*/
63
70
25
6
BOD.
• -t J
.6
.2
.6
.7
fflg/1
471
330
366
168
kg/k
204
186
82
38
kg
.8
.0
.3
.4
COD
mg/1
1517
874
1176
960
kg/kkg
54.0
301.4
4.7
2.2
TSS
mg/1
400
1417
67
55
CO
ir>
o
Notes:    1.   Raw waste loads in kg/kkg and flow for felted fabric processing and
               nonwoven manufacturing are median subcategory values from historical
               data base.

          2.   Flows for wool finishing and carpet finishing are flows upon which
               BPT was based.

          3.   Concentrations shown are calculated from mass discharge and flows
               presented.

-------
                                                 TABLE VIII-4

                                        CALCULATION OF BPT LIMITATIONS
                       Felted Fabric Processing and Nonwoven Manufacturing Subcategories
                                                 Maximum of 30-Day Average
       Subcategory
       Wool Finishing
       Felted Fabric

       Carpet Finishing
       Nonwoven Manufacturing
BOD
11.2
17.6
3.9
2.2
COD
81.5
128.4
35.1
20.0
TSS
17.6
27.7
5.5
3.1
Sulfide
0.14
0.22
0.04
0.023
Phenols
0.07
0.11
0.02
0.011
Chromium
0.07
0.11
0.02
0.011
CO
       NOTE:   1.  Felted  fabric  limitation  is equal to  (Wool Finishing Limitation)(Felted Fabric
                  Flow/Wool Finishing Flow).  In this case, Felted Fabric Limitation =
                  Wool Finishing Limitation)(212.7/135)

                  Similarly, Nonwoven Manufacturing Limitation =
                            (Carpet Finishing Limitation)(40.0/70.0)

               2.  Maximum day  limitations are equal to  two times the Maximum 30-Day Average.

-------
wastewaters  discharged  from  mills  in the carpet finishing and
wool finishing subcategories and, when applied at mills in  these
two  subcategories,  is  capable  of  attaining  the  limitations
presented in Table VIII-4.

COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS

The total costs (4th quarter  1979}  of  attainment  of  the  BPT
effluent  limitations,  assuming  biological  treatment  must  be
installed at all mills in the two new subcategories and  the  new
subdivision, have been estimated to be about $2.6 million dollars
in  capital  costs  with an associated total annual cost of about
$1.4 million dollars per year.  Five nonwoven mills, three  water
jet  weaving  mills  and  one  felted  fabric processing mill are
direct dischargers.

Conventional pollutant removals from raw  waste  discharges  from
the  two  new  subcategories  and  the  new subdivision have been
estimated to be 173 thousand kg/yr (381 thousand Ibs/yr) of  BOD£
and  43  thousand  kg/yr  (94  thousand  Ibs/yr)  of  TSS.  These
represent removals of 81 percent of the BOD5, and  56  percent  of
the  TSS  present  in raw wastes discharged from mills in the two
new subcategories and the new  subdivision.   Removal  costs  are
about  $6.48  per  kg  ($2.95  per  Ib) of conventional pollutant
removed.

NONWATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Energy

Attainment of BPT at mills in the two new subcategories  and  the
new  subdivision  will  require  the use of the equivalent of 668
thousand liters (4200 barrels) of residual fuel oil per  year,  a
1.6 percent increase over estimated current total industry energy
usage for wastewater treatment.

Solid Waste

Attainment  of  BPT at mills in the two new subcategories and the
new subdivision will result in  an  additional  282  kkg/yr  (311
tons/yr)  of  wastewater treatment solids.  This represents a 0.7
percent increase in current total industry  biological  treatment
solids generation.

Air and Noise

Attainment  of  BPT at mills in the two new subcategories and the
new subdivision will have no measurable impact on  air  or  noise
pollution.
                                392

-------
                           SECTION IX

      EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION
      OF BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
                 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL

As  a  result  of the Clean Water Act of 1977, the achievement of
BAT has  become  the  principal  national  means  of  controlling
wastewater   discharges   of   toxic   pollutants.   The  factors
considered  in  establishing  the   best   available   technology
economically  achievable (BAT) level of control include the costs
of applying the control technology, the age of process  equipment
and  facilities,  the  process  employed,  process  changes,  the
engineering  aspects  of  applying  various  types   of   control
technologies  and  nonwater  quality environmental considerations
such as  energy  consumption,  solid  waste  generation  and  air
pollution (Section 304(b)(2)(B)).  In general, the BAT technology
level  represents, at a minimum, the best economically-achievable
performance of plants of shared characteristics.  Where  existing
performance  is  uniformly  inadequate,  BAT  technology  may  be
transferred from a different subcategory or industrial  category.
BAT  may  include process changes or internal controls, even when
not common industry practice.

The statutory assessment of BAT "considers" costs, but  does  not
require  a balancing of costs against effluent reduction benefits
(see Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1101 (D.C. Cir. 1978)).  In
assessing the proposed BAT, EPA has given substantial  weight  to
the  reasonableness  of  costs.   The  Agency  has considered the
volume and the nature of discharges, the  volume  and  nature  of
discharge   expected   after  application  of  BAT,  the  general
environmental  effects  of  the  pollutants  and  the  costs  and
economic  impacts  of  the  required  pollution  control  levels.
Despite  this  expanded  consideration  of  costs,  the   primary
determinant   of  BAT  is  effluent  reduction  capability  using
economically-achievable technology.

PRIOR REGULATIONS

EPA promulgated BPT and BAT limitations, NSPS and  PSNS  for  the
textile mills point source category on July 5, 1974 (39 FR 24736;
40  CFR  Part 410, Subparts A-G).  Pollutants regulated under BAT
included the conventional pollutants BOD£,  TSS,  fecal  coliform
and  pH  for  all  subcategories  and oil and grease for the wool
scouring  subcategory.   Nonconventional   pollutants   regulated
included   COD,   total   pehnols,   sulfide  and  color  in  all
subcategories except  low  water  use  processing  (formerly  dry
processing),  where  only COD was regulated.  The toxic pollutant
total chromium was regulated  in  all  subcategories  except  low
water   use   processing.   The  technology  bases  for  the  BAT
                                393

-------
regulations included biological treatment, multimedia filtration,
chemical coagulation and  chloririation  with  variations  in  the
respective subcategories.

Industry  representatives  challenged  these  regulations  in the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.  In response to a  joint  motion
of  petitioners  and  EPA  to hold the case in abeyance while EPA
reconsidered the BAT limitations,  the  Court  remanded  all  the
regulations  except BPT to EPA for reconsideration.  In the joint
motion,  petitioners  withdrew  their  challenge   to   the   BPT
limitations  and those limitations are, therefore, in effect.  As
a result of the Court Order, the Agency and the American  Textile
Manufacturers  Institute  (ATMI)  began  a joint study to collect
information and data necessary to reconsider the  BAT,  NSPS  and
PSNS regulations.

As  a result of the court ordered review as well as the revisions
to the Clean Water Act making BAT the principal national means of
controlling toxic pollutant discharges, the Agency has reassessed
BAT.  BAT regulations presented in this document supersede  prior
BAT regulations.

REGULATED POLLUTANTS

One  toxic  pollutant,  total chromium, and three nonconventional
pollutants (chemical  oxygen  demand   (COD),  sulfide  and  total
phenols  (as  measured  by  the  procedures listed in 40 CFR Part
136)) are regulated in all subcategories except the low water use
processing subcategory where only COD  is regulated.

IDENTIFICATION OF  THE  BEST  AVAILABLE  TECHNOLOGY  ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE

BAT  limitations  for  toxic  and  nonconventional pollutants are
equal to previously promulgated BPT limitations.  The  technology
basis  for BAT is, therefore, the same as the technology basis of
BPT and includes preliminary screening,  primary  settling   (wool
scouring only), latex coagulation (carpet finishing and low water
use   processing   -  general  processing  only)  and  biological
treatment.

BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

BAT effluent limitations are presented in Table IX-1.  Allowances
for manufacturing operations and  fiber  type  are  presented  in
Table IX-2.

RATIONALE   FOR   THE  SELECTION  OF   BEST  AVAILABLE  TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE

In  October  of   1979,  EPA  published  proposed   BAT   effluent
limitations  based on biological treatment followed by multimedia
filtration, except in the case of the  wool scouring and the  wool
                                394

-------
                                                          TABLE IX-1
                                                  BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS*
CO
Subcategory

Wool Scouring**

Wool Finishing**

Low Water Use Processing
   General Processing
   Water Jet Weaving

Woven Fabric Finishing**

Knit Fabric Finishing**

Carpet Finishing

Stock and Yarn Finishing

Nonwoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Processing
Maximum for any
COD
138.0
163.0
2.8
21.3
60.0
60.0
70.2
84.6
40.0
256.0
Sulfide
0.20
0.28
-
0.20
0.20
0.08
0.24
0.046
0.44
one day
Phenols
0.10
0,14
-
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Total
Chromium
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Average
for 30
COD
69.0
81.5
1.4
13.7
30.0
30.0
35.1
42.3
20.0
128.4
of daily values
consecutive days
Sulfide
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
Phenols
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
Total
Chromium
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.11
           * Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg  of product  (lb/1000  Ib)  except  for wool scouring, which is
             expressed as kg pollutant/kkg  of wool  processed  and  wool  finishing which  is expressed as kg
             pollutant/kkg of fiber processed.
          ** For commission finishers,  an additional  allocation  of  100% of the  limitations  is allowed.

-------
                                                  TABLE IX-2
                                               BAT ALLOWANCES*

                                        CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD)
     Simple Manufacturing Operations
     employing a synthetic fiber or
     complex manufacturing operations
     employing a natural fiber.

          Woven Fabric Finishing

     Simple Manufacturing Operations
     employing a natural and synthetic
     fiber blend or complex manufacturing
to    operations employing a synthetic
     fiber.

          Woven Fabric Finishing
          Knit Fabric Finishing

     Complex manufacturing Operations
     employing a natural and synthetic
     fiber blend.

          Woven Fabric Finishing
          Knit Fabric Finishing

     Complex Manufacturing Operations

          Carpet Finishing
                                                   Maximum for
                                                   any one day
Average of daily values
for 30 Consecutive dayg
                                                       20.0
                                                       40.0
                                                       20.0
                                                       60.0
                                                       40.0
                                                       20.0
        10.0
        20.0
        10.0
        30.0
        20.0
        10.0
* Quantities of pollutant which may be discharged by a point source in addition to
  the BAT limitations in Table IX-1.

-------
finishing  subcategories  and the hosiery subdivision of the knit
fabric finishing subcategory  where  limitations  were  based  on
biological  treatment,  chemical  coagulation  and  dissolved air
flotation and  in  the  case  of  the  felted  fabric  processing
subcategory where limitations were based on biological treatment.
The proposed BAT effluent limitations would have controlled three
toxic  pollutants  (total chromium, total copper and total zinc).
Three  nonconventional  pollutants  would  have  been  controlled
(chemical  oxygen demand (COD), total phenols (as measured by the
procedure listed in 40 CFR Part 136, Standard Methods) and  color
(as  measured  by  the  method  developed  by  the  American  Dye
Manufacturers Institute (ADMI) and described in  the  proceedings
of  the  28th  Industrial  Waste Conference, Purdue University)).
One conventional pollutant (total  suspended  solids  (TSS))  was
proposed  as  an  indicator  for  the  control  of  toxic organic
pollutants discharged from textile mills.

Comments received on the proposed regulations questioned the need
for  controls  more  stringent  than  existing  BPT   for   these
pollutants.   The  commenters  stated  that  the level of control
proposed for existing mills was too costly  in  relation  to  the
effluent reduction benefits.

After  proposal,  EPA completed an analysis of all available data
to determine  the  quantity  of  pollutants  discharged  by  this
industry,   the   treatability   of  pollutants  present  in  BPT
effluents, the  cost  per  pound  of  pollutant  removed  by  the
proposed BAT technology and the economic impact that would result
from the implementation of proposed BAT limitations.

EPA   determined  that  the  amount  of  toxic  pollutants  being
discharged from the textile industry  when  BPT  limitations  are
attained  is  less than 3.2 kg (7 Ibs) per day per plant and that
the total industry discharge is about  209  kkg  (230  tons)  per
year.   The  total  chromium being discharged is less than 1.2 kg
(2.7  Ibs)  per  day  per  plant.   The  Agency  calculated  that
attainment of proposed BAT would result in costs of over $346 per
pound equivalent of total toxics removed.  [A pound equivalent is
calculated  by  multiplying  the  number  of  pounds of pollutant
discharged  by  a  weighting  factor  for  that  pollutant.   The
weighting  factor  is  equal to the water quality criterion for a
standard  pollutant,  copper,  divided  by  the   water   quality
criterion  for  the  pollutant  being  evaluated.]  This  cost is
significantly higher than for  other  industries  for  which  BAT
limitations   have   been  established  (e.g.,  iron  and  steel,
inorganic chemicals).   EPA  has  been  unable  to  identify  any
reasonable, less costly, technology option.  In addition, EPA has
estimated that attainment of proposed BAT limitations might cause
the  closure  of  nine  mills  and  the unemployment of some 1800
workers.  The Agency found that these closures might  affect  the
local  communities  in which the mills are located because of the
unavailability of alternative employment.
                                397

-------
The proposed BAT limitations were aimed at controlling 15 organic
toxic pollutants and  12  toxic  metals.   All  the  other  toxic
pollutants were excluded from regulation under Paragraph 8 of the
modified  Settlement  Agreement  (44 FR 62218; October 29, 1979).
After proposal, EPA compared the concentrations of these 27 toxic
pollutants present in textile industry wastewaters to the  lowest
concentration  of  each pollutant that can reasonably be achieved
by  the  application  of  known  technologies.    (These   lowest
achievable   concentrations   have   also   been  called  "lowest
theoretical treatability levels.") EPA also determined the degree
and frequency that these lowest concentrations are exceeded  (see
Section VI).  The Agency found that of the 27 toxic pollutants of
interest,  17  pollutants  were  found  above  lowest theoretical
treatability levels in the raw  waste  only  in  a  few  isolated
instances,  6  pollutants  were  found  above  lowest theoretical
treatability levels in treated effluents only in a  few  isolated
instances,  2  pollutants were detected at only a small number of
sources and are uniquely related to those sources and 1 pollutant
was not detectable with the use  of  state-of-the-art  analytical
methods  because  it  is  a  common  laboratory contaminant.  The
remaining pollutant, total chromium, is  controlled  by  existing
BPT effluent limitations.  Establishment of BAT as proposed would
result in only an estimated 10 percent reduction in the discharge
of  chromium   (i.e., only 0.14 kg (0.3 pounds) per day per plant)
at an estimated capital  cost  of  $41  million.   The  costs  of
additional  removal of chromium and the potential economic impact
do not justify further control.

In reviewing all available data and information, EPA  found  that
(1)  the  amounts of toxic pollutants discharged at the BPT level
of control are generally  low,  (2)  the  removal  costs  at  the
proposed  BAT  level of control are relatively high when compared
to other  industries, (3) toxic pollutants are found above  lowest
theoretical  treatability  levels in only isolated instances, and
(4) attainment of proposed BAT limitations might  result  in  the
closure  of nine mills and the loss of  1800 jobs.  Based on these
findings,  the  Agency  has  determined   that   more   stringent
regulation   of  toxic  pollutant  discharges  from  the  textile
industry  is not  justified  and  that  BAT  effluent  limitations
should  be  established  equal  to  BPT  limitations.  The Agency
recently  completed  an  environmental  assessment  in  which  we
compared   the   predicted   in-stream  concentrations  of  toxic
pollutants found in textile discharges  after  attainment  of  BPT
and  after  attainment  of proposed BAT effluent limitations with
EPA's ambient  water quality criteria.  This analysis confirms the
Agency's  decision not to control toxics beyond a BPT level.

The Agency recognizes  that  the  quantity  of  toxic  pollutants
discharged  from  individual  mills may, in some cases, be higher
than the  industry average  and  may  not  be  insignificant  when
viewed  as  a  single  point  source  discharge.  As explained in
Section VI,  several  toxic  pollutants  have  been  found  above
minimum   treatability  levels in a few  isolated instances.  These
                                 398

-------
include  1,2,4-trichlorobenzene,  2,4,6-trichlorophenol,  toluene
and  tetrachloroethylene  used  as  dye  carriers and napthalene,
pentachlorophenol and ethylbenzene used in the synthesis of dyes.
Permit-issuing authorities  may  find  it  necessary  to  require
representatives  of  individual  mills  to provide information on
toxic pollutant usage, to analyze for specific toxic  pollutants,
and/or  to  conduct  bioassay  testing  prior  to issuing a NPDES
permit.  Permit-issuing authorities may limit specific pollutants
on a case-by-case basis when limitations are necessary  to  carry
out  the  purposes  of  the  Act,  even  if  the pollutant is not
controlled by BAT limitations.

EPA has also decided that  the  nonconventional  pollutant  color
should be controlled on a case-by-case basis as dictated by water
quality  considerations, rather than through establishing uniform
national standards.  Color, in many instances,  is  an  aesthetic
pollutant,   although  in  some instances color can interfere with
sunlight transmission and the process of  photosynthesis  in  the
aquatic environment.  Color is a mill-specific problem related to
the combination of dyes and finishing chemicals used.

In  addition,  the  Agency  has  found  that  the quantity of the
nonconventional  pollutants  sulfide  and   total   phenols   now
discharged  by  the textile industry are adequately controlled by
existing BPT limits.  Accordingly, more stringent BAT limitations
are not needed.  This is because of several factors including (a)
substitution of sulfur dyes, (b) use of nonphenolic dye  carriers
and   preservatives  and  (c)  the  effectiveness  of  biological
treatment in removing these pollutants.  EPA has not identified a
technology option that is more effective  than  current  industry
practices.    Therefore, EPA is promulgating BAT limitations equal
to existing BPT limitations for sulfides and total phenols.

Furthermore, EPA has determined that it  is  not  appropriate  to
establish  more  stringent COD limitations.  Biological treatment
is capable of removing on the order of 70 percent of the COD  raw
waste  load  typical  of  this industry.  The technology on which
proposed BAT limitations were based is relatively ineffective  in
reducing  COD.   (The  application  of  multimedia  filtration in
addition to biological treatment increases COD  removal  to  only
about   75  percent.)   The  application  of  other  technologies
considered  during  development  of  the  proposed  rules  (e.g.,
multimedia filtration plus granular activated carbon, or chemical
coagulation,  sedimentation,  multimedia filtration plus granular
activated  carbon)  can  be  very  effective  in   reducing   COD
discharges.    However, these technologies have total annual costs
as much as three to six times that  of  the  proposed  BAT.   EPA
predicts  that  nine  mills  might  close  if  required to attain
proposed  BAT  limitations.   In  addition,  if   more   advanced
technology  were required, as many as 12 to 27 mills might close.
Because the costs of application of more advanced technologies to
control COD are  high  in  relation  to  the  effluent  reduction
benefits  and because of a potential for adverse economic impact,
                                399

-------
the  Agency  has  determined  that  COD  should  continue  to  be
controlled at the BPT level.

For   the  reasons  discussed  above,  EPA  is  establishing  BAT
limitations for toxic and nonconventional pollutants equal to the
previously   promulgated   BPT   limitations   (for   the   seven
subcategories  established  in  the 1974 regulations) or equal to
the BPT limitations developed in Section VIII (for  the  two  new
subcategories  and  for  the water jet weaving subdivision of the
low water use processing subcategory).   We  expect  that  Federal
and   State  permitting  authorities  will  establish  toxic  and
nonconventional pollutant limitations  more  stringent  than  the
existing  BPT, where needed, to account for unusual manufacturing
or  treatment  circumstances  or  to  achieve  or  maintain   the
receiving water quality.


NONWATER QUALITY IMPACTS

As   BAT   effluent   limitations   are  equal  to  BPT  effluent
limitations, there are no incremental  nonwater  quality  impacts
associated with attainment of BAT effluent limitations.
                                 400

-------
                            SECTION X

                NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
GENERAL
The  basis  for  new  source  performance  standards (NSPS) under
section 306  of  the  Act  is  the  best  available  demonstrated
technology.   At new plants, the opportunity exists to design the
best and  most  efficient  production  processes  and  wastewater
treatment  facilities,  so  Congress directed EPA to consider the
best  demonstrated  process  changes,   in-plant   controls   and
end-of-pipe  treatment  technologies that reduce pollution to the
maximum extent feasible.

PRIOR REGULATIONS

NSPS for the textile mills point source category were promulgated
on July 5, 1974 (39 FR 24736; 40 CFR  Part  410,  Subparts  A-G).
The  original  NSPS  established  limitations  for:  conventional
pollutants (BODS,  total suspended solids  (TSS),  fecal  coliform
and  pH  for  all  subcategories  and oil and grease for the wool
scouring subcategory), one toxic pollutant (total  chromium)  and
three  nonconventional pollutants (COD, total phenols and sulfide
(as measured by the procedures listed in 40 CFR Part 136)),   The
technology  basis  for  NSPS was biological treatment followed by
multimedia  filtration   (except   for   the   carpet   finishing
subcategory  where  NSPS  were based on biological treatment plus
chemical coagulation).  However, in  1974  the  Agency  concluded
that  at  most  new  mills,  NSPS  could  be attained by applying
in-plant controls and biological treatment.

Industry representatives  challenged  these  regulations  in  the
Fourth  Circuit  Court of Appeals.  In response to a joint motion
of petitioners and EPA to hold the case  in  abeyance  while  EPA
reconsidered  the  BAT  limitations,  the  Court remanded all the
regulations except BPT to EPA for reconsideration.  In the  joint
motion,   petitioners   withdrew   their  challenge  to  the  BPT
limitations and those limitations are, therefore, in effect.   As
a  result of the Court Order, the Agency and the American Textile
Manufacturers Institute (ATMI) began a  joint  study  to  collect
information  and  data  necessary to reconsider the BAT, NSPS and
PSNS regulations.

As a result of the court ordered review as well as the  revisions
to  the  Clean  Water  Act,  the Agency has completely reassessed
NSPS.  The standards presented in this  document  supersede  NSPS
contained in the 1974 regulation.
                                401

-------
REGULATED POLLUTANTS

Pollutants   regulated  under  NSPS  include  three  conventional
pollutants,  BOD5.,  TSS  and  pH;  one  toxic  pollutant,   total
chromium;   and  three  nonconventional  pollutants,  COD,  total
phenols and sulfide.


IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS

The technology basis  for  NSPS  in  all  nine  subcategories  is
biological  treatment  as  demonstrated  by  the  best performing
biological  treatment  systems  now  employed  in   the   textile
industry.   As  discussed in Section IV, NSPS are established for
separate subdivisions of the woven fabric  finishing  subcategory
(simple,  complex  and  desizing  operations) and the knit fabric
finishing subcategory (simple, complex and  hosiery  operations),
taking  into  account  actual wastewater treatment performance at
mills in each subcategory.

NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

NSPS effluent limitations are presented in Table X-l.

RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF NSPS

As explained previously, the regulations promulgated in  1974 were
challenged  by  industry.   In  January  of  1975,  all  of   the
regulations  except BPT were remanded to EPA for reconsideration.
After  further  study,  EPA  proposed  revised  NSPS   for   nine
subcategories  (44  FR  62204,  October 29,  1979).  The proposed
standards, with one exception, were based on the  performance  of
biological   treatment   followed  by  chemical  coagulation  and
            filtration.   In  the  low   water   use   processing
              proposed standards were based on the performance of
            treatment  only.   NSPS,  as  proposed,  would   have
             controls  on  BOD5,  COD,  TSS,  total phenol, total
multimedia
subcategory,
biological
established
chromium, total copper, total zinc, color and pH.

Comments received on the proposed regulation questioned the  need
for  controls  more  stringent  than  proposed  BAT,  which  were
generally based on the application of biological  treatment  plus
the   addition   of   multimedia  filtration  (see  Section  IX).
Subsequent  to  proposal,  the  Agency  evaluated  all  available
information  and  determined  that  biological treatment provides
adequate control of the discharge of toxic pollutants and results
in a significant reduction of  nonconventional  and  conventional
pollutants.   Application  of biological treatment at new sources
will not change the rate of entry into the industry or  slow  the
industry  growth  rate.   Therefore,  the  Administrator selected
biological  treatment  as   the   technology   basis   of   NSPS.
Promulgated  NSPS  for  BOD5., COD and TSS are more stringent than
BPT/BAT effluent limitations.  Specific standards  are  generally
                                402

-------
o
U)
     Subcategory
                                                          TABLE X-l
                                              NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS*
                                                  CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS**
Maximum for any one day
Average of daily values
for 30 consecutive days
Wool Scouring
Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
General Processing
Water Jet Weaving
Woven Fabric Finishing
Simple Operations
Complex Operations
De sizing
Knit Fabric Finishing
Simple Operations
Complex Operations
Hosiery Products
Carpet Finishing
Stock and Tarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
BODS
3.6
10.7
1.4
8.9
3.3
3.7
5.5
3.6
4.8
2.3
4.6
3.6
2.6
16.9
TSS
30.3
32.3
1.4
5.5
8.8
14.4
15.6
13.2
12.2
8.4
8.6
9.8
4.9
50.9
BODS
1.9
5.5
0.7
4.6
1.7
1.9
2.8
1.9
2.5
1.2
2.4
1.9
1.4
8.7
TSS
13.5
14.4
0.7
2.5
3.9
6.4
6.9
5.9
5.4
3.7
3.8
4.4
2.2
22.7
          *  Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib) except for wool scouring which is
             expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of wool processed and wool finishing which is expressed as
             kg pollutant/kkg of fiber processed.
          ** For all subcategories, pH within the range 6.0 to 9.0 at all times.

-------
                                                TABLE X-l (cont'd)
                                         NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS*
                                       TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
                                     Maximum for any one day
Average of daily values
for 30 consecutive days
COD
52.4
113.8
2.8
21.3
41.7
68.7
59.5
48.1
51.0
30.7
26.6
33.9
15.2
179.3
Sulfide
0.20
0.28
-
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.08
0.24
0.046
0.20
Phenols
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.12
0.12
0.023
0.10
Total
Chromium
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.22
COD
33.7
73.3
1.4
13.7
26.9
44.2
38.3
31.0
32.9
19.8
17.1
21.9
9.8
115.5
Sulfide
0.10
0.14
-
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.023
0.10
Phenols
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.011
0.05
Total
Chromium
0.05
0.07
-
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.011
0.05
Subcategory

Wool Scouring

Wool Finishing

Low Water Use Processing
   General Processing
   Water Jet Weaving

Woven Fabric Finishing
   Simple Operations
   Complex Operations
   Desizing

Knit Fabric Finishing
   Simple Operations
   Complex Operations
   Hosiery Products

Carpet Finishing

Stock and Tarn Finishing

Nonwoven Manufacturing

Felted Fabric Manufacturing 179.3

     *  Expressed as kg pollutant/kkg of product (lb/1000 Ib) except for wool scouring which is based
        on kg/kkg of wool processed and wool finishing which is based on kg/kkg of processed fiber.

-------
based  on  the  median discharge  levels attained at  existing  best
performers   in  each  subcategory  of   the   textile    industry.
Exceptions occur  (a)  in the nonwoven manufacturing and  the  felted
fabric processsing subcategories where, for  the reasons discussed
in  Section  VIII,  NSPS are based on transfer of technology  from
the  carpet   finishing   and   wool   finishing   subcategories,
respectively, and  (b) for the hosiery products subdivision  of the
knit   fabric   finishing  subcategory  where,  for  the reasons
discussed below, NSPS are based on transfer  of  technology  from
the  simple  manufacturing  operations  subdivision  of  the  knit
fabric finishing subcategory.   The  promulgated  NSPS   level  of
control  represents the best demonstrated performance of existing
biological treatment  systems in this industry.

EPA has also decided  that  the  nonconventional  pollutant  color
should be controlled  on a case-by-case basis as dictated by water
quality  considerations, rather than through establishing uniform
national standards.   Color, in many instances,  is   an   aesthetic
pollutant,   although  in  some instances color can interfere  with
sunlight transmission and the process of  photosynthesis in   the
aquatic environment.  Color is a mill-specific problem  related to
the combination of dyes and finishing chemicals used.

In  addition,  the  Agency  has  found  that the quantity  of the
nonconventional  pollutants  sulfide  and    total    phenols   now
discharged   by  the textile industry are adequately  controlled by
existing BPT limits.  Accordingly, more stringent  NSPS  are   not
needed.   This  is  because  of  several  factors  including   (a)
substitution of sulfur dyes, (b) use of nonphenolic  dye  carriers
and   preservatives   and  (c)  the  effectiveness  of   biological
treatment in removing these pollutants.  EPA has not identified a
technology option that is more effective  than  current  industry
practices.   Therefore, EPA is promulgating NSPS equal to existing
BPT limitations for sulfides and total phenols.

METHODOLOGY  USED FOR  DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS

NSPS  were   calculated  as  the  product of  (a) long-term average
discharge  levels  of each  specific  pollutant   and    (b)    an
appropriate  variability factor for each specific pollutant.

Data Base

•The  data base used for the development of NSPS includes 72 mills
where biological treatment is in"place that  is representative  of
the best practicable  control technology currently available.   The
following criteria were used in the selection of the 72 plants to
be included  in the data base:
     1.   Biological treatment generally  representative
          type that formed the basis of BPT is used.
of  the
                                405

-------
     2.


     3.


     4.


     5.
Treatment  system  performance  is  characteristic  of,
although not necessarily achieving, BPT limitations.
Sufficient long-term data  were
seasonal variability.
available  to  reflect
Overall response  to  the  industry  data  request  was
accurately and conscientiously prepared.

Production and flow data were available.
Long-term average BOD5.,  TSS  and  COD  discharges  per  unit  of
production for the 72 plant data base are presented in Table X-2.

Calculation of Subcateqory Long-Term Average Discharge Levels

Best  performers were identified as those where long-term average
BOD5., TSS and COD effluent discharges were less than the  maximum
30-day  average BPT effluent limitations for each parameter.  For
each subcategory, the median long-term average BOD!>, TSS and  COD
characteristic  of  the  best performing mills forms the basis of
NSPS limitations for these parameters.  The best  performers  are
identified  and the median subcategory long-term averages used as
the basis of NSPS are presented in Table X-3.

As discussed previously, insufficient data are available  on  the
performance   of   biological  treatment  in  the  new   nonwoven
manufacturing  and  felted   fabric   processing   subcategories.
Long-term averages for these subcategories were, therefore, based
on  flow-adjusted long-term averages for the carpet finishing and
wool finishing subcategories for the reasons presented in Section
VIII.

In addition, no best performing mills have been identified  in the
hosiery  products  subdivision  of  the  knit  fabric   finishing
subcategory.    Therefore,   as   explained   in  the  Notice  of
Availability of Additional Information (46 FR  8590,  January 27,
1981),  long-term average biological treatment performance  levels
for the hosiery products subdivision are  based  on  transfer  of
technology  from  the  simple  processing subdivision of the knit
fabric finishing subcategory.  This transfer is justifed  because
(a)  manufacturing operations, raw material usage, and wastewater
characteristics are similar at mills in  both  subdivisions,  (b)
biological  treatment  is  available  and  can be employed  at new
sources in the hosiery products subdivision, and  (c)  biological
treatment,  when  applied  at  -new  hosiery  mills, is capable of
attaining the long-term average performance levels  presented  in
Table X-3.

Effluent Variability Analysis

Pollutant  quantities  discharged  from  a  wastewater  treatment
system vary.  This  variability  is  accounted  for  .in  deriving
                                406

-------
                TABLE X-2

  LONG TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT (72 PLANT) DATA BASE
BOD
Subcategory/Plant No. (kg/kRg)
Wool Scouring
10006
10015
BPT Max. 30 day limit
Wool Finishing
20005
20009
20011
20020
20021
BPT Max. 30 day limit
Woven Fabric (Simple Processing)
40023
40035
40050
40098
40100
40109
40143
BPT Max. 30 day limit
Woven Fabric (Complex Processing)
40022
40091
40111
40148
40154
40160
BPT Max. 30 day limit

0.40
1.82
5.30

10.39
3.28
6.43
2.93
50.5
11.2

0.36
5.05
1.84
2.59
3.44
18.77
1.01
3.3

4.05
5.30
3.19
.54
1.14
5.03
3.3
                             COD
                           (kg/kkg)
                             8.93
                            35.58
                            69.0
                            52.13
                            44.33
                           104.7
                            81.5
                             7.63
                            71.71
                            45.99
                            36.22
                            31.02

                            17.67
                            30.0
                            42.47
                            23.79
                            55.88

                            29.06
                            44.42
                            60.0
  TSS
(kg/kkg)
   1.00
  14.56
  16.10
  20.64
   8.30
  14.10
   5.47
  27.5
  17.6
   1.38
   8.95
   4.43
  11.26
   3.92
   8.60
   2.27
   8.9
  10.11
   7.55
   3.20
   4.83
   3.70
  11.42
   8.9
  Best
Performer
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
    X
                   407

-------
                             TABLE X-2 (continued)

                     LONG TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
                   BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT (72 PLANT) DATA BASE
                                   BOD
SubcategorPlant No.
Woven Fabric (Desizing)
40012
40017
40034
40037
40059
40064
40072
40074
40087
40097
40099
40103
40120
40140
40145
40151
40153
BPT Max. 30 day limit
Knit Fabric (Simple Processing)
50008
50015
50057
50081
50082
50098
50108
50113
50116
BPT Max. 30 day limit
Knit Fabric (Complex Processing)
50035
50056
50065
50099
50123
BPT Max. 30 day limit

1.17
.87
1.75
3.17
3.02
3.01
.73
2.31
1.87
.76
2.14
1.61
.51
4.66
1.12
3.13
9.76
3.3

2.45
2.67
2.02
.89
1.52
9.68
.87
1.30
.42
2.5

3.31
8.31
7.46
1.47
.14
2.5
  COD
(kg/kks)
  TSS
(kg/kkg)
  Best
Performer
1.17
.87
1.75
3.17
3.02
3.01
.73
2.31
1.87
.76
2.14
1.61
.51
4.66
1.12
3.13
9.76
3.3
-
4.69
30.12
25.17
41.61
-
21.73
58.92
-
21.53
32.99
-
14.67
29.40
25.48
14.48
69.36
60.0
5.43
.65
6.43
1.84
3.40
10.62
.71
15.14
2.54
1.59
6.52
1.73
4.56
7.66
8.65
4.91
19.38
8.9
X
X
X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X


2.45
2.67
2.02
.89
1.52
9.68
.87
1.30
.42
2.5
.
64.02
71.94
8.68
28.58
37.61
20.40
22.45
9.13
30.0
3.24
5.22
3.29
3.53
8.28
12.68
1.56
6.21
1.32
10.9
X


X
X

X
X
X

3.31
8.31
7.46
1.47
.14
2.5
40.45
68.26
58.00
21.62
3.31
70.0
17.17
11.60
6.19
3.13
.66
8.9



X
X

                                      408

-------
                             TABLE X-2  (continued)

                     LONG TERM AVERAGE EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
                   BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT  (72 PLANT) DATA BASE
Subcategory/Plant No.

Knit Fabric  (Hosiery Products)

5H028
5H029
BPT Max. 30  day limit

Carpet Manufacturing
60001
60005
60013
60018
60021
60034
60037
60039
BPT Max,
30 day limit
Stock and Yarn Finishing

70009
70031
70036
70075
70084
70087
70089
70096
70104
70106
70126
BPT Max. 30 day limit
                          BOD
                        (kg/kgg)
                          2.47
                          6.62
                          2.5
  98
  01
  45
  37
  58
  84
1.73
4.77
3.9
             COD
           (kg/kkg)
            23.43
            37.09
            70.0
 6.41
19.06
 8.72
11.27
26.02
15.31

33.71
35.1
            TSS
          (kg/kkg)
              3.94
              6.70
              8.9
  .81
 3.85
 1.58
 2.80
 6.10
 3.42
 1.64
10.93
 5.5
          Best
        Performer
            X
                                                               X
                                                               X
                                                               X
                                                               X

                                                               X
                                                               X
.94
.57
3.31
.55
1.85
1.27
1.85
1.75
.71
.23
10.13
3.4
17.24
11.24
42.94
10.17
23.85
8.34
55.31
11.53
21.15
4.99
24.21
42.3
1.56
2.43
7.24
2.61
6.42
1.43
7.60
1.44
4.36
.34
8.28
8.7
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X


                                      409

-------
              TABLE X-3




CALCULATION OF NSPS LONG-TERM AVERAGE
Mill
Wool Scouring
10006
10015
MEDIAN
Wool Finishing
20011
20009
20020
MEDIAN
Woven Fabric Finishing
40143
MEDIAN
Woven Fabric Finishing
40148
40154
MEDIAN
Woven Fabric Finishing
40120
40012
40072
40097
40037
40151
40145
40099
40103
40034
40059
40087
MEDIAN
BOD,
(kg/kfcg)
0.40
1.82
1.11
6.43
3.28
2.93
3.28
(Simple)
1.01
1,01
(Complex)
0.54
1.14
0.84
(Desizing)
0.51
1.17
0.73
0.76
3.17
3.13
1.12
2.14
1.61
1.75
3.02
1.87
1.68
COD
(kg/kkg)
8.9
35.6
22.2
52.13
44.33
48,23
17.67
17.67
29.1
29.1
14.67
21.73
21.53
25.17
14.48
25.48
32.99
30.12
41.61
25.2
TSS
(kg/kkg)
1.0
14.56
7.8
14.10
8.30
5.47
8.30
2.27
2.27
4.83
3.70
4.30
4.56
5.43
0.71
1.59
1.84
4.91
8.66
6.52
1.73
6.43
3.40
2.54
4.00
            410

-------
                         TABLE X-3 (continued)

                 CALCULATION OF NSPS LONG-TERM AVERAGE
Mill
Knit Fabric (Simple)
50008
50081
50108
50116
50082
50113
MEDIAN
Knit Fabric (Complex)
50099
MEDIAN
Knit Fabric (Hosiery)
BOD
(kg/kJg)
2.45
0.69
0.87
0.42
1.52
1.30
1.10
1.47
1.47

COD
(kg/kkg)
8.68
20.40
9.13
28.58
22.45
20.4
21.62
21.62

TSS
(kg/kkg)
3.24
3.53
1.56
1.32
8.28
6.21
3.4
3.13
3.13

     Due to insufficient data to apply the general methodology
     hosiery numbers were based on the simple processing group
     adjusted for flow (simple x 75.1/117/6).
Annual Ave.
Carpet Manufacturing
0.69
13.0
2.16
60018
60005
60013
60037
60001
60034
1.37
1.01
1.45
1.73
0.98
1.84
11.27
19.06
8.72
.
6.41
15.31
2.80
3.85
1.58
1.64
0.81
3.42
MEDIAN
1.41
11.27
2.22
                             411

-------
                         TABLE X-3 (continued)

                 CALCULATION OF NSPS LONG-TERM AVERAGE
Mill
  BOD
(kg/kSg)
Stock and Yarn Finishing
  COD
(kg/kkg)
  TSS
(kg/kkg)
70087
70096
70104
70009
70075
70031
70036
70084
MEDIAN
1.27
1.75
0.71
0.94
0.55
0.57
3.31
1.85
1.10
8.34
11.53
21.15
17.24
10.17
11.27
42.94
23.85
14.38
1.43
1.44
4.36
1.56
2.61
2.43
7.24
6.42
2.52
Non Woven Manufacturing

     As in proposal the wastewater characteristics are taken from
     Carpet Mills adjusted for flow:  (Carpet Mills) (40.0/46.7)
Annual Ave.
  1.21
  9.68
  1.90
Felted Fabric Processing

     As in proposal the wastewater characteristics are taken from
     Wool Finishing adjusted for flow:  (Wool Finishing) (212.7/304.4)
Annual Ave.
  2.66
  34.4
  6.00
                             412

-------
limitations  regulating  the  amount  of  pollutants  that may be
discharged by individual plants in  the  textile  industry.   The
statistical  procedures employed in analyzing variability for the
conventional   pollutants,   BOD5,   and   TSS,   and   for    the
nonconventional pollutant COD are described below.__

Effluent  Limitations  Guidelines  An  effluent  limitation is an
upper bound on the amount of pollutant discharge allowed per  day
or the average amount of pollutant discharge allowed for a period
of   30  days.   The  limitations  are  generally  determined  by
calculating the product of two numbers which may be derived  from
effluent data: one is referred to as a variability factor and the
other  as  a long-term average.  Two types of variability factors
are derived for the guidelines: a  daily  maximum  factor  and  a
30-day  maximum  factor.   The daily factor is the ratio of (a) a
value that would  be  exceeded  rarely  by  the  daily  pollutant
discharge  to  (b)  the  long-term  average daily discharge.  The
30-day factor is the ratio of (a) a value that would be  exceeded
rarely  by  the average of 30 daily discharge measurements to (b)
the long-term average daily  discharge.   The  long-term  average
daily  discharge  quantity  is  an  expression  of  the  long-run
performance of the treatment  process.   Given  a  daily  maximum
variability  factor  for  a  pollutant  (denoted  by  VF)  and  a
plant-specific long-term average for the same pollutant  (denoted
by  LTA),  the  plant-specific daily limitation is the product of
the variability factor and the  long-term  average  (VF  x  LTA).
Similarly,  given  a  30-day maximum variability factor  (VF30), a
plant specific limit for the average of 30 daily observations  is
VF30 x LTA.

Data   Base  The  data  base  for  the  calculation  of  effluent
variability included data for 39 of the 72 mills included in  the
total  data  base.   These  data  were  obtained  in  the initial
industry surveys and a  subsequent  data  request  for   long-term
daily data sent to representatives of ten facilities.

Variability Factors Both daily maximum and maximum 30-day average
variability  factors  were  determined that are representative of
the variation in treatment system performance in treating textile
industry BOD5., TSS and COD discharges.

     Daily  Maximum  Variability  Factors  -  -   Daily   maximum
variability factors were derived from daily effluent measurements
for  each  of  the  three pollutants.  Goodness-of-fit tests were
performed to determine whether  the  data  could  be  assumed  to
follow  either  a normal or lognormal distribution.  [If data are
assumed  to  follow  either  of   these   distributional   forms,
convenient  estimation  techniques  associated  with distribution
theory may be applied in order to estimate variability   factors.]
The  overall  results  of  the goodness-of-fit tests are somewhat
inconclusive in the sense that  the  data  are  not  consistently
normal  or  lognormal.   This is not surprising because  the small
sample sizes available for some of the mills substantially reduce
                               413

-------
the probability  of  correctly  rejecting  the  hypothesis  under
consideration.   With sufficiently large numbers of observations,
variability factors and limitations'  may  be  determined  without
making  assumptions  about  the functional form of the underlying
distribution of the data.  However, because of the  small  sample
sizes,    conventional   distribution-free   (or   nonparametric)
techniques were not appropriate in this case.

The  lognormal  distribution  was  assumed  for  the   underlying
distribution   of   the  data  because  plots  of  the  empirical
distribution function suggest that daily  pollutant  measurements
are  described  reasonably  well  by  the lognormal distribution.
Daily maximum variability factors for BOD!>, COD and  TSS  at  all
mills  in  the data base are presented in Table X-4.  Average and
median variability factors for all mills in  the  data  base  are
also shown in Table X-4.  Various alternatives present reasonable
possibilities  for  determining daily maximum variability factors
to be used in establishing NSPS for this industry.

It is reasonable to expect that at new mills, personnel  will  be
able to control effluent variability at least as well as the best
25  percent  of the mills for which sufficient data are available
to determine effluent variability.  Overall industry  variability
factors   were,  therefore,  based  on  the  25th  percentile  .of
individual mill values presented in Table X-4.

     30-Day Maximum Variability Factors -  -  Thirty-day  maximum
variability  factors  were calculated using a modification of the
Central Limit Theorem.  This theorem states that the distribution
of sample means of size "n" drawn from any one of a  large  class
of  different distributional forms will be approximately normally
distributed.    The   normal   distribution   provides   a   good
approximation  of the distribution of the sample mean for samples
as small as 25 or 30 data points (13).  Sample sizes of at  least
150  data  points  yield  five  successive  30-day  averages  and
represent a reasonable minimum number of averages from  which  to
assess the distributional form of the sample mean.

The  mill-specific  30-day  averages were found to fit the normal
distribution on the basis of the Lilliefors goodness-of-fit test.
The sample mean 
-------
              TABLE X-4

  MAXIMUM DAY VARIABILITY FACTORS
    LOGNORMAL DATA DISTRIBUTION
BOD
TSS
COD
Mill
Number
10006
10015
20009
20020
20021
40091
40098
40099
40100
40140
40143
40151
40154
40160
50008
50015
50035
50056
50057
50065
50081
50082
50098
50099
50116
50123
5H028
5H029
60001
60018
60021
70075
70084
70087
70089
70009
70031
70106
70126
MEAN
MEDIAN
25 percentile
Number
of Data
Points
46
93
4
46
182
15
192
172
234
-
-
8
221
135
157
-
181
140
34
117
49
173
67
9
-
52
24
16
14
29
24
16
153
105
12
51
48
175
17



Maximum
Day
7.021
5.428
4.425
5.492
4.652
3.805
3.825
3.354
4.809
-
-
3.942
3.799
2.194
2.017
-
4.017
3.298
4.927
3.909
5.749
4.122
3.835
2.928
-
1.718
11.253
2.865
4.016
4.505
3.535
4.708
3.640
4.223
1.463
2.870
3.328
3.188
5.881
4.14
3.94
3.27
Number
of Data
Points
47
95
4
45
192
8
192
173
234
19
13
8
52
140
157
-
185
142
56
115
49
174
56
4
18
52
24
13
3
29
24
16
154
105
12
51
50
180
17



Maximum
Day
5.781
6.360
2.258
4.532
4.818
4.185
3.789
4.010
4.842
1.850
6.073
5.421
7.065
4.257
4.448
-
5.062
5.221
5.072
6.719
6.464
4.751
3.993
1.685
4.822
2.292
8.393
3.098
4.719
4.315
4.309
5.088
3.703
4.577
5.108
2.931
4.112
4.094
2.142
4.54
4.55
3.89
Number
of Data
Points
46
95
0
46
1
15
192
-
234
19
16
8
77
136
-
12
185
95
11
125
47
174
69
9
18
14
24
-
3
29
24
16
154
105
12
51
49
3
17



Maximum
Day
4.360
4.661
-
2.871
-
1.600
3.693
-
3.345
1.810
2.368
3.570
4.377
2.338
-
1.789
2.912
2.370
3.254
2.490
4.769
3.336
3.500
2.761
1.844
1.981
2.723
-
4.526
3.312
1.914
2.567
3.235
3.237
3.169
1.381
2.291
2.760
2.517
2.93
2.82
2.36
                415

-------
where X denotes the long-term mill-specific average.   Table  X-5
presents  the maximum 30-day average variability factors for each
mill for which sufficient BOD5., TSS and COD data were  available,
EPA  tested  this  method  to  see if it would yield a reasonable
approximation of the maximum 30-day average discharge  likely  to
occur  at  an individual mill.  The Agency found that 100 percent
of the individual 30-day averages were less  than  the  predicted
maximum  30-day  average  for each mill.  Based on this analysis,
EPA concluded that this was a  reasonable  method  of  estimating
maximum 30-day average variability factors.

Maximum  30-day average variability factors for BOD5,, COD and TSS
could be determined for only five to ten facilities.  Because  of
the limited data available, the Agency based final maximum 30-day
average   NSPS  on  median  maximum  30-day  average  variability
factors, rather than 25th percentile values.  Median  variability
factors are shown in Table X-5.

COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS

The cost of attainment of NSPS varies by subcategory as discussed
in  detail  in  Appendix A.  Substantial reductions of BODS., COD,
TSS,  phenols,  sulfide  and  total  chromium  will  resulF  upon
attainment of NSPS at new direct discharging textile mills.

NONWATER QUALITY IMPACTS

Energy  costs  and the cost of disposal of solid wastes have been
included in the costs of NSPS.  As the technology basis for  NSPS
is  the same as for BPT, there will be no significant impact over
the energy required and solid waste  generated  to  achieve  BPT.
Attainment 'of NSPS will have no measurable impact on noise or air
pollution.
                                416

-------
                                   TABLE X-5

                MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVERAGE VARIABILITY FACTORS FOR
                               BOD, TSS, AND COD
Plant
Number
020021
040098
004099
040100
040154
050008
050035
050082
070084
070106
Minimum
Variability
Factor
Maximum
Variability
Factor
Median
Variability
Factor
Maximum
BODS
2.01 (182)
1.71 (192)
1.63 (174)
2.49 (234)
2.03 (221)
1.57 (157)
1.66 (181)
1.51 (173)
1.89 (153)
1.60 (175)

1.51


2.49


1.69

30-Day Average Variability
TSS
1.88 (192)
1.42 (192)
1.35 (173)
2.39 (234)
(b)
1.88 (157)
2.29 (185)
1.35 (174)
1.54 (154)
1.73 (180)

1.35


2.39


1.73

Factors (a)
COD
(b)
1.52 (192)
(b)
1.67 (234)
(b)
(b)
1.47 (185)
1.38 (174)
1.77 (154)
(b)

1.35


1.77


1.52

(a)  Number of daily data points given in parentheses.
(b)  Insufficient daily data for analysis, or daily data not available.
                                     417

-------

-------
                           SECTION XI
               PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING
                         AND NEW SOURCES
GENERAL
Section  307  (b)  of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires EPA to
promulgate pretreatment standards  for  existing  sources  (PSES)
that  must  be  achieved  within  three years of promulgation and
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  dischargers,  like new direct
dischargers,  have  the  opportunity  to  incorporate  the   best
available  demonstrated  technologies  including process changes,
in-plant control measures and end-of-pipe treatment.

Pretreatment standards for existing and new sources are  designed
to  control  the  discharge  of  pollutants  that  pass  through,
interfere with,  or are otherwise incompatible with the  operation
of  a publicly owned treatment works (POTW).  The Clean Water Act
of 1977 requires pretreatment for pollutants  that  pass  through
the  POTWs  in  amounts  that  would  violate  direct  discharger
effluent limitations  or  interfere  with  the  POTW's  treatment
process  or  chosen  sludge  disposal  method.   The  legislative
history of the 1977 Act indicates that pretreatment standards are
to  be  technology-based,  analogous  to   the   best   available
technology.   EPA  has  generally  determined  that there is pass
through of pollutants if the percent of pollutants removed  by  a
well-operated POTW achieving secondary treatment is less than the
percent  removed  by the BAT model treatment system.  The general
pretreatment regulations, which served as the framework  for  the
categorical  pretreatment  regulations,  are found at 40 CFR Part
403.

PRIOR REGULATION

PSNS were promulgated on July 5, 1974  (39  FR  24739)  and  were
equal  to  the  standard  set  forth  in 40 CFR Part 128 with the
exception that pretreatment standards for incompatible pollutants
would be equal  to  NSPS.   Industry  representatives  challenged
these  regulations  in  the  Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.  In
response to a joint motion of petitioners and  EPA  to  hold  the
case  in abeyance while EPA reconsidered the BAT limitations, the
Court  remanded  all  the  regulations  except  BPT  to  EPA  for
reconsideration.   Subsequently,  in  a joint motion, petitioners
withdrew  their  challenge  to  the  BPT  limitations  and  those
limitations  are, therefore, in effect.  As a result of the Court
Order,  the  Agency  and  the  American   Textile   Manufacturers
                                419

-------
Institute  (ATMI)  began a joint study to collect information and
data necessary to reconsider the BAT, NSPS and PSNS regulations.

PSES were promulgated on May 26, 1977 (42 FR 26983)  establishing
general  pretreatment  requirements  (no specific pollutants were
limited) that included the elements  of  what  later  became  the
General  Pretreatment  Regulations,  now  included in 40 CFR Part
403.

As a result of the court ordered review as well as the  revisions
to  the Clean Water Act, the Agency has reassessed PSES and PSNS.
The standards presented in this document supersede the previously
published PSES and PSNS.

REGULATED POLLUTANTS

Categorical pretreatment standards are not being established  for
new  or  existing  sources; therefore, no specific pollutants are
regulated.

IDENTIFICATION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS  FOR  EXISTING  AND  NEW
SOURCES

PSES  and  PSNS  for the textile mills point source category shall
be the General Pretreatment Regulations found at 40 CFR Part  403
(43 FR 27736, June 26,  1978).

RATIONALE   FOR  THE  SELECTION  OF  PRETREATMENT  STANDARDS  FOR
EXISTING AND NEW SOURCES

As discussed previously, industry challenged the PSNS promulgated
in  1974 and  the regulation  was  remanded  to  the  Agency  for
reconsideration.    PSES,   establishing   general   pretreatment
requirements  (no  specific  pollutants   were   limited),   were
promulgated  in  1977   (42 FR 26983; May 26, 1977).  Revised PSNS
and PSES were proposed  in  1979  (see  44  FR  62204,  October 29,
1979).    The    proposed   pretreatment   standards   would  have
established controls on total chromium, total  copper  and  total
zinc.

Commenters  argued  that  pollutants  discharged  by  the textile
industry do not  interfere with or pass through POTWs.   Following
proposal,   the   Agency   reviewed   available  information  and
determined that  textile wastewaters are susceptible to  treatment
in  and do not  interfere with the operation of POTWs.  Comparison
of metal removal efficiencies at 20 POTWs and at textile  industry
biological treatment systems shows that POTW removal  of  copper,
chromium  and zinc is equal to or better than removal in  industry
biological treatment systems.  Therefore, these pollutants do not
pass through POTWs.
                                420

-------
Accordingly, under the authority  of  Paragraph  8(b)(i)  of  the
modified Settlement Agreement, this,regulation does not establish
categorical pretreatment standards for the textile industry.  The
textile  industry  will,  however,  remain subject to the General
Pretreatment Regulations.  Section VII  includes  information  on
the  capability of various technologies applicable to controlling
textile industry discharges to POTWs.  We expect  that  operators
of  POTWs  will  be  able  to  control  the discharge of specific
pollutants, if required, on a case-by-case basis and  could  make
use of the information contained herein.

COST OF APPLICATION

As  no  specific  pollutants  are  regulated under PSES and PSNS,
there are no costs associated with this regulation.

NONWATER QUALITY IMPACTS

As no specific pollutants are  regulated  under  PSES  and  PSNS,
there  are  no  nonwater  quality  impacts  associated  with this
regulation.
                                421

-------

-------
                           SECTION XII

                        ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. James E. Gallup, James R. Berlow and Richard E. Williams, all
of the Effluent Guidelines Division, served as  project  officers
during  the  technical study of the textiles industry.  Robert W.
Dellinger, Acting Chief, Wood Products and Fibers Branch provided
direction and  guidance  in  the  maturation  of  the  regulatory
strategy  and  the development of final rules.  Jeffery D. Denit,
Director, Effluent Guidelines Division, contributed  counsel  and
support during the study.

Other  EPA  personnel  who  contributed to the completion of this
project include Debra  Maness,  Louis  DuPuis,  Jessica  Pollner,
Clifton Bailey and James Spattarella of the Office of Regulations
and Standards.  In addition, Lee Schroer and Susan Lepow, both of
the Office of General Counsel - Water, provided valuable guidance
and direction.

The Sverdrup Corporation St. Louis, Missouri, and the E.G. Jordan
Co.,  Portland,  Maine,  were  the  technical  contractors to the
Agency,  they  collected  the  technical  data  and  information,
organized it, and provided it to the Agency.  Special recognition
and appreciation is expressed to Larry J. Oliver, P.E. and Conrad
R.  Bernier,  P.E.,  project  managers  for  Sverdrup and Jordan,
respectively.  These  gentlemen's  contributions  and  assistance
played a major role in the completion of the project.

The  cooperation  of  textiles  industry  companies and personnel
during the data and information collection phase of the study  is
also  gratefully  acknowledged.   Without  their cooperation, the
promulgation of final effluent  guidelines  and  standards  would
have  been greatly delayed.  The assistance of the industry trade
and  technical  associations,  especially  the  American  Textile
Manufacturers  Association,  the Northern Textile Association and
the Carpet and Rug institute is appreciated.

Finally, the performance of the  Effluent  Guidelines  Division's
word processing department is acknowledged.  The efforts of Pearl
Smith,  Carol  Swann and Glenda Nesby, in the face of what seemed
to be insurmountable odds at times, are greatly appreciated.
                                423

-------

-------
                          SECTION XIII

                           REFERENCES
1.    "Development Document for  Effluent  Limitations  Guidelines
and  New Source Performance Standards for the Textile Mills Point
Source   Category,"   U.S.   Environmental   Protection   Agency,
Washington, DC, Ref. No. EPA 440/1-74-022-a.
2•    Davison's  Textile  Blue  Book,   111th
Publishing Company, Ridgewood, NJ (1977).
Edition,   Davison
3,   "In-Plant  Control  of   Pollution   -   Upgrading   Textile
Operations  to  Reduce  Pollution," U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No. EPA 625/3-74-004.

4.   "Draft Development  Document:   Pretreatment  Standards  for
Textile  Mills (Addendum to the Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance  Standards  for
the  Textile Mills Point Source Category)," Sverdrup & Parcel and
Associates, Inc., St. Louis, MO  (November, 1976).

5.   "Textile  Industry  Technology  and  Costs   of   Wastewater
Control," Lockwood-Greene, New York, NY  (June, 1975).

6.   "Cost of Clean Water - Volume III, Industrial Waste Profiles
- No. 4, Textile Mill Products,  The,"  Federal  Water  Pollution
Control Administration, Washington, DC (September, 1967).

7.   "Census  of  Manufactures,  1972,"   Social   and   Economic
Statistics  Administration, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department
of Commerce Publication (1975).

8.   "CoUnty Business Patterns, 1975," County Business  Patterns,
Bureau of the Census, Ref. No. CBP-75-1.

9.   "Textiles - U.S. Industrial  Outlook,"  U.S.  Department  of
Commerce,  Domestic  and  International  Business Administration,
Washington, DC (1978), pp. 239-244.

10.  Trotman, E. R., Dyeing and Chemical  Technology  of.  Textile
Fibers,  Fifth  Edition,  Chas.  Griffin  & Co., Ltd., London, GB
(1975).

11.  "Sources and Strengths of  Textile  Wastewaters,"  Lockwood-
Greene  Engineers (Technology Transfer Report on Raw Waste Loads,
Chapter 4), pp. 4-1 to 4-65.

12.  Walpole, R. F., and Myers, R. H., Probability and Statistics
for Engineers and Scientists  (1972).
                                425

-------
13.  Miller, I., and Freund, J. E.,  Probability  and  Statistics
for Engineers (1965).

14.  Snedecor, G. W., and Cochran, W.  G.,  Statistical  Methods,
6th_ed*  (1967).

15.  Masselli, J. W., MasselH, N. W., and  Burford,  M.  G.,   "A
Simplification  of  Textile  Waste  Survey  and  Treatment,"  New
England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, Boston,  MA
(1959).

16.  "Quality Criteria for Water," U.S. Environmental  Protection
Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No. EPA 440/9-76-023.

17.  Faro, R. C., Kartiganer, H. L., Schneider, A.,  and  Albano,
D. J., "Pretreatment Provides Constant Effluent Quality," Water .&
Wastes Engineering (October, 1974), pp. 52-55.

18.  Stone, R.,  "Carpet Mill Industrial Waste System," Journal  oj
the Water pollution Control Federation, Vol. 44,  No.  3   (March,
1972), pp. 470-478.               :

19.  Frye, W. H., and DiGiano, F.  A.,  "Adsorptive  Behavior   of
Dispersed   and   Basic   Textile   Dyes  on  Activated  Carbon,"
Proceedings of  the  29th  Industrial  Waste  Conference,   Purdue
University, Lafayette, IN (1974), pp. 21-28.

20.  Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering:  Collection,
Treatment, Disposal,  McGraw-Hill  Book  Company,  New  York,   NY
(1972).

21.  Feigenbaum, H. N., "Removing Heavy Metals  In Textile Waste,"
Industrial Wastes (March/April, 1972), pp. 32-34.

22.  Snider, E. H., and Porter, J. J., "Ozone   Treatment  of  Dye
Waste,M  Journal  oj the ftater pollution. Contro^ Federation, Vol.
46, No. 5  (May,  1974), pp. 886-894.

23.  Stuber, L.  M.,   "Tertiary  Treatment  and Disinfection   of
Tufted Carpet Dye Wastewater," Proceedings of the 29th Industrial
Waste  Conference,  Purdue  University, Lafayette,  IN  (1974), pp.
964-977.

24.  Hammer, M. J., Water and Wastewater Technology, John Wiley &
Sons,  Inc., New York, NY  (1975T

25.  Brandon, C. A., and  Porter,  J.  J.,  "Hyperfiltration  for
Renovation  of  Textile Finishing Plant Wastewater," Ref. No. EPA
600/2-76-060.

26.  Brandon,  C.  A.,  Porter,  J.  J.,   and   Todd,   D.   K.,
"Hyperfiltration  for Renovation of Composite Wastewater at Eight
                                426

-------
Textile Finishing Plants,"  Ref.  No.  EPA  600/2-78-047  (March,
1978).

27.  "Survey of Textile Wastewater Treatment, State of  the  Art,
Add-on  Treatment  Processes,"  Hydroscience,  Inc., Westwood, NJ
(April, 1976).

28.  "Process Design  Manual  for  Nitrogen  Control,"  U.S.  EPA
Technology Transfer (October, 1975).

29.  Gulp,  R.  L.,  and  Gulp,  G.  L.,   "Advanced   Wastewater
Treatment,"  Van  Nostrand  Reinhold  Company,  New  York, 310 pp
(1971).

30.  Hrutfiord, B. F., Johanson, L.  N.,  and  McCarthy,  J.  L.,
"Steam Stripping Odorous Substances from Kraft Effluent Streams,"
U.S. EPA, ORM, EPA-R2-73-196 (April, 1973).

31.  "Process Design Manual  for  Carbon  Adsorption,"  U.S.  EPA
Technology Transfer (October, 1973).

32.  Weber, W. J., "Physiochemical Processes  for  Water  Quality
Control," Wiley-Interscience, New York, 640 pp. (1972).

33.  Ford, D. L., "Putting Activated  Carbon  in  Perspective  to
1983  Guidelines," .Industrial Water Engineering, p. 20 (May/June,
1977).

34.  "Activated Sludge with Powdered Activated  Carbon  Treatment
of  Textile  Wastewaters, Feasibility Study Report," Engineering-
Science, Atlanta, GA (May, 1978).

35.  "Final Development Document for Existing Source Pretreatment
Standards for the Electroplating  Point  Source  Category,"  U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Washington, D.C. Ref. No. EPA
440/1-79/003.

36.  Fate of Priority  Pollutants  in  Publicly  Owned  Treatment
Works,  Environmental  Protection  AGency,  Washington,  D.C. EPA
440/1-80-301, October 1980.

37.  "Proposed  Development  Document  for  Effluent  Limitations
Guidelines  and  Standards  for  the  Textile  Mills Point Source
Category," U.S.   Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Washington,
D.C. Ref. No. EPA 440/l-79/022b.

38.  "Analysis of National  Industrial  Water  Pollution  Control
Costs,"  Associated  Water & Air Resource Engineers, Inc. (AWARE)
(1973).

39.  "A Guide  to  the  Selection  of  Cost-Effective  Wastewater
Treatment Systems," Bechtel, Inc., EPA-430/9-75-002 (1975).
                                427

-------
40.  Smith, R., "Cost of Conventional and Advanced  Treatment  of
Wastewater,"  Journal  a£ the Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 40, No. 9 (September, 1968), pp. 1546-1574.

41.  "Process Design Manual for Sludge Treatment  and  Disposal,"
U.S.   Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Ref. No.
625/1-74-006.

42.  "Estimating Costs and Manpower Requirements for Conventional
Wastewater TReatment Facilities," U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency,  Office  of  Research  and  Monitoring,  Washington, D.C.
(October 1971).

43.  "Capital and Operating Costs of Pollution Control  Equipment
Modules," Icarus Corp., EPA-R5-73-023a & b, Vol. 1 & 2 (1973).

44.  Monti, R. P.,  and  SiIberman,  P.  T.,  "Wastewater  System
Alternatives:  What  are  they ... And What Cost?"  Water & Waste
Engineering  (March, 1974 et. seg.), pp. 32, et. seg.      "~

45.  "Process Design Manual for  Removal  of  Suspended  Solids,"
U.S.   Environmental  Protection Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No.
EPA 625/1-75-0033.

46.  "Process  Design  Manual  for   Carbon   Adsorption,"   U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Washington,  DC, Ref. No. EPA
625/l-71-002a  (1973).

47.  "Appraisal  of  Powdered  Activated  Carbon  Processes   for
Municipal  Wastewater  Treatment,"  U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati,  OH  Ref.
No. EPA-600/2-77-156 (September, 1977).

48.  "Ozone System Capital Cost Quotation," Infilco-Degremont (C.
B. Smith Company) (October, 1977).

49.  "Feasibility  and  Economics  of  Ozone  Treatment,"   Emery
Industries,  Inc., Data Sheet 789.

50.  "New Technology for Textile Water Reuse is Available and Can
Be Very Profitable," U.S. Ozonair Corp., South San Francisco, CA.

51.  Fisher Scientific Co., Catalog 77.

52.  NUS/Rice Laboratory, Sampling Prices, Pittsburgh, PA (1978).

53.  Product  Bulletin  No.  12-05.B1   (Shelter   Houses),   AFL
Industries,  Inc., 1149 Howard Drive, West  Chicago  (12/29/77).

54.  Estimating  Staffing  for  Municipal  Wastewater   Treatment
Facilities,  CH2M/Hill  &  Assoc.,  EPA-Contract  No.  68-01-0328
(1973).
                                428

-------
55.  Smith, J* E., "Inventory of Energy Use in Wastewater  Sludge
Treatment    and    Disposal," ,  Industrial   Water   Engineering
(July/August, 1977).

56.  Maggiolo, A., and Sayles, J. H., "Automatic  Exchange  Resin
Pilot  Plant  for  Removal  of  Textile Dye Wastes," Ref. No. EPA
600/2-77-136.

57.  "Water Supply and Pollution  Control,"  Clark,  Veissman,   &
Hammer, International Textbook Company (1971).

58.  Banerji, S. K., and O'Conner, J. T., "Designing More Energy-
Efficient Wastewater Treatment Plants," Civil Engineering - ASCE,
Vol. 47, No. 9 (September, 1977)  pp. 76-81.

59.  O'Donovan, D. C., "Treatment with  Ozone,"  Journal  of  the
American  Water  Works  Association  (September, 1965), pp. 1167-
1194.            ''     '
60.  Hann, V. A., "Disinfection of Drinking  Water  with  Ozone,"
JAWWA (October, 1956), p. 1316.

61.  NUS/Rice Laboratory, Sampling Prices, Pittsburgh, PA (1978),
p. 1.

62.  Pricing Lists and Policies, WARF Instruments, Inc., Madison,
WI (June 15, 1973).

63.  Service Brochure and Fee Schedule #16, Orlando Laboratories,
Inc., Orlando, FL (January 1, 1978).

64.  Water &  Wastewater  Analysis  -  Fee  Schedule,  St.  Louis
Testing Lab  (August, 1976).

65.  Laboratory Services, Individual Component Analysis,  Ecology
Audits, Inc., Dallas, TX (August, 1976).
6.6.  Laboratory  Pricing  Schedule,  Laclede  Gas  Company,
Division, St. Louis (August, 1977).
Lab
67.  Price List, Industrial Testing Lab, Inc., St. Louis  (1975).

68.  Mahlock, J. I., Shindola, A., McGriff, E. 0.,  and   Barnett,
W.  A.,  "Treatability  Studies  and  Design Considerations  for a
Dyeing Operation,"  Proceedings  of  the  29th   Industrial   Waste
Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN, pp 44-50  (1974).

69.  Rinker, T. L. and Sargent, T. N.,  "Activated Sludge  and Alum
Coagulation Treatment of Textile Wastewaters," Proceedings of the
29th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue  University,  Lafayette,
IN pp 456-471 (1974).
                                429

-------
70.  Rinker, T. L., "Treatment of Textile Wastewater by Activated
Sludge and Alum Coagulation," Ref. No. EPA 600/2-75-055.

71.  Startup and Operation of a 6.5 MGD PACT Process with Wet Air
Regeneration, Zimpro, Inc., Technical Bulletin 2702-T  (1980).
                                430

-------
                             BIBLIOGRAPHY

1.   Abrams, E. F., Guinan, D. K., and Derkics,  D.,  "Assessment
of  Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices," (NTIS Reproduction) U.
S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Office  of  Solid   Waste
Management  Programs,  Washington,  DC, Report No. SW-125C  (June,
1976).

2.   Abrams,  E.  F.,  Guinan,  D.  K.,  and   Parker,   C.   L.,
"Identification  of the Potentially Hazardous Wastes Generated by
the Textile Industry," Clemson  University's  Textile  Wastewater
Treatment  and  Pollution Control Conference, Hilton Head Island,
SC (January 21-23, 1976).

3.   Allen, W., Altherr, E., Horning, R. H.,  and  King,  J.  C,,
"The  Contribution  of  Dyes to the Metal Content of Textile Mill
Effluents,"  Journal  of  the  American  Association  of  Textile
Chemists and Colorists,  Vol. 4, No. 12 (December, 1972^.
4.   Argo, D. G., and Wesner, G. M., "AWT Energy  Needs  a
Concern," jJater & Wastes Engineering (May, 1976), p. 24.
Prime
5.   Aurich, C. et. al., "Treatment of Textile Dyeing  Wastes  by
Dynamically  Formed  Membranes,"  journal  pf the Water Pollution
Control Federation, Vol. 44, No. 8 (August, 19727, pp. 1545-1551.

6.   Baird, R., Carmona, L., and Jenkins,  R.  L.,  "Behavior  of
Benzidine   and  Other  Aromatic  Amines  in  Aerobic  Wastewater
Treatment," Journal of the Water  Pollution  Control  Federation,
Vol. 49, No. 7 (July, 1977), pp. 1609-1615.

7.   Banerji, S.  K., and 0*Conner, J. T., "Designing More Energy-
Efficient Wastewater Treatment Plants," Civil Engineering - ASCE,
Vol. 47, No. 9 (September, 1977), pp. 76-81.

8.   Blecker, H.  G. and Cadman, T.  W.,  "Capital  and  Operating
Costs  of  Pollution  Control  Equipment  Modules - Vol. I - User
Guide," Ref.  No. EPA R5-73-023a.

9.   Blecker, H.  G. and Cadman, T.  W.,  "Capital  and  Operating
Costs  of  Pollution  Control  Equipment Modules - Vol. II - Data
Manual," Ref. No. EPA R5-73-023b.

10.  Boudreau, J. J., "Water Quality and the  Textile  Industry,"
Journal  American  Water  Works Association. (February, 1975), pp.
59-60.

11.  Brandon, C.  A., and  Porter,  J.  J.,  "Hyperfiltration  for
Renovation  of  Textile Finishing Plant Wastewater," Ref. No. EPA
600/2-76-060.

12.  Bryan, C. E., "Water Pollution Reduction Through Recovery of
Desizing   Wastes,"   U.S.   Environmental   Protection   Agency,
                                 431

-------
Washington,  DC Water Pollution Control Research Series-12090 EOE
(January, 1972).

13.  Bryan, C. E.,  and Harrison, P. S., "Treatment  of  Synthetic
Warp  Sizes in Activated Sludge Systems," Proceedings of the 28th
Industrial Waste Conference,  Purdue  University,  Lafayette,  IN
(1973) pp. 252-258.

14.  "Carpet and Rug Institute Directory and  Report,  1974-1975,
The," The Carpet and Rug Institute, Dalton, GA (September, 1975).

15.  "Carpet Specifiers Handbook, Second Edition," The Carpet and
Rug Institute, Dalton, GA (1976).

16.  Carrique, C. S., and  Jaurequi,  L.  U.,  "Sodium  Hydroxide
Recovery in the Textile Industry," Proceedings of 21st Industrial
Waste  Conference,   Purdue  University, Lafayette, IN (1966), pp.
861-868.

17.  Case, F. N., and Ketchen, E. E., "Study of Gamma Induced Low
Temperature Oxidation of Textile Effluents," Ref, No. EPA  R2-73-
260.

18.  "Census  of  Manufactures,  1972,"   Social   and   Economic
Statistics Administration, Bureau of  the Census, U. S. Department
of Commerce Publication (1975).

19.  "Chemical Research and Services  Department Newsletter," Vol.
V, No. 2, Institute of Textile  Technology,  Charlottesville,  VA
(December, 1976).

20.  "Chemical Research and Services  Department Newsletter,  Vol.
VI,  No.  1,  Institute of Textile Technology, Charlottesville, VA
(April,  1977).

21.  Chiagouris, G.  L.,  "Analyzing  the  Cost  of  Solid  Waste
Disposal," Plant Engineering  (March 23, 1972), pp. 82-85.

22.  Chian, E. S. K., Bruce,  W. N., and Fang, H. H. P.,   "Removal
of  Pesticides  by  Reverse   Osmosis,"  Environmental Science and
Technology, Vol. 9, No. 1 (January, 1975), pp. 52-59.

23.  Christoe, J. R., "Treatment of Wool Scouring Effluents  with
Inorganic  Chemicals,"  Journal  £f   the  Water Pollution Control
federation. Vol. 49, No. 5  (1977), pp. 848-854.

24.  Cole, C., Carr, S., and  Albert,  J.,   "Sludge  Dewatering  in
Textile  Plants,"  Industrial  Wastes (January/February, 1977), pp.
14-16.

25.  "Compilation of Toxic Rejection  Data  for Membranes,"  Carre,
Inc., Pendleton, SC  (December 9, 1977).
                                432

-------
26.  Conner, J. R.,  "Disposal of  Concentrated  Wastes  from  the
Textile  Industry,"   Industrial  Water  Engineering (July/August,
1977), pp.  6-15.

27.  "Construction  Costs  for  Municipal  Wastewater   Treatment
Plants:   1973-1977,"   U.S.    Environmental  Protection  Agency,
Washington,  D.C., EPA 430/9-77-013, MCD-37.

28.  Cook,  A. A., "Detergents:  If the Bugs Don't Like Them,  You
Can't Use Them," Textile Industries (January, 1973), pp. 64-66.

29.  "Cost  of Clean Water - Volume III, Industrial Waste Profiles
- No. 4, Textile Mill Products,  The,"  Federal  Water  Pollution
Control Administration, Washington, DC (September, 1967).
30.  Cowan,  M.  L.,  and  Jungerman,  M.  E.,  Introduction
Textiles,  Second  Edition,  Appleton - Century
Corporation (1969).
	   to
Crofts Meredith
31.  Craft, T. F., and Eichholz, G. G., "Dyestuff  Color  Removal
by  Ionizing  Radiation and Chemical Oxidation," Ref. No. EPA R2-
73-048.

32.  Crowe, T., O'Melia, C. R., and Little, L., "The  Coagulation
of  Disperse  Dyes,"  Proceedings  of  the  32nd Industrial Waste
Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN (1977), pp. 655-662.

33.  Davis, G. M., Koon, J. H., and Adams, C. E.,  "Treatment  of
Two  Textile  Dye  House  Wastewaters,"  Proceedings  of the 32nd
Industrial Waste Conference,  Purdue  University,  Lafayette,  IN
(1977), pp. 981-997.

34.  Davis, G. M., Koon, J. H., and  Adams,  C.  E.,  "Wastewater
Treatment  Investigations  and  Process  Design for a Textile Dye
House," Associated  Water  and  Air  Resources  Engineers,  Inc.,
Nashville, TN (1975).

35-  Davison's  Textile  Blue  Book,   11Oth   Edition,   Davison
Publishing Company, Ridgewood, NJ (1976).

36.  Davison's  Textile  Blue  Book,   lllth   Edition,   Davison
Publishing Company, Ridgewood, NJ (1977).

37.  "Development Document for  Effluent  Limitations  Guidelines
and  New Source Performance Standards for the Textile Mills Point
Source   Category,"   U.S.   Environmental   Protection   Agency,
Washington, DC, Ref. No. EPA 440/1-74-022-a.

38.  "Dioxin Implementation Plan," U.S. Environmental  Protection
Agency,  Office  of  Pesticide  Programs, Criteria and Evaluation
Division, Washington, DC (1974).
                                433

-------
39.  Domagala,  R.,    "The   'Reemay'    Challenge   to   Cotton,"
Wallcoverings, Vol.  55. No. 5 (May, 1976), pp. 42-48.

40.  Domey,  W.  R.,   "Design  Parameters  and   Performance   of
Biological  Systems  for Textile Plant Effluents," Proceedings of
the  28th  Industrial  Waste   Conference,   Purdue   University,
Lafayette, IN  (1973), pp. 438-446.

41.  Douglas,   G.,    "Modular   Wastewater   Treatment   System;
Demonstration for the Textile Maintenance Industry," Ref. No. EPA
660/2-73-037.

42.  "Draft Development  Document:   Pretreatment  Standards  for
Textile  Mills (Addendum to the Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and New Source Performance  Standards  for
the  Textile Mills Point Source Category)," Sverdrup & Parcel and
Associates, Inc., St. Louis, MO (November, 1976).

43.  "Draft Report;   Study of Selected  Pollutant  Parameters  in
Publicly   Owned   Treatment   Works,"   Sverdrup  &  Parcel  and
Associates, Inc., St. Louis, MO (February, 1977).

44.  "Dyes and the Environment - Reports  on  Selected  Dyes  and
Their  Effects  - Vol. II," American Dye Manufacturers Institute,
Inc., New York, NY (September, 1974).

45.  "Economic Analysis of Pretreatment Standards for the Textile
Industry," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,  DC,
Ref. No. EPA 440/1-77-009.

46.  "Economic Analysis of Proposed Effluent Guidelines:  Textile
Industry," Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC,  Ref.
No. EPA 230/1-73-028.

47.  Encyclopedia of  Textiles,  Second  Edition,  Prentice  Hall
Publishing Company, Englewood Cliffs, NJ  (1972).

48.  "Environmental Considerations of Selected Energy  Conserving
Manufacturing   Process  Options,  Vol.   IX  -   Textile  Industry
Report",  Industrial  Environmental  Research  Laboratory,   U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Cincinnati,  OH, Ref. No. EPA-
600/7-76-0341.

49.  "Facts About Contract  Carpeting,"  The  International  Wool
Secretariat, London, England  (November, 1975).

50.  Faro, R.  C., Kartiganer, H. L., Schneider,  A.,  and  Albano,
D. J.,  "Pretreatment Provides Constant Effluent  Quality," Water &
Wastes Engineering (October,  1974), pp. 52-55.

51.  Feigenbaum,  H. N.,  "Removing  Heavy Metals In Textile Waste,"
Industrial Wastes (March/April, 1972), pp. 32-34.
                                434

-------
52.  "Final Engineering Report, Modifications to Waste  Treatment
Facility  -  Wool  Scouring  Pretreatment,  Clarksville Finishing
Plant," Corporate Engineering Dept., Burlington Industries, Inc.,
Greensboro, NC (January, 1976).

53.  Frey, J. W., "H-W-D Introduces Equipment to Process Dyehouse
Effluence," Knitting Times (January 21, 1974).

54.  Frye, W. H., and DiGiano, F.  A.,  "Adsorptive  Behavior  of
Dispersed   and   Basic   Textile   Dyes  on  Activated  Carbon,"
Proceedings of  the  29th  Industrial  Waste  Conference,  Purdue
University, Lafayette, IN (1974), pp. 21-28,

55.  Gaddis, L., "Rejection of Chemical  Species  by  Membranes,"
Clemson University, Clemson,  SC (1977).

56.  Gaffney, P. E., "Carpet and  Rug  Industry  Case  Study  II:
Biological  Effects,"  Journal  of  the  Water  Pollution Control
Federation (1976), pp. 2731-2737.                        '

57.  Ghosh,  M.  M.,  Woodard,  F.  E.,  and   Sproul,   0.   J.,
"Treatability  Studies  and  Design  Considerations for a Textile
Mill  Wastewater,"  Proceedings  of  the  32nd  Industrial  Waste
Conference, Purdue University, Vol. 1 (1977), pp. 663-673.

58.  Goodson,  L.  A.,  "Are  We  Legislating  Ourselves  Out  of
Business?" Industrial, Wastes (January/February, 1976), pp. 34-35.

59.  Guertin, P. D., and Knowlton,  P.  B.,  "Textile  Wastewater
Treatment  Case  Studies,"  New  gngland  Water Pollution Control
Association Journal (October*^197677

60.  Gutmanis, I., and Keahey, S., "Water Use  and  Pollution  in
Textile   Industries,"   International  Research  and  Technology
Corporation, Washington, DC (April, 1971).

61.  Hagen, R. M., and Roberts, E. B., "Energy  Requirements  for
Wastewater  Treatment,  Part  2," Water & Sewage Works (December,
1972), pp. 52-57.

62.  Hager, D. G., "A Survey of Industrial  Wastewater  Treatment
by  Granular  Activated  Carbon,"  4th Joint Chemical Engineering
Conference, AIChE-CSChE, Vancouver, BC (September 10, 1973).

63.  Hager, D. G., Rizzo, J.  L., and Zanitsch, R. H., "Experience
with Granular Activated Carbon in Treatment of  Textile  Industry
Wastewaters,"  Prepared  for  EPA  Technology  Transfer  Seminar,
Atlanta, GA (September 25-26, 1973).
64.  Hall, D.  M.,  "Solvent  and  Hot  Melt  Slashing,"
Industries (January, 1973), pp. 30-32.
Textile
                                435

-------
65.   Hannah, S. A. ,  Jelus, M.,  and  Cohen,  J.  M.,  "Removal  of
Uncommon   Trace   Metals  by  Physical  and  Chemical  Treatment
Processes," Journal of the  Water  Pollution  Contro}  Federation
(November, 1977), ppT2297-2309.

66.   Hatch, L. T., Sharpin, R.  E., Wirtanen, W. T., and  Sargent,
T.  N.,  "Chemical/Physical  and  Biological  Treatment  of  Wool
Processing Wastes," Ref. No. EPA 660/2-73-036.

67.   Hentschel, R. A. A., "Spunbonded Sheet  Products,"  Chemtech
(January, 1974), pp. 32-41.

68.   Holliday,  T.  M.,   "Spunbonded  Fabrics,"  Modern  Textiles
(November, 1974), pp. 40-46.

69.   Huibers,  D.  A.,  McNabney,  R.,  and  Halfon,  A.,  "Ozone
Treatment   of  Secondary  Effluents  From  Wastewater  Treatment
Plants," Contract No. 14-12-114,  (1969), Federal Water  Pollution
Control Administration,  Cincinnati, OH  (April, 1969).

70.   "Industrial Waste Studies Program:  Textile Mill  Products,"
Arthur  D.  Little,   Inc.,  Draft  Report  for  the Water Quality
Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (May
28,  1971).

71.   "In-Plant  Control   of   Pollution   -   Upgrading   Textile
Operations  to  Reduce  Pollution," U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington,  DC,  Ref. No.  EPA 625/3-74-004.

72.   Jones, H. R., Pollution Control  in  the  Textile  Industry,
Noyes Data Corporation,  Park Ridge, NJ  (1973).

73.   Jones, J. L., Bomberger, D.  C., and Lewis,  F.  M.,  "Energy
Usage  and  Recovery  in  Sludge  Disposal, Parts 1 & 2," Water  &
Sewage Works  (July/August, 1977), pp. 42-47,

74.   Jorder, H.,  "Spunlaced  Nonwovens,  Production,  Properties,
and  Fields  of  Use," Melliand Textilberichte (English Edition),
Vol. 5, No. 8  (1976), pp. 642-643.

7 5.   Junk, G. A., Svec,   H.  J.,   Ray,  D.,  and  Avery,  M.  J.,
"Contamination    of   Water   by   Synthetic   Polymer   Tubes,"
Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 8, No.   13  (December,
1974), pp. 1100-1106.

76.   Kace, J. S., and Linford,  H. B., "Reduced Cost  Flocculation
of  a  Textile Dyeing Wastewater," Journal of the Watey Pollution
Control Federation, Vol. 47, No.  7 (July, 19757Tpp. 1971-1977.

77.   Rachel, W. M., and Reinath,  T. M., "Reclamation  of  Textile
Printing  Wastewaters  for  Direct  Recycle," Proceedings of 27th
Industrial Waste Conference,  Purdue  University,   Lafayette,   IN
(1972), pp. 406-419.
                                436

-------
78.  Kennedy, D. C., Rock, S. L.,  and  Kerner,  J.  W.,   "A  New
Adsorption/   Ion-Exchange   Process   for   Treating   Dye Waste
Effluents," Rohm and Haas Co., Philadelphia, PA.

79.  Koon, J. H., Adams, C. E., and Eckenfelder, W. W.,  "Analysis
of National Industrial Water Pollution Control Costs,"  Associated
Water and Air  Resource  Engineers,  Inc.,  Nashville,   TN  (May,
1973).

80.  Kreye, W. C., King, P. H.,  and  Randall,  C.  W.,   "Polymer
Aided  Alum  Coagulation of Textile Dyeing and Finishing Wastes,"
Proceedings of  the  27th  Industrial  Waste  Conference,  Purdue
University, Lafayette, IN  (1972), pp. 447-457.

81.  Leatherland, L. C., "Treatment of Textile Wastes,"   Water  J*.
Sewage Works.. Reference Number (1969), pp. R210-R214.

82.  Lehmann, E. J., and Cavagnaro, D.  M.,  "Textile   Processing
Wastes  and  Their  Control (Citations from the NTIS Data Base),"
U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIS, NTIS/PS-76/0962  (1976).

83.  Little, L. W., and Ericson, J. W., "Biological  Treatability
of   Wastewaters  from  Textile  and  Carpet  Dyeing  Processes,"
Proceedings of the 8th Mid-Atlantic Industrial Waste  Conference,
University  of  Delaware,  Newark,  DE (January 12-13,  1976), pp.
201-216.

84.  Loven, A. W., and Pintenich, J. L.,  "Industrial   Wastewater
Recirculation  System:   Preliminary Engineering," Ref.  No.  EPA-
600/2-77-043..

85.  Maggiolo, A., and Sayles, J. H.,  "Application  of   Exchange
Resins  for Treatment of Textile Dye Wastes," Ref. No.  EPA 660/2-
75-016. "

86.  Maggiolo, A., and Sayles, J. H., "Automatic  Exchange Resin
Pilot  Plant  for  Removal  of  Textile Dye Wastes," Ref.  No. EPA
600/2-77-136.

87.  Mahloch, J. L., Shindala, A., McGriff, E. C.,  and   Barnett,
W.  A.,  "Treatability  Studies  and  Design Considerations for a
Dyeing Operation,"  Proceedings  of  the  29th  Industrial  Waste
Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN (1974), pp.  44-50.

88.  Mansfield, R. G., "Spunbonded Nonwovens  Eye  Roadbuilding,"
Textile World. Vol. 127, No. 9 (September, 1977), pp. 81-84.
89.  Mark,  H.,  Wooding,  N.  S.,   Atlas,   S.   M.,
Chemical
Aftertreatment  of Textiles, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York,
NY (1971).

90.  Maruyama, T., Hannah,  S.  A.,  and  Cohen,  J.  M.,  "Metal
Removal by Physical and Chemical Treatment Processes," Journal of
                                 437

-------
the  Water  Pollution  Control  Federation,  Vol.  47,  No.  5  (May,
1375), pp. 962-975.

91,  Masselli, J. W., Masselli, N. W., and  Burford,   M.   G.,   "A
Simplification  of  Textile  Waste  Survey  and   Treatment,"   New
England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission,  Boston,  MA
(1959).
92.  Miller,  E.,  Textiles,  Properties,
Batsford, Ltd., London, England  (1968).
and  Behavior,  B.  T.
93.  Monti, R. P.,  and  Silberman,  P.   T.,   "Wastewater   System
Alternatives:  What  are   they  ... And What Cost?"  .Water £ Waste
Engineering (March/ 1974 et. seg.), pp.  32, et,  seg.

94.  Netzer, A., and Beszedits, S., "Physical-Chemical   Treatment
of  Exhausted  Dyebath  Effluents," Proceedings  of  the  6th  Annual
Industrial Pollution Conference,  St. Louis, MO (1978),   pp.   225-
240.

95.  "New Technology for Textile  Water Reuse  is  Available and Can
Be Very Profitable,"  U.S. Ozonair Corp.,  South San  Francisco,
CA.

96.  Newlin, K. D., "The Economic Feasibility of Treating Textile
Wastes in Municipal Systems,"   Journal   of  the   Water;   Pollution
Control  .Federation,  Vol. 43,  No. 11  (November,  1971),  pp.  2195-
2199.

97.  O'Donovan, D. C.,  "Treatment with   Ozone,"   Journal of  the
American  Water  Works  Association^  (September,  1965),  pp.  1167-
1194.

98.  "Organic  Characterization  Study   - Coosa River Basin  -
Northwest  Georgia,"  Surveillance  and  Analysis Division,  Region
IV, U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta, GA  (1974).

99.  "Organic  Characterization  Study  - Phase   II -  Coosa   River
Basin  -  Northwest Georgia," Surveillance and Analysis Division,
Region IV, U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Atlanta,  GA
(1976).

100.  Patterson,   J.  W.,  "Technology  and Economics of  Industrial
Pollution  Abatement,"   Illinois   Institute    for   Environmental
Quality, Chicago,  IL  (October,  1976).

101.  Perkins,  W. S.,  Hall,  D. M., Slaten, B. L.,  Walker,  R. P.,
and Farrow, J. C.,  "Use of Organic Solvents  in Textile  Sizing and
Desizing," Ref. No. EPA-600/2-77-126.

102. Phipps, W. H.,  "Activated  Carbon Reclaims Water  for   Carpet
Mill," Water & Wastes Engineering. (Mav 1970), pp. C-22  to  C-23.
                                  438

-------
103. "Pilot Plant and Engineering Study of Textile Industry BATEA
Effluent   Standards   {Presentation   Materials),"   Engineering
Science, Inc., Atlanta, GA (June, 1976).

104. Pollock* M. J., and Froneberger, C. R., "Treatment of  Denim
Textile Mill Wastewaters:  Neutralization and Color Removal," EPA
600/2-76-139.

105.  Poon,  C.  P.  C.,  "Biodegradability  and  Treatability of
Combined Nylon  and  Municipal  Wastes,"  Journal  of  the  Water
Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 42, No. 1 (January, 1970), pp.
100105.

106.  Poon,  C. P. C., and Virgadamo, P. P., "Anaerobic - Aerobic
Treatment of Textile Wastes with Activated Carbon," Ref. No.  EPA
R273-248.

107.   Porter,  J.  J.,  "A  Study  of  the  Photodegradation  of
Commercial Dyes," Ref. No. EPA R2-73-058.

108. Porter, J. J., "Stability and  Removal  of  Commercial  Dyes
from  Process Wastewater," Pollution Engineering (October,  1973),
pp. 27-28.

109. Porter, J. J. "State of the Art of Textile Waste Treatment,"
U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Washington,  DC,  Water
Pollution Control Research Series - 12090 DWM (January, 1971).

110.   Porter,   J.   J.,   and   Snider,   E.   H.,   "Long-Term
Biodegradability of Textile  Chemicals,"  Journal  of  the  Water
Pollution  Control  Federation, Vol. 48, No. 9 (September,  1976),
pp. 2198-2210.

111. "Preliminary Engineering  Report,  Pretreatment  Facilities,
Dyersburg  Fabrics, Inc.," J. E. Sirrine Co., Greenville, SC (May
30, 1974).

112.   "Process  Design  Manual  for  Carbon   Adsorption,"   U.S.
Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Washington,  DC, Ref. No. EPA
625/l-71-002a  (1973).

113. "Process Design Manual for  Removal  of  Suspended  Solids,"
U.S.   Environmental  Protection Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No.
EPA 625/l-75-003a.

114. "Process Design Manual for Sludge Treatment  and  Disposal,"
U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No.'
EPA 625/1-74-006.

115.   Purvis,  M.  R.,   "Aerobic  Treatment  of  Textile  Waste,"
American Dvestuff Reporter (reprint),  (August, 1974).
                                 439

-------
116.   "PVA  Reclamation  Solves  Textile  Mill  Waste  Treatment
Problem; Yields Substantial Savings," Union Carbide  Corporation,
Tarrytown, NY (1975).

117.  Qasim,  S.  R.,  and Shah, A. K., "Cost Analysis of Package
Wastewater Treatment Plants," Water and Sewage  Works  (February,
1975), pp. 67-69.

118.  "Quality Criteria for Water," U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC, Ref. No. EPA 440/9-76-023.

119. Rebhun, M., Weinberg, A.,  and  Narkis,  N.,  "Treatment  of
Wastewater  from  Cotton  Dyeing  and Finishing Works for Reuse,"
Proceedings of  the  25th  Industrial  Waste  Conference,  Purdue
University, Lafayette, IN (1970), pp. 626-637.

120.  "Recommendations and Comments for the Establishment of Best
Practicable Wastewater Control Technology Currently Available for
the  Textile  Industry,"   Institute   of   Textile   Technology,
Charlottesvilie,   VA   and   Hydroscience,  Inc.,  Westwood,  NJ
(January, 1973).

121. Rennison, P. A., "Water Conservation in Textile  Finishing,"
American Dyestuff Reporter, Vol. 66, No. 11 (1977).

122.   "Report   to   Charlton  Woolen  Company,  Charlton  City,
Massachusetts, on Process Revisons - Pilot  Plant  Study  of  the
Proposed  Wastewater  Treatment  Fac i1i ty,"  Cu11i nan Eng i neer i ng
Co., Inc. Auburn, MA (August, 1973).

123. "Revised Executive Summary to Economic Analysis of  Proposed
Effluent   Guidelines:   Textile  Industry,"  U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington,  DC,  Ref.  No.  EPA  230/1-73-028
(1974).

124.  Rhame,  G.  A.,  "Treatment  of Textile Finishing Wastes by
Surface Aeration,"  Proceedings  of  the  26th  Industrial  Waste
Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN (1971), pp. 702-712.

125.  Richardson,  M.  B.,  and  Stepp, J. M., "Costs of Treating
Textile Wastes in Industrial and Municipal Treatment Plants;  Six
Case  Studies,"  Water  Resources  Research  Institute,   Clemson
University, Clemson, SC (March, 1972).

126. Rinker, T. L., "Treatment of Textile Wastewater by Activated
Sludge and Alum Coagulation," Ref. No. EPA 600/2-75-055.

127.  Rinker,  T.  L.,  and Sargent, T. N., "Activated Sludge and
Alum Coagulation Treatment of Textile  Wastewaters,"  Proceedings
of  the  29th  Industrial  Waste  Conference,  Purdue University,
Lafayette, IN (1974), pp. 456-471.
                                 440

-------
128.  Rodman,  0.  A.,  and  Shunney,  E.  L.,   "Bio-Regenerated
Activated   Carbon   Treatment   of   Textile   Dye  Wastewater,"
Environmental Protection Agency, -Washington, DC, Water  Pollution
Control Research Series - 12090 DWM  (January, 1971).

129. Sercu, C., "National Committee on Water Quality Report," Dow
Chemical Co., Midland, MI (March, 1977).

130. Shelley, M. L.,  Randall, C. W., and King, P. H., "Evaluation
of   Chemical-Biological   and  Chemical-Physical  Treatment  for
Textile  Dyeing  and  Finishing  Waste,"  Journal  of  the  Water
Pollution  Control  Federation, Vol. 48, No. 4 (April, 1976), pp.
753-761.

131. Shriver, L. E.,  and Dague, R. R., "Textile Dye Process Waste
Treatment  with  Reuse  Consideration,"   Proceedings   of   32nd
Industrial  Waste  Conference,  Purdue  University, Lafayette, IN
(1978), pp. 581-592.

132. Smith, J. E., "Inventory of Energy Use in Wastewater  Sludge
Treatment    and    Disposal,"   Industrial   Water   Engineering
(July/August, 1977).

133. Smith, R., "Cost of Conventional and Advanced  Treatment  of
Wastewater,"  Journal  pf  the Water Pollution Control federation
Vol. 40, No. 9  (September, 1968), pp. 1546-1574.

134.  Smith  R.,   "Electrical  Power  Consumption  for  Municipal
Wastewater Treatment," Ref. No. EPA R2-73-281.

135.  Snider,  E.  H., and Porter, J. J., "Ozone Treatment of Dye
Waste," Journal of the Water Pollution Control  Federation,  Vol.
46, No. 5  (May, T?747T PP. 886-894."

136. Snyder, A. J., and Alspaugh, T. A., "Catalyzed Bio-Oxidation
and  Tertiary  Treatment of Integrated Textile Wastewaters," Ref.
No. EPA 660/2-74-039.

137. "Specifications - 1976 ATMI/EPA Study of 1983 BATEA Effluent
Standards for the  Textile Industry - Phase I,"  American  Textile
Manufacturers Institute, Inc., Charlotte, NC  (1976).

138.  Stark,  M.   M., and Rizzo, J. L., "Carbon Adsorption - Case
Studies  at  Several  Textile  Plants,"  Presented  at  Midwinter
Conference  on  Textile  Wastewater  and  Air  Pollution Control,
Hilton Head Island, SC (January 23-25, 1974).

139. Stone, R., "Carpet Mill Industrial Waste System," Journal of
Jbhe Water Pollution Control Federation^ Vol. 44,  No.  3  (March,
1972), pp. 470-478.

140.  Stuber,  L.  M.,  "Tertiary  Treatment  and Disinfection of
Tufted Carpet Dye  Wastewater," Proceedings of the 29th industrial
                                441

-------
Waste Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette,  IN
964-977.
(1974),   pp,
141,  "Study of the Biological and Chemical Treatability of Hyper-
filtration  {Reverse  Osmosis)  Textile  Waste  Concentrates, A,"
Texidyne, Inc., Clemson, SC (August, 1975).

142.   Suchecki,  S.  M.,  "Canton's  Futuristic  Waste  Treatment
System,"  Textile  Industries, Vol. 140, No. 3 (March, 1976), pp.
43-49.

143.  "Supplemental Studies on the Vanity Fair Waste, Monroeville,
Alabama,"  Thompson   and   Tuggle   Environmental   Consultants,
Montgomery, AL (April, 1974).

144.   "Survey  of  Textile Wastewater Treatment State of the Art,
Add-on Treatment Processes,"  Hydroscience,  Inc.,  Westwood,  NJ
{April, 1976).

145.   Talbot, R. S., "Literature Review:  Textile Wastes - 1976,"
Journal of the Water Eollution Control Federation, Vol. 48, No. 6
(June, 'I'tfeTTpp- 1282-1284.

146.  Talbot, R. S., "Literature Review:  Textile Wastes -  1977,"
Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation,. Vol. 49, No. 6
{June, 1977), pp. 1161-1163.

147.    "Textile  Industry  Technology  and  Costs  of  Wastewater
Control," Lockwood-Greene, New York, NY  (June, 1975).

148.  "Textile Technology Digest, Vol. 34,"  Institute  of  Textile
Technology, Charlottesville, VA (January,  1977).

149.     "Textile    Technology/Ecology     Interface    -   1977,"
(Environmental  Symposium),  American  Association   of   Textile
Chemists and Colorists, Research Triangle  Park, NC  (March, 1977).

150.   Thiansky, D. P., "Historical Development of Water Pollution
Control Cost Function," Journal of the,  Water  Pollution  Control^
Federation Vol. 46, No. 5  (May, 1974), p.  813.

151.   Thompson,  Barbara,   "The  Effects   of  Effluent  from   the
Canadian Textile Industry on Aquatic  Organisms  -  A  Literature
Review,"  Fisheries  and  Marine  Service,  Freshwater Institute,
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada  (1974).

152.  Throop, W. M.,   "Why   Industrial  Wastewater  Pretreatment?"
Industrial Wastes  (July/August, 1976), pp.  32-33.

153.   Tincher,  W.  C.,  "Chemical  Use  and  Discharge in Carpet
Dyeing," Georgia Institute of Technology,  Atlanta, GA  (September,
1975).
                                 442

-------
154. Trotman, E. R.,  Dyeing and Chemical  Technology  of  Textile
Fibers,  Fifth  Edition, Chas. Griffin & Co., Ltd., London, Great
Britain (1975).

155. "U.S. Industrial  Outlook,"  U.S.  Department  of  Commerce,
Domestic  and  International Business Administration, Washington,
DC (1978), pp. 239-244.

156. Van Note, R. H., Herbert, P. V., Patel, R. M.,  Chupek,  C.,
and  Feldman,  L.,  "A  Guide  to the Selection of Cost-Effective
Wastewater Teatment Systems," Ref. No. EPA 430/9-75-002.

157. Van Winkle, T. L., Edeleanu, J., Prosser, E. A., and Walker,
C. A.,  "Cotton versus Polyester,"  American  Scientist,  Vol.  66
(1978), pp. 280-289.

158. Wachter, R. A.,  Archer, S. R., and Blackwood, T. R., "Source
Assessment:   Overview and Priorization of Emissions from Textile
Manufacturing,"  Ref.  No. EPA 600/2-77-107h (September, 1977), pp.
1-131.

159. "Wastewater Treatment Systems:   Additional  Case  Studies,"
Metcalf & Eddy,  Inc., Boston, MA  (January, 1975).

160. "Wastewater Treatment Systems - Upgrading Textile Operations
to  Reduce  Pollution,"  U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,
Washington, DC,  Ref.  No. EPA 625/3-74-004.

161. Weeter, D.  W.,  and  Hodgson,  A.  G.,  "Dye  Wastewaters   -
Alternatives  for Biological Waste Treatment," Proceedings of the
32nd Industrial  Waste Conference, Purdue  University,  Lafayette,
IN (1978) pp. 1-9.

162.  Whi'ttaker, C. B., "ITT Publications:   1944-1976," Institute
of Textile Technology, Charlottesville, VA (April, 1977).

163. 'Whittaker,  C. B., "The Textile Library:  A Selected List  of
Books,"  Institute  of  Textile  Technology,  Charlottesville, VA
(January, 1977).

164. Wight, J.  L.,  "Biological  Treatment  System  Measures  Up
During   High   Solids  Load  Condition,"  Pollution  Engineering
(October, 1977), pp.  52-55.

165. Williamson, R.,  "Handling Dye Waste in  a  Municipal  Plant,"
Public Works, Vol. 102, No. 1  (January, 1971), pp. 58-59.

166. Wynn, C. S., Kirk, B. S., and McNabney, R.,  "Pilot Plant for
Tertiary  Treatment of Wastewater with Ozone," Ref No. EPA R2-73-
146.

167. Zwerdling,  D., "Spraying Dangers  in  the  Air,"  Washington,
Post (January 25, 1976), Section F.
                                443

-------

-------
                              SECTION XIV

                               GLOSSARY
Animal Hair Fibers

Fibers  obtained  from animals for purposes of weaving, knitting,
or felting into fabric; some animal  fibers  are  alpaca,  angora
goat  hair,  camel  hair,  cashmere, cow hair, extract wool, fur,
horse hair, llama, mohair, mungo, noil, shoddy, silk, vicuna, and
wool.

Anti-static Agents

Functional finishes applied to  fabric  to  overcome  deleterious
effects  of static electricity.  Compounds commonly used are PVA,
styrene-base resins, polyalkylene  glycols,  gelatine,  PAA,  and
polyvinyl acetate.

Batch Processing

Operations which require loading of discrete amounts of material,
running   the  process  to  completion,  and  then  removing  the
material.  This is in contrast to continuous processing in  which
material  in  rope  or  open width form runs without interruption
through one or more processes, obviating the need for loading and
unloading.

Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)

Level of technology applicable  to  effluent  limitations  to  be
achieved  by  July  1, 1984, for industrial discharges to surface
waters as defined by Section 301 (b) (2)  of  the  Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act, As Amended.

Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)

The  level of technology applicable to effluent limitations to be
achieved by July 1, 1977, for industrial  discharges  to  surface
waters as defined by Section 301 (b) (1) (A) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, As Amended.

Complex Processing

Woven  or  knit  fabric  finishing operations that may consist of
fiber preparation, scouring, functional finishing, and bleaching,
dyeing, or printing.

Consent Decree

The Settlement Agreement entered into by  EPA  with  the  Natural
Resources  Defense  Council  and  other  environmental groups and
                                445

-------
approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of  Columbia
on  June  7,  1976.   One  of  the  principal  provisions  of the
Settlement Agreement was to direct EPA to  consider  an  extended
list  of  65  classes  of pollutants in 21 industrial categories,
including  Textile  Mills,  in  the   development   of   effluent
limitations guidelines and new source performance standards.

Conventional Pollutants

Constituents  of  wastewater as determined by Section 304 (a) (4)
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, including  but  not  limited  to,
pollutants  classified  as biological oxygen demanding, suspended
solids, fecal coliform, and pH.

Direct Discharger

An  industrial  discharger  that  introduces  wastewater   to   a
receiving body of water or land, with or without treatment by the
discharger.

Effluent Limitation

A  maximum  amount per unit of production (or other unit) of each
specific  constituent  of  the  effluent  that  is   subject   to
limitation from an existing point source.

End-of-Pipe Technologies

Treatment  processes  used  to  remove or alter the objectionable
constituents of the spent water from manufacturing operations.
Environmental Protection Agency - Sewage
STP)
                                          Treatment  Plant  (EPA-
A  sewage  treatment plant construction cost index originating in
1957 with a base cost index of 100.

Environmental  Protection  Agency  -  Small   City   Conventional
Treatment (EPA-SCCT)

A  sewage  treatment plant construction cost index originating in
the 3rd Quarter, 1973, and based on a cost index of 100  for  St.
Joseph, Missouri.

Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972

Public'  Law 92-500 which provides the legal authority for current
EPA  water  pollution  abatement   projects,   regulations,   and
policies.   The  Federal  Water Pollution Control Act was amended
further in 1977 in legislation referred to  as  The  Clean  Water
Act.
                                446

-------
Functional Finish Chemicals

Substances applied to fabric to provide desirable properties such
as wrinkle-resistance, water-repellency, flame-resistance, etc.

Greiqe Mills

Facilities  which  manufacture  unfinished  woven  or  knit goods
(greige goods) for finishing  at  other  locations.   If  process
wastewater is generated, it is usually small in quantity.
Indirect Discharger

An   industrial   discharger  that
publicly-owned collection system.

In-plant Control Technologies
introduces  wastewater  to  a
Controls or measures applied within the manufacturing process  to
reduce  or  eliminate  pollutant  and  hydraulic  loadings of raw
wastewater.  Typical inplant control  measures  include  chemical
substitution, material reclamation, water reuse, water reduction,
and process changes.

Internal Subcategorization

Divisions  within  a  subcategory to group facilities that, while
producing related  products  from  similar  raw  materials,  have
differing  raw  waste  characteristics  due  to the complexity of
manufacturing processes employed.

Low-Water-Use Processing Mills

Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing  greige  goods,
laminating  or  coating fabrics, texturizing yarn, producing tire
cord fabric, and similar  activities  in  which  cleanup  is  the
primary w&ter use or process water requirements are small.

National Polllutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

A Federal program requiring industry and municipalities to obtain
permits  to  discharge  plant  effluents  to  the  nation's water
courses.

New Source

Industrial facilities from which there is, or may be, a discharge
of pollutants, and whose  construction  is  commenced  after  the
publication of the proposed regulations.

Non-Conventional Pollutants

Parameters  selected  for  use  in developing effluent limitation
guidelines and new source performance standards  which  have  not
                                 447

-------
been  previously  designated as either conventional pollutants or
priority pollutants.

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact

Deleterious  aspects  of  control  and   treatment   technologies
applicable  to  point  source category wastes, including, but not
limited to, air pollution, noise,  radiation,  sludge  and  solid
waste generation, and energy usage.

Physical-Chemical Treatment

Processes that utilize physical (i.e., sedimentation, filtration,
centrifugation,  activated  carbon, reverse osmosis, etc.) and/or
chemical  means  (i.e.,  coagulation,  oxidation,  precipitation,
etc.)  to treat wastewaters.

Point Source Category

A  collection  of  industrial  sources  with  similar function or
product, established by Section 306 (b) (1) (A)  of  the  Federal
Water  Pollution  Control  Act,  As  Amended  for  the purpose of
establishing Federal standards for the disposal of wastewater.

Pollutant Loading

Ratio of the total daily mass discharge of a particular pollutant
to the total daily wet production of a mill expressed in  terms of
(kg pollutant)/{kkg wet production).
Pretreatment Standard

Industrial waste effluent quality required
publicly-owned treatment works.

Product Line
for  discharge  to  a
Goods  which  are  similar  in  terms of raw materials, method of
manufacture, and/or function (e.g.,  scoured  wool,  wool  goods,
woven  goods,  knit  goods,  carpet,  stock  and yarn, nonwovens,
felts, etc.).

Publicly-Owned Treatment Works  (POTW)

A facility  that  collects,  treats,  or  otherwise  disposes  of
wastewaters,  owned  and  operated  by  a  village, town, county,
authority, or other public agency.
Raw Waste Characteristics

A description of the constituents and properties of a
before treatment.
           wastewater
                                448

-------
Simple Processing

Woven  or  knit  fabric  finishing operations that may consist of
fiber preparation, scouring, functional finishing, and one of the
following processes applied to more than five  percent  of  total
production; bleaching, dyeing, or printing.

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

A  numerical categorization scheme used by the U.S. Department of
Commerce to denote segments of industry.

Standard of Performance

A maximum weight discharged  per  unit  of  production  for  each
constituent   that  is  subject  to  limitations.   Standards  of
performance are applicable to new sources, as opposed to existing
sources which are subject to effluent limitations.

Synthetics

As used in this report, synthetics refers to all man-made fibers,
including  those  manufactured  from  naturally   occurring   raw
materials  (regenerated  fibers).   Strictly  speaking, synthetic
fibers are those that are made by chemical synthesis.

Toxic Pollutants

All compounds specifically named or referred to  in  the  Consent
Decree,  as well as recommended specific compounds representative
of the nonspecific or ambiguous groups or compounds named in  the
agreement.   This  list  of pollutants was developed based on the
use  of  criteria  such  as  known  occurrence  in  point  source
effluents,  in  the  aquatic  environment,  in  fish, in drinking
water, and through evaluations of carcinogenicity, other  chronic
toxicity, bioaccumulation, and persistence.

Water Usage

Ratio  of  the  spent water from a manufacturing operation to the
total wet production by the mill, expressed in terms  of  (liters
of wastewater/day)/(kilogram of wet production/day).

Wet Processing Mills

As used in this report, it refers to all manufacturing facilities
having  major  wet  manufacturing  operations.   Any  mill in the
following manufacturing segments is a wet processing mill:   Wool
Scouring,  Wool  Finishing,  Woven  Fabric Finishing, Knit Fabric
Finishing (including Hosiery Finishing), Carpet Finishing,  Stock
&  Yarn  Finishing,  Nonwoven  Manufacturing,  and  Felted Fabric
Processing.
                                449

-------
Wet Production

Mass of textile goods that goes through one
processes in a specified time period.
or  more  major  wet
                                450

-------
                           APPENDIX A

             COSTS OF TREATMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS
INRODUCTION

This appendix  presents  the  results  and  methodology  for  the
calculation  of  capital  and  annual  costs  for  the  treatment
technologies that have been considered  for  the  development  of
effluent  limitations  and  standards  for  the control of toxic,
conventional and nonconventional pollutants.  The costs have been
developed for the purpose of evaluation of cost versus  pollutant
reduction  benefit  and  for the purposes of determination of the
economic impact of the several regulatory options that have  been
considered   for   the   textile  mills  point  source  category.
Although, many of the technologies will not serve  as  the  basis
for  promulgated  effluent limitations and standards considerable
time and effort has been devoted to these calculations  and  they
represent a valuable resource for the evaluation of treatment and
control  technologies  where additional end-of-pipe treatment may
be required for water quality reasons.

GENERAL APPROACH

A model plant approach has  been  used  for  the  calculation  of
alternative  technology  costs for textile mills as the resources
required by the  Agency  and  industry  for  specific  mill  cost
estimates would be prohibitive.   The model approach has been used
successfully  in several other industries to calculate technology
cost.  From a review of production capacity,  flow  per  unit  of
production,  and  plant discharge data in all subcategories eight
different flow models ranging from  0,05  mgd  to  5.0  mgd  were
selected  for  the  detailed calculation of investment and annual
costs.  The eight flow  models  selected  provided  a  sufficient
range   of   sizes   to  represent  three  model  sizes  in  most
subcategories and thus properly represent the range  of  existing
plant  sizes.  As the model plants are flow sized models they can
be related to production sizes by the respective flow per unit of
production for the respective subcategories.

SUMMARY OF MODEL PLANT COSTS

The treatment and control options considered for BPT, BAT,  NSPS,
PSES,  and  PSNS were presented in section VII and are summarized
here in Table A-l.  The raw waste  loads  for  each  option,  the
methodology  for  calculation of effluent characteristics and the
final effluent characteristics are also presented in section VII.
These technology options are summarize here in Table A-l.   Model
plant  costs  for  each  subcategory  and option are presented in
Table A-2.
                                451

-------
BPT
BAT
NSPS
                              TABLE A-l


                    TREATMENT AND CONTROL OPTIONS



Option  1      Screening plus extended aeration activated sludge treatment



Option  1      No additional treatment beyond BPT biological treatment.

Option  2      Multimedia filtration of Option 1 effluent.

Option  3      Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation of Option 1 effluent.

Option  4      Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation followed by multimedia
               filtration of Option 1 effluent.




Option  1      Screening plus extended aeration activated sludge.

Option  2      Option 1 treatment plus chemical coagulation/sedimentation
               and multimedia filtration.
PSES & PSNS
     Option  1
     Option  2
               No additional treatment beyond screening and equalization,
               Option 1 plus chemical coagulation/sedimentation.
                                     452

-------
                                         TABLE A-2

                                  MODEL MILL COST SUMMARY
                                       BPT OPTION 1
                     SCREENING AND EXTENDED AERATION ACTIVATED SLUDGE
Subcategory

Low Water Use Processing
     (Water Jet Weaving)

Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)   Flow (MGD)
                    Costs ($1000)
                Capital      Total Annual
     10,600
     24,100

     22,900
     52,100

      2,000
      4,300
0.11
0.25

0.11
0.25

0.05
0.11
308
404

308
404

239
308
161
204

161
204

130
161
                                           453

-------
                                         TABLE A-2
                                         (Cont'd)

                                  MODEL MILL COST SUMMARY
                            BAT  OPTION 2 MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

Wool Scouring



Wool Finishing
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)   Flow (MOD)
      35,700
      78,600
     178,600
0.05
0.11
0.25
                    Costs ($1000)
                Capital      Total Annual
 93
133
200
     Multimedia Filtration Not Considered
 66
 80
104
Low Water Use Processing
     (Water Jet Weaving)
     BAT options beyond BPT not considered.
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
12,000
65,200
163,000
51,300
256,400
427,400
47,200
118,100
393,700
17,700
70,900
354,600
17,000
40,800
68,000
5,600
12,200
44,600
107,100
267,900
21,600
51,700
86,200
129,300
22,900
52,100
0.11
0.60
1.5
0.60
3.00
5.00
0.60
1.50
5.00
0.25
1.00
5.00
0.25
0.60
1.00
0.05
0.11
0.25
0.60
1.50
0.25
0.60
1.00
1.50
0.11
0.25
133
297
488
297
747
1,018
297
488
1,018
200
387
1,018
200
297
387
93
133
200
297
488
200
297
387
488
133
200
80
147
226
148
333
444
148
229
444
103
185
442
104
148
187
66
80
104
148
229
103
147
185
226
80
104
    Multimedia Filtration Not Considered

               454

-------
                            BAT
             TABLE A-2
             (Cont'd)

      MODEL MILL COST SUMMARY
     OPTION 3 CHEMICAL COAGULATION
Subcategory

Wool Scouring



Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
      (Water Jet Weaving)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)
Flow (MGD)
    Costs ($1000)
Capital      Total Annual
35,700
78,600
178,600
16,400
41,100
82,200
BAT options
12,000
65,200
163,000
51,300
256,400
427,400
47,200
118,100
393,700
17,700
70,900
354,600
17,000
40,800
68,000
5,600
12,200
44,600
107,100
267,900
21,600
51,700
86,200
129,300
22,900
52,100
2,000
4,300
0.05
0.11
0.25
0.60
1.50
3.00
beyond BPT not
0.11
0.60
1.50
0.60
3.00
5.00
0.60
1.50
5.00
0.25
1.00
5.00
0.25
0.60
1.00
0.05
0.11
0.25
0.60
1.50
0.25
0.60
1.00
1.50
0.11
0.25
0.05
0.11
Chemical
consider
365
536
778
considered.
206
365
528
365
763
1,112
365
528
1,112
263
447
1,112
263
365
447
172
206
263
365
528
263
365
447
528
206
263
172
206
                                                      246
                                                      373
                                                      556
                                                      150
                                                      244
                                                      370

                                                      244
                                                      555
                                                      796

                                                      244
                                                      370
                                                      796

                                                      179
                                                      302
                                                      796

                                                      179
                                                      244
                                                      302

                                                      134
                                                      151

                                                      179
                                                      244
                                                      370

                                                      179
                                                      244
                                                      302
                                                      370

                                                      151
                                                      180

                                                      134
                                                      151
                                           45!

-------
                                         TABLE A-2
                                         (Cont'd)

                                  MODEL MILL COST SUMMARY
                      BAT OPTION 4 CHEMICAL COAGULATION/SEDIMENTATION
                                PLUS MULTI MEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

Wool Scouring



Wool Finishing
Low Water Use Processing
     (Water Jet Weaving)

Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Desizing)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)
Flow (MGD)
    Costs ($1000)
Capital      Total Annual
35,700
78,600
178,600
16,400
41,100
82,200
BAT options
12,000
65,200
163,000
51,300
256,400
427,400
47,200
118,100
393,700
17,700
70,900
354,600
17,000
40,800
68,000
5,600.
12,200
44,600
107,100
267,900
21,600
51,700
86,200
129,300
22,900
52,100
2,000
4,300
0.05
0.11
0.25
0.60
1.50
3.00
beyond BPT not
0.11
0.60
1.50
0.60
3.00
5.00
0.60
1.50
5.00
0.25
1,00
5.00
0.25
0.60
1.00
0.05
0.11
0.25
0.60
1.50
0.25
0.60
1.00
1.50
0.11
0.25
0.05
0.11
Option
611
959
1,449
considered.
303
611
950
611
1,434
2,039
611
950
2,039
420
773
2,039
420
611
773
231
303
420
611
950
420
611
773
950
303
420
231
303
                                                      329
                                                      520
                                                      784
                                                      180
                                                      328
                                                      518

                                                      328
                                                      786
                                                    1,121

                                                      328
                                                      518
                                                    1,121

                                                      229
                                                      416
                                                    1,121

                                                      229
                                                      328
                                                      416

                                                      152
                                                      181

                                                      229
                                                      328
                                                      518

                                                      229
                                                      328
                                                      416
                                                      518

                                                      180
                                                      320

                                                      152
                                                      181
                                           456

-------
                                          TABLE A-2
                                          (Cont'd)

                                  MODEL MILL  COST SUMMARY
                                       NSPS OPTION  1
                         SCREENING PLUS AERATION ACTIVATED  SLUDGE
 Subcategory

 Wool  Scouring*
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)   Flow (MGD)
                    Costs  ($1000)
                Capital      Total Annua.
Wool Finishing
Low water Use Processing
      (Water Jet Weaving)
      41,100


      10,600
1.50
0.11
2,275


  308
  783


  162
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      65,200
0.60
  573
  346
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
      256,400
3.00
3,624
1,184
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Desizing)
     118,100
1.50
2,275
  783
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      70,900
1.00
1,744
  635
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
      40,800
0.60
  573
  346
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
12,200
44,600
51,700
52,100
9,800
0.11
0.25
0.60
0.25
0.25
310
405
573
405
405
                                                      210
                                                      257
                                                      346
                                                      257
                                                      257
*NSPS costs for the wool scouring subcategory were not calculated as no new
sources are anticipated.

                                           457

-------
                                         TABLE A-2
                                         (Cont'd)

                                  MODEL MILL COST SUMMARY
                                       NSPS OPTION 2
                          EXTENDED AERATION ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLUS
                          CHEMICAL COAGULATION/SEDIMENTATION PLUS
                                   MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
Subcategory

Wool Scouring*
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)   Flow (MGD)
                    Costs ($1000)
                Capital      Total Annual
Wool Finishing
Low water Use Processing
     (Water Jet Weaving)
      41,100


      10,600
1.50
0.11
3,234
1,303
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      65,200
0.60
1,184
  674
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
     256,400
3.00
5,058
1,970
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Designing)
     118,100
1.50
3,225
1,301
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      70,900
1.00
2,517
1,051
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
      40,800
0.60
1,184
  674
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
      12,200


      44,600


      51,700


      52,100
0,11
0.25
0.60
0.25
  613
  825
1,184
  825
  391


  487


  674


  487
Felted Fabric Processing
       9,800
0.25
  825
*NSPS costs for the wool scouring subcategory were not calculated as no new
sources are anticipated.
                                            458
  487

-------
                                         TABLE A-2
                                         (Cont'd)

                                  MODEL MILI COST SUMMARY
                                   PSES & PSNS OPTION 2
                            CHEMICAL COAGULATION/SEDIMENTATION
Subcategory

Wool Scouring
          Model Size
Production (Ib/day)   Flow (MGD)
     178,600
0.25
                    Costs ($1000)
                Capital      Total Annual
459
299
Wool Finishing
      41,100
1.50
745
440
Low Water Use Processing
     (Water Jet Weaving)
      24,100
0.25
366
207
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      18,100
0.25
366
207
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
      51,300
0.60
493
289
Woven Fabric Finishing
     (Designing)
     118,100
1.50
765
441
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Simple Operations)
      47,200
0.60
493
288
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Complex Operations)
      40,800
0.60
493
288
Knit Fabric Finishing
     (Hosiery Products)

Carpet Finishing
Stock and Yarn Finishing
Nonwoven Manufacturing
Felted Fabric Processing
      12,200


     107,100


      21,600


      52,100


      10,000
0.11


0.60


0.25


0.25


0.25
293


493


366


366


366
170
288
207
207
207
                                            459

-------
CALCULATION OF COMPONENT TECHNOLOGY COSTS

Treatment Technologies Considered

Several distinct technologies comprise the treatment and  control
options  considered for the textile industry.  These technologies
which have been selected for the detailed  calculation  of  costs
are as follows:

     Screening.
     Equalization
     Activated Sludge
     Chemical Coagulation/Precipitation
     Vacuum Filtration
     Multimedia Filtration
     Dissolved Air Flotation
     Granular Activated Carbon
     Powdered Activated Carbon
(GAC)
(PAC)
Model Plant Cost Estimates
Total  investment  and annual cost estimates are prepared for the
alternatives applicable to each model.  The  example  computation
sheet  (Figure A-l)  is  used  as  an  aid  in  this  task.   The
investment costs include the cost of  purchasing  and  installing
the  components  of each alternative technology and allowance for
contingencies and engineering.  The annual costs include the cost
of  capital,  depreciation,  operation  and  maintenance   labor,
maintenance  materials,  sludge  disposal, energy, chemicals, and
monitoring.

Details of the methodology used in preparing the  cost  estimates
are  discussed  below.   The  basic assumptions and the rationale
supporting the estimates are based primarily  on  data  collected
during  the  industry  survey  and  information obtained from the
literature.  References  are  cited  throughout  the  section  to
provide  the  reader with a clear understanding of the sources of
the information.

Component Technology Investment Costs

Cost curves are presented in Figures A-2  through  A-l 1  for  the
component  technologies  used  in  establishing  the  alternative
control technologies.  The curves  provide  the  total  installed
costs   relative   to  flow  rate  and  represent  the  following
distributions between equipment and construction costs.
Component Technology
Screening {BAT and NSPS)
Screening (PSES and PSNS)
Equalization (NSPS)
Equalization (PSES and PSNS)
Activated Sludge
     Installed Cost Breakdown
        percent of total
Equipment          Construction
    20                  80
    35                  65
    20                  80
    35                  65
    20                  80
                                460

-------
                                   FIGURE A-l
                             TEXTILE INDUSTRY BAT REVIEW
                         TREATMENT COST COMPUTATION SHEET
SUBCATEGORY 4a. Woven Fabric Finishing-Simple Processing  REGULATION 	

MODEL FLOW    0.6    MGD  TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE    F      CC + MMF + AC
                    C-12,200
                                    KLBS
                                                                           BAT
           	MGD  TREATMENT ALTERNATIVE
                    C-12,200
ANNUAL PRODUCTION   0-13,900
          ANNUAL CAPACITY    16,300
KLBS
                    1-13,000

INVESTMENT  COSTS
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Component
PT AS CC VF OAF MMF
AS CC VF DAF MMF AC
CC VF DAF MMF AC OZ
VF DAF MMF AC OZ
MONITORING
Equipment
39,900
24,700
39,900
452,200
20,000
                                                   Construction

                                                     159,600

                                                      45,800

                                                     159,600

                                                     452.200
                                                                         Total

                                                                        199,500
                                                                         70,500
                                                                        199.500
                                                                        904,400
                                                       None
                                                                         20.000
                    EQUIPMENT & CONSTRUCTION COSTS (E&C)

    CONTINGENCIES ( 15  % OF E&C)

    ENGINEERING (  7  % OF A&B)
                                                              (A)  $  1,393,900

                                                              (B)       209,100

                                                              (C)
                                     112,200
                         TOTAL INVESTMENT COSTS (TIC) * * * * * $_
                                                                      1,715,000
ANNUAL  COSTS
    COST OF CAPITAL ( 15  % of TIC)

    DEPRECIATION ([A + B] -f  18   YEARS AVERAGE USEFUL LIFE)

    O&M LABOR ( 5,140     MRS X   20    $/HR)

    MAINTENANCE MATERIALS

    SLUDGE DISPOSAL (  359      TONS X    20      $/TON)
                                                                        257,300
                                                                         89.100
                                                                        102,800
                                                                         60,500
                                                                          7,200
    ENERGY & POWER (   283,000
                   (    39,000
                                      kwhr x  3.4 
-------
                                                        FIGURE A-2
                                                 SCREENING-INSTALLED COST
O)
           1000
        (0
        o
            100
             10
               0.01
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                                    Flow, mgd


                 SOURCE:  Refereace Ko. 3 (4th quarter  1979 dollars)

-------
                                                      FIGURE A-3
                                              EQUALIZATION-INSTALLED COST
CO
            1000
         Jg
         o
         •o
         CO

         O   100
              10
                        t    a   i  l i i II
                0.01
                    lilt
        t    I   l  1  i  i i i
        I   3
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                                      Flow, mgd

                  SOURCE:   Reference No. 3  (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
   1000
o
•o
a
O   100
     10
                                              FIGURE A-4
                                    ACTIVATED SLUDGE-INSTALLED COST
                I	I
I  I  I II
                                                      aeri tlon
                    24-hour
                    (Constructed)
                                     24-hour aeration
                                     (Package)
                                •-hour aeration
                                '(Package)
                                                                 i    l   i   i  i i i i
       0.01
      0.1
1.0
10.0
                                              Flow, mgd

         SOURCE:   Reference No. 3 (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
   1000
 o

»>
 o
 (0


O  100
      10
        0.01
                                             FIGURE A-5

                                 CHEMICAL COAGULATION-INSTALLED COST
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                             Flow, mgd
         SOURCE:  References  28, 30, 31 (4th quarter 1979  dollars)

-------
                                           FIGURE A-6

                                 VACUUM FILTRATION-INSTALLED COST
   1000
o
•o
CO


O   100
     10
        10
100
         1000


FHter Area, ft.2
10000
         SOURCE:  References 28, 30, 81, 82 (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
ch
           1000
        o
        TJ
        <0

        O  100
              10
               0.01
                                                     FIGURE A-7

                                        MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION-INSTALLED COST
                                            With polymeric filter aid
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                                      Flow, mgd


                 SOURCE:  References  28,  30,  31,  32,  33,  34 (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
                                                      FIGURE  A-8
                                        DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION-INSTALLED COST
00
           1000
         10
         w
         o

         "o
         TJ
        O   100
              10
                C.01
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                                     Flow, mgd


                 SOURCE:   Reference  34  (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
-p*
en
            1000
 Cft





 o



9

 O
         a


         O   100
              10
                0.01
                                                     FIGURE A-9

                                      GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON-INSTALLED COST
                                                With on-»ft* rageneiation
                                0.1
1.0
10.0
                                                      Flow, mgd
                  SOURCE:  References 30, 31, 33, 35 (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
                                               FIGURE A-10
                                POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON-INSTALLED COST
  10000
CO
o
•Q
CO
o  1000
                                                   PACT2 (full application
                                                   carbon, regenerated)
               PAC2 (addition to biological treatment
                      carbon regenerated )
    100 I	
        0.01
I   I   I  I  I II
                                        PACT! (full application .
                                               carbon discarded)
                                                            PAC .   (addition to biological treatment.
                                                                   carbon discarded)
             I   I  I  I  I i i
            0.1
1.0
10.0
                                               Flow, ragd
          SOURCE:   Reference 83 (4th quarter  1979  dollars)

-------
                                            FIGURE A-ll
                                     OZONATION-INSTALLED COST
   1000
0
k.
JS
o
•o
CO

O   100
     10
                1    f   511(11
       0.01
0.1
1.0
10.0
                                            Flow, mgd

         SOURCE:   References  33, 37, 38, 50 (4th quarter 1979 dollars)

-------
Chemical Coagulation/
Precipitation
Vacuum Filtration
Multimedia Filtration
Dissolved Air Flotation
Granular Activated Carbon
Powdered Activated Carbon
(Not Regenerated)
    Addition to EAAS
    Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(Regenerated)
    Addition to EAAS
    Full Application
Ozonation
2Q

35
20
35
50
32
25
45
34
50
80

65
80
65
50
68
75
55
66
50
The features, applicable design parameters, and  source  of  cost
information  for  each of these technologies are described below.
In all cases, the cost  curves  for  the  component  technologies
represent  4th  Quarter 1979 dollars.  The original equipment and
construction costs, which were taken from the sources  given  for
each   component   technology,  were  adjusted  to  achieve  this
uniformity.  The adjustment was accomplished in two  steps.   The
original  equipment  and construction cost estimates presented in
the Textile Mills  Point  Source  Category  Proposed  Development
Document  (37)  were  based  on  4th  quarter  1976 dollars.  The
individual cost information was updated to  that  time  frame  by
establishing  adjustment ratios based on the EPA-STP and EPA-SCCT
indexes.  These ratios  varied  depending  on  the  date  of  the
original  cost  information.   The 4th Quarter 1976 equipment and
construction costs were subsequently updated to 4th Quarter  1979
dollars  by increasing the costs by one third.  This increase was
based on a change in the EPA-SCCT index from a 4th  Quarter  1976
base  city average of 119 to a 4th Quarter 1979 base city average
of 162.

Screening   Screening is used as a preliminary treatment step for
new sources and is included ahead of extended aeration  activated
sludge  for existing direct.dischargers.  Figure A-2 includes the
costs fort   site  preparation;  structural  concrete;  equipment
housing;   purchase  and  installation  of  mechanical  screening
equipment;  pumps,  piping,  and  valves;  and   instrumentation.
Screening  is  used  to remove lint, floe, rags, and other coarse
suspended solids that tend  to  clog'  pumps,  foul  bearings  and
aerators,  float  in  basins,  and  otherwise  interfere with the
operation of treatment plants.  The costs  were  taken  from  the
Development Document (Proposed Regulation) (4) and updated to 4th
Quarter 1979 dollars.

Equalization    Equalization  is  used as a preliminary treatment
step for new  sources.   The  technology  includes  earthen  wall
basins  providing  12 hours detention time with mixing by surface
aerators.  The assumed depth is 3 meters  (approximately 10 feet).
                                 472

-------
Figure A-3  includes  the  costs  for  site  preparation,   basin
construction, wet wells, pumps, and floating mechanical aerators.
The   costs  were  taken  from  background  calculation  used  in
preparing the Development  Document   (Proposed  Regulation)  (4)
and updated to 4th Quarter 1979 dollars.

Activated  Sludge    Activated  sludge is the technology in place
for most existing direct dischargers.  Consequently,  it  is  not
included  in  estimating  the  costs of the alternative treatment
technologies  for  all  mills.   Because  the  Hosiery  Products,
Nonwoven    Manufacturing,    and    Felted   Fabric   Processing
Subcategories are new, and activated sludge is not  generally  in
place,  activated  sludge  is  included,  for cost purposes, as a
major treatment step for existing direct dischargers.  It also is
included as a component technology  for  all  new  source  direct
discharge  mills.   Figure A-4  includes costs for 8- and 24-hour
package aeration systems and a 24-hour detention site constructed
system.  The basic unit operations and processes included in  the
site  constructed  system  are  aeration, secondary clarification
with solids recycle, sludge thickening, and vacuum filtration for
sludge  dewatering.   The  costs  were  taken   from   background
calculations used in preparing the Development Document {Proposed
Regulation) (3) and updated to 4th Quarter 1979 dollars.

Chemical Coagulation/Precipitations. Chemical coagulation/precip-
itation after biological treatment is used for direct dischargers
and   as   pretreatment   for   indirect   dischargers.   In  all
applications, the technology is based on  the  use  of  alum  (as
A12(S04)3   18  H20) as the coagulant and includes sedimentation.
The assumed alum dosage was based on the following conditions:
Condition
    1
    2
Influent TSS,  mq/1
     700 or greater
     less than 700
Alum Dosage/ mq/1
     1,000
       100
Figure A-5 includes the costs for site preparation,  purchase  of
coagulation  and  sedimentation  equipment,  and  installation of
equipment and  instrumentation.   The  costs  were  developed  by
averaging the costs found in References 38, 39, and 40.

Vacuum  Filtration    For  existing  direct  dischargers,  vacuum
filtration  accompanies  chemical  coagulation/precipitation  for
sludge  dewatering  purposes.   Backwash  solids  from multimedia
filtration  also  are  processed  by  vacuum  filtration  if  the
multimedia   filter   is   used   in  conjunction  with  chemical
coagulation.  Vacuum filtration is included  with  all  treatment
alternatives  for  existing  indirect  dischargers.  The cost was
calculated as a function of filter area, -which is  determined  by
using    a   dry   solids   loading   rate   of   19.5 kg/sq m/hr
(4 Ib/sq ft/hr) and an operating period of  ten  hours  per  day.
The  specific  chemical  coagulation  and  multimedia  filtration
conditions given below are  used  in  determining  vacuum  filter
requirements.
                                473

-------
Chemical Coagulation
   Condition
         1
         2
         3
         4
         5

Multimedia Filtration
   Condition
         1
         2
         3
                      Alum Added
                        mq/1
                        1 ,000
                        1,000
                          100
                          100
                          100
TSS Removed
    mq/1
    40
    20
     5
Figure  A-6  includes  the  costs  of site preparation, equipment
housing,  purchase  and  installation  of  filtration  equipment,
piping,  pumping, and instrumentation.  The curve is based on the
average of costs given in References 38, 39, 40, and 42.

Multimedia Filtration   Multimedia filtration is used in the same
capacity as chemical coagulation/precipitation.   The  technology
utilizes  a  granular  media  bed  of  anthracite coal, sand, and
gravel, with polymeric filter aid added in  applications  without
prior  chemical  coagulation.  In all applications, the hydraulic
loading rate used is 9.8 cu m/hr/sq m (4 gpm/sq ft).  Filter  aid
is added at a rate of 1 mg/1.

Figure  A-7  includes  the  costs  for  site  preparation and the
purchase  and  installation  of  filtration  equipment,   piping,
pumping,  and instrumentation.  The curve is based on the average
of costs given in References 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, and 45.

Dissolved Air Flotation   Dissolved  air  flotation  is  used  to
remove  suspended  solids  and  oil & grease in the Wool Scouring
Subcategory.   It  is   used   in   conjunction   with   chemical
coagulation/  precipitation  after  the biological treatment step
for direct dischargers and as a pretreatment  step  for  indirect
dischargers.   In  all  applications, a surface hydraulic loading
rate of 163.2 cu m/day/sq m  (4,000 gpd/ sq ft)  is used.

Figure A-8 includes the costs for purchase  and  installation  of
tanks,  air  pressurizing  equipment,  recycle pumping equipment,
operating valves, instrumentation, and  piping.   The  costs  are
based  on  those  developed  in  EPA's  Process Design Manual for
Removal of Suspended Solids  (45).

Granular Activated Carbon.  Granular activated  carbon is used  as
a  post-biological  treatment step and as a pretreatment step for
both existing and new sources.  It is usually   applied  following
chemical  coagulation/precipitation and/or multimedia filtration.
The technology  utilizes  granular  carbon  columns  and  on-site
carbon   regeneration   for  wastewater  flows  of  greater  than
450 cu m/day (0.12 mgd).  Carbon for smaller flows  is assumed  to
                                 474

-------
be  discarded  after  use.   An  exhaustion  rate of 0.66 kg/cu m
{5,500 Ib/mil gal) of water treated is used.

Figure A-9 includes  the  costs  for  site  preparation  and  the
purchase   and   installation  of  carbon  columns,  regeneration
equipment, piping, pumping, and instrumentation.   The  curve  is
based on information found in References 39, 40, 44, and 46.
Powdered  Act i vated  Carbon  Add i t ion
to  Biological
to   existing
Treatment
Powdered  activated  carbon  addition  to   existing   biological
treatment  systems is considered for existing direct dischargers.
The technology utilizes  addition  of  carbon  to  the  activated
sludge  basin  and on-site wet air oxidation for wastewater flows
of greater than 7,500 cu m/day  {2.0 mgd).   Carbon  for  smaller
flows  is  assumed to be discarded after use.  An exhaustion rate
of 0.14 kg/cu m {1,200 Ib/mil gal) of wastewater treated  is used.
Figure A-10 includes the costs for site preparation; purchase  of
carbon  and  chemical  feeding equipment, regeneration equipment,
instrumentation;  and   installation   of   all   equipment   and
instrumentation.    The   curve   is  based  on  costs  found  in
Reference 47.

Powdered Activated Carbon Treatment   Powdered  activated  carbon
treatment  is considered as a treatment technology for new direct
dischargers.  The technology uses screening followed by  addition
of  carbon to an activated sludge basin.  Sludge is dewatered and
regenerated by wet air oxidation for wastewater flows of  greater
than  7,500 cu m/day  {2.0 mgd).   Carbon  for  smaller  flows is
assumed to  be  discarded  after  use.   An  exhaustion  rate  of
0.14 kg/cu m (1,200 Ib/mil gal) of water treated is used.

Figure A-10 includes the costs for site preparation; construction
of  basins, clarifiers, and facilities; purchase of equipment for
screening, aeration, settling,  pumping,  carbon  feed,  chemical
feed,  sludge  handling,  regeneration  and  instrumentation; and
installation of all equipment and instrumentation.  The curve  is
based on costs found in Reference 47.

Ozonation     Ozonation   is   considered  as  a  post-biological
•treatment step and as a pretreatment step for  existing  sources.
It      is      usually      applied      following      chemical
coagulation/precipitation and/or multimedia filtration.  However,
for  the  textile  industry,  it  is  applied  after   biological
treatment  for  direct  dischargers.   The  cost calculations are
based on the on-site generation of  ozone  and  on  a  generation
capacity of 100 mg/1 of ozone.

Figure A-ll  includes  the  costs  for  site  preparation and the
purchase and installation of ozone contactors,  ozone  generation
equipment,  piping,  pumping,  and instrumentation.  The  curve is
based on the average of costs found in References 44, 48, 49, and
50.  50.
                                 475

-------
Installed Investment Costs Matrix

The installed equipment and  construction  investment  costs  for
each of the component technologies are presented in Table A-3 for
each  model  plant size.  The tabulated values are the base costs
taken  from  the  component  technology  installed  cost   curves
(Figures A-2 through A-11) updated to 4th Quarter 1979 dollars.

Other Investment Costs

Monitoring   Equipment    The  investment  costs  for  monitoring
equipment are based on collecting samples  of  the  influent  and
effluent  streams  of the treatment plant.  The sampling consists
of 24-hour composite samples taken at each location twice  weekly
for   direct   dischargers   and   once  per  week  for  indirect
dischargers.  For direct dischargers, grab samples are taken once
per week of the receiving water both upstream and  downstream  of
the  discharge.  Continuous monitoring of pH and flow is provided
for the influent and effluent of all treatment plants.

The equipment items include two flow meters, two primary and  one
back-up  refrigerated  samplers,  two pH meters, and refrigerated
sample storage containers.  The costs  were  based  on  equipment
manufacturers' price lists (51, 52, and 53).

It  should  be  noted  that  the  equipment  described here is an
estimate of the requirements for a  complete  monitoring  program
for  major direct and indirect dischargers.  Existing facilities,
especially larger direct discharge mills,  normally  already  own
most of this equipment and the investment costs incurred by these
mills are considerably less.
Land Costs
Because  all  of
                                the alternative technologies have
small space requirements, and because most plants have some  land
available,  the  cost  of  additional land is not included in the
estimates.

Contingencies   An allowance of 15 percent of the total installed
costs of the alternative treatment technologies is used to  cover
contingencies  and  differences  between  actual  systems and the
costs used for estimates.  No allowance is made for mill shutdown
during construction.

Engineering Costs    Engineering  costs  are   estimated   as   a
percentage  of the total installed costs plus contingencies.  The
values used are taken from the curve presented in Figure A-12.

Annual Costs

In estimating annual costs, it is  assumed  that  the  wastewater
treatment technologies will operate 300 days/year.  The operation
of  the  treatment  technology  should  not  be confused with the
                                 476

-------
                                                  TABLE A-3
              INSTALLED EQUIPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION INVESTMENT COSTS FOR COMPONENT TECHNOLOGIES
Technology
 0.05    0.11
(189)   (416)
  Model Size, mgd (cu m/day)
0.25    0.60      1.0       1.5       3.0       5.0
(946)  (2,271)  (3,785)   (5,678)  (11,355)  (18,925)
Cost, thousands of dollars
Screening
Equalization
Activated Sludge (8-hour)
Activated Sludge (24-hour)
Chemical Coagulation/
Precipitation
Vacuum Filtration
Condition 1*
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
Condition 5
Multimedia Filtration
Filtration (with polymer)
Dissolved Air Flotation
Granular Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Granular Activated Carbon
(with regeneration)
32
32
37
68
44


75
71
71
71
71
48
52
52

53

718
35
36
54
120
72


100
71
71
71
71
79
84
71

86

758
39
44
102
193
117


146
96
71
71
71
128
137
94

146

798
49
56
173
319
200


279
140
71
71
71
200
216
133

239

904
67
64
239
1,330
266


426
206
76
71
71
266
289
164

333

1,104
100
77
293
1,729
333


599
273
87
77
71
346
371
192

495

1,436
146
88
532
2,793
505


1,197
479
114
101
89
545
581
293

958

2,128
180
101
-
-
771


2,022
825
148
125
108
758
803
383

1,585

3,205

-------
CO
                                                         TABLE A-3 (Cent.)
                                                              Model Size,  mgd (cu m/day)
Technology

Powdered Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Added to EAAS
Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(with regeneration)
Added to EAAS
Full Application
Ozonation
0.05
(189)



162
-


1,556
-
61
0.11
(416)



169
1,131


1,583
2,075
112
0.25
(946) (2
Cost,


186
1,144 1,


1,609 1,
2,261 2,
213
0.60
,271)
1.0
(3,785)
1.5
(5,678)
3.0
(11,355)
5.0
(18,925)
thousands of dollars


239
330


649
660
399


293
1,543


1,729
2,926
612


352
1,862


1,756
3,259
825


525
2,653


2,022
4,256
1,397


812
-


2,252
—
2,062
      *  These conditions  are  defined  in the section on vacuum filtration.




      Source:  Figures A-2 to  A-ll  updated to 4th quarter 1979 dollars.

-------
                                         FIGURE A-12

                             ESTIMATED ENGINEERING COMPENSATION
   16



    15



    14



    13



    12
<  10
CO
z

a   9
2
O
(j   p




    7
              i    i   i  t I I it
     0.01
O.I                      1.0


NET CONSTRUCTION COST, 106 dollars
10.0
        SOURCE:  Reference No.  40

-------
operation of the  textile  mill,  which  is  assumed  to  be  250
days/year.

Capital Costs    The cost of money is assumed to be 15 percent of
the total investment.

Depreciation    Estimated  lives  for  the  components  of   each
alternative  are  established and related to the investment costs
to determine the estimated design life for the alternative.   The
installed cost is depreciated by the straight-line method for the
calculated life.

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Labor    Estimates  of the annual
man-hours required to operate and maintain the various  component
technologies  are  presented  in  Table A-4  for each model plant
size.   The  estimates  are   developed   from   information   in
References 49,  54 and 47.  Man-hour requirements for laboratory,
supervisory, administrative, and  clerical  activities  also  are
presented  in Table A-7 for the various levels of control.  Total
O&M labor includes the cost  of  operating  and  maintaining  the
component  technologies  and the cost of laboratory, supervisory,
administrative, and clerical  requirements.   A  productive  work
value  of 6.5 hr/day/person, or 1950 hr/yr/person, is assumed and
a rate of $20/hr is used as the total cost for  wages,  benefits,
and  payroll  processing  expenses  when  converting the hours to
dollar costs.

Maintenance Materials   Estimates of the costs of  materials  and
parts  needed to maintain each component technology are presented
in Table A-5.  The requirements are developed from information in
References 39,  49,  and  47  and  from  contact  with  equipment
manufacturers.  manufacturers.

Sludge  Disposal    The  costs  for  sludge  disposal include the
hauling  and  deposition  of  dewatered  sludge   and   exhausted
activated carbon in an approved sanitary landfill.  The costs are
developed  by  estimating  the  quantities  of  sludge  that  are
generated by the various component technologies, determining  the
total  quantity  of  sludge requiring disposal for each treatment
alternative, and applying an estimated unit cost (dollars/ton  of
sludge)  applicable  to  the  total  quantity of sludge requiring
disposal.

A matrix of the estimated sludge quantities by model size for the
various  component  technologies  is  presented   in   Table A-6.
Estimates  of the sludge generated by screening are based on data
collected from the textile industry in 1976 (4).   Estimates  for
activated  sludge  are  based  on  established typical generation
rates available in References 20 and 24.  A value  of  150 mg  of
dry  solids  per  liter of wastewater is used.  The estimates for
chemical coagulation/precipitation,  multimedia  filtration,  and
dissolved  air  flotation  are based on the quantity of suspended
solids removed by the technologies.  Values are presented for the
                                480

-------
                                                      TABLE A-4
                                     ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MAN-HOURS
        Technology
              Model Size, mgd (cu m/day)
 0.05    0.11    0.25    0.60      1.0       1.5       3.0       5.0
 (189)  (416)   (946)   (2,271)  (3,785)   (5,678)  (11,355)  (18,925)
CO
              Hours to Operate & Maintain Technology

  560     560     580     590      600       600       640       750

  460     520     620     720      780       840       950     1,050

  660     970   1,450   2,230    2,900     3,550     5,000     6,500

  126     192     298     482      640       810     1,180     1,580


2,270   2,310   2,360   2,510    2,685     2,900     3,555     4,425

   56     113     225     450      625       780     1,150     1,525
Screening

Equalization

Activated Sludge

Chemical Coagulation/
  Precipitation

Vacuum Filtration

Multimedia Filtration

Dissolved Air
  Flotation

Granular Activated Carbon
  (without regeneration)

Granular Activated Carbon
  (with regeneration)

Powdered Activated Carbon
  (without regeneration)
     Added to EAAS
     Full Application
                                          144     221      325     515
                                           46
           80     145     280
                                   675
400
          830     1,220     1,610
550
950     1,430
                                          250      400      700    1,250     1,850      2,400      4,100      6,350
                                        1,810    1,850    2,260   2,645     2,820      2,950      3,285      3,450
                                                5,375    5,905   6,780     7,633      8,490     11,400

-------
                                                      TABLE A-4  (Cont.)
        Technology
                                                  Model Size, mgd  (cu m/day)
                                0.05    0.11    0.25    0.60       1.0        1.5        3.0       5.0
                               (189)    (416)    (946)  (2,271)    (3,785)    (5,678)   (11,355)   (18,925)
-*»
oo
                                                     Hours  to  Operate & Maintain Technology

        Powdered Activated Carbon
          (with regeneration)
             Added to EAAS              1,840    1,916   2,410    3,005    3,420      3,850     5,085      6,450
             Full Application              -    5,441   6,055    7,140    8,233      9,390    13,200
Ozonation


Regulation

BAT

PSES, NSPS, PSNS
        840     940   1,100   1,240    1,340     1,450     1,600     1,800

Hours for Laboratory, Supervisory, Administrative, & Clerical Requirements


         15      65     100     440      600       750     1,100     1,500

         35     125     210     830    1,150     1,505     2,400     3,370
        Source:  References 30 and 83.

-------
                                                  TABLE A-5
                                     ANNUAL MAINTENANCE MATERIALS COSTS
Technology
                   Model Size,  mgd (cu m/day)
 0.05    0.11    0.25    0.60     1.0       1.5       3.0       5.0
(189)   (416)    (946)   (2,271) (3,785)  (5,678)    (11,355)   (18,925)
      Activated Sludge

      Chemical Coagulation/
        Precipitation

      Vacuum Filtration

      Multimedia Filtration

oo     Dissolved Air Flotation

      Granular Activated Carbon
        (without regeneration)

      Powdered Activated Carbon
        (without regeneration)
           Add to EMS
           Full Application

      Powdered Activated Carbon
        (with regeneration)
           Add to EMS
           Full Application

      Ozonation
                                    2,300   3,900

                                    1,500   3,300
                  Cost,  thousands of dollars

                7,100   13,200   19,500    25,500   43,500    63,000

                7,500   18,000   27,800    42,800   84,000   136,500
                                    4,400   5,400   7,500   11,300   15,000    19,500   31,500    46,500

                                    3,900   6,800  11,700   21,000   30,000    40,500   64,500    91,500

                                    1,800   3,200   5,700   11,100   16,500    22,500   36,000    54,000


                                      900   2,000   4,400   10,200   16,500    25,500   49,500    82,500
                                    1,800   1,800   2,600    3,400    1,400
                                        -  15,200  18,200   24,700   31,000
                                    1,900   2,100   3,300
                                        -  15,500  19,000
                         5,200    4,500
                        26,500   34,000
                                      300
          600   1,800    3,500    5,600
                                            2,100    5,400     6,000
                                           40,200   63,000
 6,700   14,600    24,400
44,800   72,200

 8,700   16,700    27,600
Source:  References 30, 37, 38, and 83 updated to 4th quarter 1979 dollars.

-------
00
                                                         TABLE A-6
                               ESTIMATED ANNUAL SLUDGE QUANTITIES FOR COMPONENT TECHNOLOGIES

                                                            Model Size, mgd (cu m/day)
Technology
0.05
(189)
0.11
(416)
0.25 0.60 1.0
(946) (2,271) (3,785)
1.5 3.0 5.0
(5,678) (11,355) (18,925)
Dewatered Sludge, tons
Screening
Activated Sludge
Chemical Coagulation/Precipitation
Condition 1*
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
Condition 5
Dissolved Air Flotation
Multimedia Filtration
Condition 1*
Condition 2
Condition 3
Granular Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Powdered Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Add to EAAS
Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(with regeneration)
Add to EAAS
Full Application
25
70

870
335
45
32
24
2

13
6
2

120


34
-


-
—
50
150

1,920
735
98
71
52
5

28
14
3

270


75
213


-
50
100
320

4,360
1,670
223
162
118
11

63
31
8

620


171
471


-
100
240
740

10,460
4,010
535
391
284
26

150
75
19

1,500


411
1,131


-
240
380
1,200

17,440
6,690
891
651
472
44

250
125
31

2,500


685
1,865


-
380
570
1,800

26 , 160
10,030
1,337
976
709
66

375
188
47

3,700


1,028
2,798


-
570
960
3,400

52,320
20,060
2,673
1,952
1,417
132

750
375
94

7,400


2,055
5,415


-
960
1,300
5,600

87,200
33,430
4,435
3,253
2,361
219

1,250
625
156

12 , 400


3,425
-


-
~
       * These conditions are defined in the section on vacuum filtration.

       Source:  Technical Contractor Engineering Analysis

-------
                                                        TABLE A-7
                              ESTIMATED ANNUAL POWER REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPONENT TECHNOLOGIES
                                                        Model Size, mgd (cu m/day)
CO
CJ1
Technology
Screening
Equalization
Activated Sludge
Chemical Coagulation/
Precipitation
Vacuum Filtration
Condition 1*
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
Condition 5
Multimedia Filtration
Dissolved Air Flotation
Granular Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Granular Activated Carbon
(with regeneration, kwh)
Granular Activated Carbon
(with regeneration, therm/yr)
0.05
(189)
4.2
4.8
190.0
9.0
20.4
20.4
20.4
20.4
20.4
1.2
35.0
6.0
12.0
3.3
0.11
(416)
5.6
4.8
280.0
19.8
38.3
20.4
20.4
20.4
20.4
2.6
39.0
13.0
26.0
6.9
0.25
(946)
Power
10.0
5.8
430.0
45.0
68.9
33.2
20.4
20.4
20.4
6.0
59.0
30.0
65.0
15.4
0.60
(2,271) (3
, thousands
23.0
11.0
670.0
108.0
140.0
64.0
20.4
20.4
20.4
14.4
110.0
70.0
140.0
38.5
1.0
,785)
1.5
(5,678)
3.0
(11,355)
5.0
(18,925)
of kilowatt- hours
39.0
18.0
870.0
180.0
212.0
100.0
20.4
20.4
20.4
24.0
155.0
120.0
235.0
65.0
58.0
30.0
1,070.0
270.0
288.0
135.0
25.5
23.0
20.4
36.0
205.0
180.0
355.0
97.0
115.0
62.0
1,530.0
540.0
577.0
232.0
48.5
38.3
25.5
72.0
310.0
350.0
700.0
185.0
195.0
104.0
2,000.0
900.0
990.0
408.0
68.9
51.0
43.4
120.0
375.0
600.0
1,200.0
330.0
         These conditions are defined in the section on vacuum  filtration.

-------
                                                         TABLE A-7  (Cont.)
                                                              Model Size, mgd  (cu m/day)
4s*
00
Technology
0.05 0.11
(189) (416)
0.25
(946)
0.60
(2,271)
1.0
(3,785)
1.5
(5,678)
3.0
(11,355)
5.0
(18,925)
Power, thousands of kilowatt-hours
Powdered Activated Carbon
(without regeneration)
Add to EAAS
Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(with regeneration, kwh)
Add to EAAS
Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(with regeneration, therms/yr)
Add to BPT
Full Application
Ozonation


16.1 20.
93.


26.1 34.
107.


344.0 352.
352.
175.0 385.


1
0


1
0


0
0
0


57.7
183.0


87.7
213.0


361.0
361.0
875.0


103
356


163
416


378
378
2,101


.6
.0


.6
.0


.0
.0
.0


165
606


285
726


404
404
3,502


.2
.0


.2
.0


.0
.0
.0


318.3
920.0


488.3
1,090.0


430.0
430.0
5,252.0


575.
1,713.


875.
2,013.


482.
482.
10,505.


8
0


8
0


0
0
0


809.7
-


1,319.7
-


559.0
-
17,508.0
       Source:   References 36, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, and 83 updated to  4th  quarter  1979  dollars.

-------

conditions  noted  earlier  under  the   discussion   of   vacuum
filtration.    It is assumed that the solids concentration for all
sludges is 20 percent by weight.  The estimates for the  quantity
of  spent  granular  activated  carbon  are  based  on the carbon
containing its own weight plus an  equivalent  weight  of  water.
When powdered activated carbon is regenerated, it is assumed that
only screening operation sludges are generated.

The  estimated  costs  to haul and deposit dewatered sludge in an
approved sanitary landfill are graphically presented in Figure A-
13.  The curve is developed from information obtained during  the
survey  of  the  textile  industry  and  represents  the best fit
polynomial for the data points noted.

Energy and Power   The costs for energy and power  represent  the
expense  of   purchasing electricity and fuel to operate equipment
and facilities.  The costs  are  developed  by  estimating  power
requirements  for  the  various  component  technologies for each
model size and applying unit costs for electric power  and  fuel.
It  was  assumed that fuel oil would be used for the regeneration
of activated carbon.  All other treatment components were assumed
to be powered by electricity.

A matrix of  the estimated  power  requirements  for  the  various
component technologies is presented in Table A-7.  The values are
established   from  information  in References 55, 51, 56, 57, 58,
59, 60, 50,  and 47.  It is assumed that all equipment,  with  the
exception of  the  vacuum  filters,  will  operate 24 hr/day and
300 days/yr.  Vacuum filters are sized to operate 10 hr/day.   An
electric motors efficiency of 88 percent is assumed.

For  most of  the  component technologies, energy consumption is
based solely on flow.  For vacuum filtration, flow  (quantity  of
sludge) as well as sludge characteristics (such as solids content
and dewaterability) affects energy consumption.

In  converting  power  requirements  to  dollars,  the  cost  for
electricity  is assumed to be 3.4 cents/kwh.  The cost  represents
a  typical value taken from the industry survey responses for the
southeastern region of the U.S. updated to represent  4th quarter
1979 dollars.  This region was chosen because the majority of the
country's textile mills are located there (see Table III-l).

Fuel  oil  is  assumed  to cost 33 cents/therm.  This cost, which
represents 4th quarter 1979 dollars, is taken from  the  industry
survey  responses and Reference 46.  It also represents costs for
the southeastern region of the U.S.

Chemicals   The costs for the chemicals required to  operate  the
various  component  technologies  are  given  by  model  size  in
Table A-8.  They are developed by applying 4th quarter 1979  unit
costs to estimated quantities of the chemicals required.
                                487

-------
                                                        FIGURE A-13

                                      COST FOR HAULING AND DISPOSING DEWATERED SLUDGE
00
00
                 25
                 20
                  "5
(0
              o


              S 10
              O
                  0
                              5OO
                                                              2500
                     IOOO        I5OO        2000



                              QUANTITY, tons/year



SOURCE:  EPA Industry Survey,  1977; updated to 4th quarter 1979 dollars
3000

-------
        Technology
                                                     TABLE A-8
                             ESTIMATED ANNUAL CHEMICAL COSTS FOR COMPONENT TECHNOLOGIES
                                                  Model Size, mgd (cu m/day)
                               0.05    0.11    0.25    0.60      1.0        1.5
                              (189)   (416)    (946)  (2,271)  (3,785)    (5,678)
                                                3.0       5.0
                                             (11,355)  (18,925)
CO
                                                     Cost, thousands  of  dollars
        Chemical Coagulation/Precipitation
          Condition  1  (1000 mg/1 alum)  15.0
          Condition  2  (1000 mg/1 alum)  15.0
          Condition  3  (100 mg/1 alum)
          Condition  4  (100 mg/1 alum)
          Condition  5  (100 mg/1 alum)
5.0
5.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
33.0
33.0
3.3
3.3
3.3
75.0
75.0
7.5
7.5
7.5
180.0
180.0
18.0
18.0
18.0
300.0
300.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
450.0
450.0
45.0
45-0
45.0
900.0
900.0
90.0
90.0
90.0
1,500.0
1,500.0
150.0
150.0
150.0
Multimedia Filtration

Granular Activated Carbon
  (without regeneration)

Granular Activated Carbon
  (with regeneration)

Powdered Activated Carbon
  (without regeneration)
                                         0.2
 0.4
 0.9
 2.3
 3.8
  5.7
 11.3
                                        5.0
11.0
24.8
59.4
99.0
148.5
297.0
 18.8
                                        61.5    136.5    310.5    667.5    1,237.5     1,857.0    3,712.5    6,187.5
495.0
Add to EMS
Full Application
Powdered Activated Carbon
(with regeneration)
Add to EAAS
Full Application
10.5 23.0
24.1
2.0 4.3
5.4
52.3
54.7
9.8
12.2
125.6
131.4
23.5
29.3
209.3
218.9
39.2
48.8
313.9
328.4
58.7
73.2
627.9
656.9
117.5
146.4
1,046.5
195.8
         Source:   Reference  52.

-------
For  chemical  coagulation, alum is the coagulant of choice based
on its proven effectiveness and reasonable  cost.   A  dosage  of
1000 mg/1  (as  alum) is was assumed for coagulation conditions 1
and 2, and a dosage of 100 mg/1 was assumed for conditions 3,  4,
and  5,  These coagulation conditions are defined earlier in this
section  under  the  discussion  of   vacuum   filtration.    For
multimedia filtration, 1 mg/1 of polymeric filter aid is included
whenever filtration is not preceded by chemical coagulation.  For
granular  activated  carbon,  an  exhaustion rate of 0.66 kg/cu m
(5,500 Ib/mil gal) is assumed when regeneration is practiced.  An
exhaustion rate of 0.14 kg/cu m (1,200 Ib/mil gal)  is  used  for
powdered activated carbon.

           costs  used  in  developing  the chemical costs are as
The  unit
follows:

Chemical
Alum (technical)
Polymer
Carbon (granular)
Carbon (powdered)
                                Unit Cost
                          $0.26-0.28 per kg ($0.12-0.13 per Ib)
                          $3.30 per kg ($1.50 per Ib)
                          $1.65 per kg ($0.75 per Ib)
                          $1.10 per kg ($0.50 per Ib)
Monitoring    Monitoring   costs   include   outside   laboratory
analytical  charges  and time for reporting results to regulatory
agencies.  The costs associated with  collecting  and  delivering
samples are included under operation and maintenance labor.

Separate  monitoring costs were developed for direct and indirect
dischargers.  Direct dischargers were assumed to sample in  order
to comply with a discharge permit.  This entails regular sampling
of  influent  and  effluent  waste  streams and receiving waters.
Samples for the conventional pollutants are collected  twice  per
week, and nonconventional pollutants are collected once per week.
Samples   for   toxic   pollutants  are  collected  semiannually.
Indirect dischargers are assumed to sample  in  order  to  comply
with    the    local    sewer   ordinances.    Conventional   and
nonconventional  pollutants  are  collected  weekly   and   toxic
pollutants semiannually.

Laboratory  cost  estimates  are  based  on commercial laboratory
price lists (53, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, and 67) updated  to  4th
Quarter  1979  dollars.  Reporting costs were based on $20/hr and
allowed  1 hr/week  for  compiling  data  plus  8  hr/month   for
preparing reports.

Annual monitoring costs are based on a complete program for major
direct  and indirect dischargers.  As mentioned under "Monitoring
Equipment," many of the larger facilities have existing  programs
that  would  result  in considerably less additional cost in this
area.  The monitoring frequencies are assumed for cost estimation
purposes only and  are  not  intended  to  provide  a  model  for
compliance monitoring.
                                490

-------
CALCULATION OF MODEL PLANT COSTS•

Example Calculation

Using  the  component  investment  and  annual costs presented in
Tables A~6 through A-8 and the methodology  presented  in  Figure
A-l  the  costs  for  several  possible  treatment options can be
calcualted for each model plant.  As an example of the use of the
methodology model will costs for a 470 kkg wool  finishing  model
mill  are presented in Table A-9 for four treatment options which
are, as follows:

     BAT Option 2 Multimedia Filtration

     BAT Option 3   Chemical Coagulation followed  by  Multimedia
          Filtration
     BAT Option 4   Chemical Coagulation,
          and Granular Activated Carbon
Multimedia  Filtration
Cost Curves
In  the analysis of treatment alternatives for regulatory options
selection costs were calculated for a sufficient range  of  model
sizes  to  plot  curves  of  costs versus model flow.  These cost
curves relating investment and annual costs to flow for  each  of
the  treatment alternatives are presented in Figures A-l4 through
A-32.  As noted in earlier discussion, the curves  represent  the
best  fit  of  the cost estimates developed for the various model
plants.  The curves provide the means for quickly estimating  the
investment  and  annual  costs  for  a  range of treatment plants
(based on  flow  size)  covering  existing  and  anticipated  new
facilities.

The following index is provided as an aid to the user in locating
specific curves.

Figure         Treatment Alternatives

A-l4       Screening and Extended Aeration
                     Activated Sludge
A-l5       Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation
                     and Multimedia Filtration
A-l6       Multimedia Filtration
A-l7       Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation
                     and Multimedia Filtration
A-l8       Multimedia Filtration and Granular
                     Activated Carbon
A-l9       Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation,
                     Multimedia Filtration, and Granular
                     Activated Carbon
A-20       Ozonation
A-21       Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation
                                491

-------
A-22
A-23
A-24

A-25

A-26

A-27

A-28
          and Ozonation
Powdered Activated Carbon Addition to EAAS
Multimedia Filtration and Ozonation
Chemical Coagulation/Sedimentation,
          Multimedia Filtration, and Ozonation
Chemical Coagulation and Dissolved Air
          Flotation
Chemical Coagulation, Dissolved Air
          Flotation, and Granular Activated Carbon
Chemical Coagulation, Dissolved Air
          Flotation, and Ozonation
Screening and Powdered Activated Carbon
          Treatment

                                492

-------
                               TABLE A-9
                    MODEL PLANT CONTROL COST SUMMARY
                  BAT:  5,678 CU M/DAY (1.5 MGD) MODEL
Subcategory:  WOOL FINISHING

Daily Production Capacity:  18,700 kg




INVESTMENT COSTS

Chemical Coagulation
     Equipment
     Construction
Vacuum Filtration
     Equipment
     Construction
Multimedia Filtration
     Equipment
     Construction
Granular Carbon
     Equipment
     Construction
Ozonation
     Equipment
     Construction
Powdered Carbon
     Equipment
     Construction
Monitoring
Engineering
Contingencies

     Total Investment

ANNUAL COSTS

Capital
Depreciation
Useful Life (years)
O&M Labor
Employees (persons)
Maintenance
Sludge Disposal
Energy & Power
Chemicals:   Polymer
            Alum
            Carbon
Monitoring

     Total Annual
       BAT Option
 234

Cost, thousands of dollars
 66.5
266.0

 27.0
 50.1
 66.5
266.0

 27.0
 50.1

 69.2
276.6
 66.5
266.0

 27.0
 50.1
                   69.2
                  276.6

                  718.2
                  718.2
 20.0
 42.0
 64.4

536.0
 80.4
 33.0
   15
 89.2
  3.0
 62.3
 12.2
 10.0

 45.0

 40.5

372.6    520.4  1,132.7
20.0
66.9
116.3
958.6
143.9
59.4
15
104.8
3.5
102.8
12.8
.11.2
45.0
-
40.5
20.0
178.1
331.8
2,721.7
408.3
141.3
18
152.8
5.1
128.3
12.8
55.2
45.0
148.5
40.5
                                  493

-------
                                    FIGURE A-14
         ALTERNATIVE A:   SCREENING AND EXTENDED AERATION ACTIVATED SUJDGfi
                  INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                                  Flow, mgd
                                                  1,0
10
10,000 ri

-------
lOpOOr:
                                   FIGURE A-15

               ALTERNATIVE B:   CHEMICAL COAGULATION/SEDIMENTATION
                 INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                           0.10                    1.0
                                  Flow, mgd
10
10,000 r:
                           0.10                     1.0
                                  Flow, mgd
10
                                495

-------
                                     FIGURE A-16
                        ALTERNATIVE C:  MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION

                   INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
   ICyOOOr:
 CO

 5

 "o
 •o
to
 O
 15
 o
 O
 e
 15
 
-------
   10,000
                                      FIGURE A-17
                  ALTERNATIVE D:  CHEMICAL COAGULATION/SEDIMENTATION
                               AND MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION
                    INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                              0.10                    IX)
                                     Flow.mgd
                                              10
   10,000 r:
 o
 •o
K>
 O
 w
 o
 O
 C
 ^ 1000 -
        0.01
0.10                     1.0
       Flow.mgd
                                   497

-------
                                       FIGURE A-18

           ALTERNATIVE E:   MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION AND GRANULAR  ACTIVATED CARBON

                      INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COST FOR EXISTING MILLS
   10,000 rr
 at
 o
 •o
H>
 O
 8  1000
 O
 c
 0>
 E

 CO
 
-------
Annual Cost, 10 dollars
Investment Cost, 10  dollars

-------
   10,000 r:
 (A
in
 O
 g  1000
 o
 o>
 e
 c
     100
        0.01
                                       FIGURE A-20

                                ALTERNATIVE G:  OZONATKiN

                    INVESTMENT  AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                                                     II
0.10
                                      Flow.mgd
                        1.0
10
   10,000 r:
 
-------
             Annual Cost, 10 dollars
                                    Investment  Cost, 10 dollars
   o
   o
o
o
o
.0

o
o
o
 p
 o
  o

  o
o
£
           t  I  I  ! I  I I

-------
                                  FIGURE A-2 2
      ALTERNATIVE I:   POWERED ACTIVATED CARBON ADDITION TO BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
                INVKSTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
  10,000 r:	
10
 O
3
*-
c
I
    1000
     too
        0.01
                             11
                                                           PAC2
                                                    
-------
                                   FIGURE A-23
               ALTERNATIVE J:  MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION AND OZONAT10N
                 INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                                     Flow, mgd
   10,000 r:
 o
 •o
10
 O

 J  1000
 0>

 3

 "5
 3

 I
     100
        0.01
               I	I
                               I    I   I  I  I M I
0.10
                                     Flow, mgd
l.O
10
                                    B03

-------
                 Annual Cost, 10  dollars
                                             Investment Cost, 10 dollars
       o
       o
          o
          o
          o
      p
      o
             £>
              o
              o
              o
rr T nil
      p

      o
Ul

O
    O





    ia
    a.
I    I  I  I  II II

-------
                                     FIGURE A-25
          ALTERNATIVE M:  CHEMICAL COAGULATION ANP l^SSOLVED AIR FLOTATION
                   INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
  10,000 rr
o
•O

O
   tooo
c
0>
E

-------
                                       FIGURE A-26
            ALTERKATIVE  N:   CHEMICAL COAGULATION, DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION,
                  MULTIMEDIA FILTRATION,  AND GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON
                     INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
   10,000 rr
 S2
 J5
 "o
 TJ
10
 O
 8  1000
 c
 O)
 e
 (A
 0)
        0.01
0.10
                                     Flow, mgd
10
   10,000 rr
 (fl
     100
        0.01
0.10                  .  1.0
       Flow, mgd
                                   506

-------
                                      FIGURE A-27
            ALTERNATIVE P:  CHEMICAL COAGULATION, DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION,
                                     AND OZONATION
                    INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL COSTS FOR EXISTING MILLS
                                    Flow, mgd
  10,000 rr
^ 1000
CO
o
O
C
    100
                  I   I  I  I 111
                               I    I  I   I II11
       0.0!
0.10
                                    Flow, mgd
1.0
10
                                 507

-------
                        CONVERSION TABLE
Multiply (English Units)           By
English Unit    Abbreviation    Conversion
  To Obtain
Abbreviation
Metric Units)
 Metric Unit
acre
acre-feet
British Thermal
Unit
British Thermal
Unit/pound
cubic feet
per minute
cubic feet
per second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Farenheit
feet
gallon
gallon per
minute
gallon per ton
horsepower
inches
pounds per
ac
ac ft
BTU
BTU/lb
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
OF
ft
gal
gpm
gal/ton
hp
in
psi
0.405
1233.5
0.252
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555
-------
                           (continued)
      Multiply (English Units)           By          To Obtain  (Metric Units
English Unit    Abbreviation    Conversion   Abbreviation  Metric Unit
million gallons
per day
pounds per square
inch (gauge)
pounds
board feet
ton
mile
square feet
MGD
psi
Ib
b.f .
ton
mi
ft2
3.7 x 10-3
(0.06805 psi + 1)*
0.454
0.0023
0,907
1.609
.0929
cu m/day
atm
kg
cu m, m3
kkg
km .
m2
. cubic meters
per day
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters
metric ton
kilometer
square meters
* Actual conversion, not a multiplier.
                                    509

-------

-------

-------

-------