DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
FOR
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
FOR THE
BATTERY MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Anne M. Gorsuch
Administrator
Frederic A. Eidsness, Jr.
Assistant Administrator
Office of Water
Steven Schatzow, Director
Office of Water Regulations and Standards
Jeffery Denit, Director
Effluent Guidelines Division
Ernst P. Hall, P.E., Chief
Metals and Machinery Branch
Mary L. Belefski
Project Officer
OCTOBER 1982
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WATER
OFFICE OF WATER REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
EFFLUENT GUIDELINES DIVISION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
I. Conclusions 1
II. Recommendations 7
III. Introduction 75
Legal Authority 75
Guideline Development Summary 77
Industry Description 83
Industry Summary 102
Industry Outlook 114
IV. Industry Subcategorization 141
Subcategorization 141
Final Subcategories And Production
Normalizing Parameters 148
Operations Covered Under Other Categories 158
V. Water Use And Wastewater Characterization 165
Data Collection And Analysis 165
Cadmium Subcategory 180
Manufacturing Processes 182
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 187
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 194
Calcium Subcategory 196
Manufacturing Processes 196
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 198
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 199
Lead Subcategory 199
Manufacturing Process 200
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 206
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 215
Leclanche Subcategory 219
Manufacturing Processes 220
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 224
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 227
Lithium Subcategory 227
Manufacturing Processes 228
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 229
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent ,Data Analysis 232
1X1
-------
In order to comply with requests for
confidentiality/ plant identification
numbers have been deleted from the text
and plants are referenced by letters.
The same plant does not necessarily have
the same letter for every reference.
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
21. Peat Adsorption 640
22. Reverse Osmosis 642
23. Sludge Bed Drying 645
24. Ultrafiltration 647
25. Vacuum Filtration 649
26. Permanganate Oxidation 651
In-Process Pollution Control Techniques 652
VIII. Cost Of Wastewater Control And Treatment 719
Cost Estimation Methodology 719
Cost Estimates For Individual Treatment
Technologies 727
Treatment System Cost Estimates 742
Energy And Non-Water Quality Aspects 751
IX. Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available 807
Technical Approach To BPT 807
Selection Of Pollutant Parameters For
Regulation 811
Cadmium Subcategory 811
Calcium Subcategory 816
Lead Subcategory 818
Leclanche Subcategory 827
Lithium Subcategory 830
Magnesium Subcategory 834
Zinc Subcategory 838
Application Of Regulation in Permits 844
X. Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 895
Technical Approach To BPT 895
Regulated Pollutant Parameters 896
Cadmium Subcategory 896
BAT Options Summary 896
BAT Option Selection 901
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 904
BAT Effluent Limitations 904
Calcium Subcategory 905
Technology Options Summary 905
Options Selection 907
Pollutant Parameters Selected For
Effluent Limitations 908
Lead Subcategory 908
BAT Options Summary 908
BAT Option Selection 914
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 917
BAT Effluent Limitations 917
Leclanche Subcategory 918
v
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
Magnesium Subcategory 233
Manufacturing Processes 234
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 236
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 240
Zinc Subcategory 240
Manufacturing Processes 241
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics,
And Wastewater Discharge 248
Wastewater Treatment Practices And
Effluent Data Analysis 259
VI. Selection Of Pollutant Parameters 489
Verification Parameters 489
Specific Pollutants Considered For
Regulation 539
VII. Control And Treatment Technology 573
End-of-Pipe Treatment Technologies 573
Major Technologies 574
1. Chemical Precipitation 574
2. Chemical Reduction Of Chromium 584
3. Cyanide Precipitation 585
4. Granular Bed Filtration 587
5. Pressure Filtration 591
6. Settling 593
7. Skimming 596
Major Technology Effectiveness 600
L & S Performance 601
LS & F Performance 611
Minor Technologies 617
8. Carbon Adsorption 617
9. Centrifugation 620
10. Coalescing 622
11. Cyanide Oxidation By Chlorine 623
12. Cyanide Oxidation By Ozone 625
13. Cyanide Oxidation By Ozone With UV
Radiation 626
14. Cyanide Oxidation By Hydrogen
Peroxide 626
15. Evaporation 627
16. Flotation 631
17. Gravity Sludge Thickening 633
18. Insoluble Starch Zanthate 634
19. Ion Exchange 634
20. Membrane Filtration 638
IV
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
Leclanche Subcategory 1037
Pretreatment Option Selection 1037
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1037
Lithium Subcategory 1038
Pretreatment Option Selection 1038
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 1038
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1038
Magnesium Subcategory 1039
Pretreatment Option Selection 1039
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 1040
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1040
Zinc Subcategory 1040
Pretreatment Option Selection 1040
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 1041
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1042
XIII. Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology 1085
XIV. Acknowledgements 1087
XV. Bibliography 1089
XVI. Glossary 1101
XVII. Conversion Factors 1117
VII
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
Lithium Subcategory 919
Technology Options Summary 919
Options Selection 922
Pollutant Parameters Selected For 923
Effluent Limitations
Effluent Limitations 923
Magnesium Subcategory 923
Technology Options Summary 924
Options Selection 926
Pollutant Parameters Selected For
Effluent Limitations 928
Effluent Limitations 928
Zinc Subcategory 928
BAT Options Summary 928
BAT Option Selection 933
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 935
BAT Effluent Limitations 936
XI. New Source Performance Standards 1009
Technical Approach To BDT 1009
Cadmium Subcategory 1009
New Source Performance Standards 1010
Calcium Subcategory 1010
New Source Performance Standards 1010
Lead Subcategory 1010
New Source Performance Standards 1011
Leclanche Subcategory 1012
Lithium Subcategory 1012
New Source Performance Standards 1012
Magnesium Subcategory 1013
New Source Performance Standards 1013
Zinc Subcategory 1013
New Source Performance Standards 1014
XII. Pretreatment 1031
Technical Approach To Pretreatment 1032
Identification Of Pretreatment Options 1033
Cadmium Subcategory 1033
Option Selection 1034
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 1035
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1035
Calcium Subcategory 1035
Pretreatment Option Selection 1035
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1035
Lead Subcategory 1035
Pretreatment Option Selection 1036
Pollutant Parameters For Regulation 1037
Pretreatment Effluent Standards 1037
VI
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
III-l Theoretical Specific Energy As A Function Of 116
Equivalent Weight And Cell Voltage For Various
Electrolytic Couples
III-2 Performance Capability Of Various Battery Systems 117
III-3 Cutaway View Of An Impregnated Sintered Plate 118
Nickel-Cadmium Cell
III-4 Cutaway View Of A Cylindrical Nickel-Cadmium 119
Battery
III-5 Cutaway View Of Lead Acid Storage Battery 120
III-6 Cutaway View Of Cylindrical Leclanche Cell 121
III-7 Exploded View Of A Foliar Leclanche Battery 122
Used In Film Pack
III-8 Cutaway View Of Two Solid Electrolyte Lithium 123
Cell Configurations
III-9 Cutaway View Of A Reserve Type Battery 124
111-10 Cutaway View Of A Carbon-Zinc-Air Cell 125
III-ll Cutaway View Of An Alkaline-Manganese Battery 126
111-12 Cutaway View Of A Mercury (Ruben) Cell 127
111-13 Major Production Operations In Nickel-Cadmium 128
Battery Manufacture
111-14 Simplified Diagram Of Major Production Operations 129
In Lead Acid Battery Manufacture
111-15 Major Production Operations In Leclanche Battery 130
Manufacture
111-16 Major Production Operations In Lithium-Iodine 131
Battery Manufacture
111-17 Major Production Operations In Ammonia-Activated 132
Magnesium Reserve Cell Manufacture
ix
-------
Vlll
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER. TITLE PAGE
V-14 Production Of Batteries From Green (Unformed) 275
Electrodes
V-15 Production Of Batteries From Purchased Formed 276
Plates
V-16 Percent Production Normalized Discharge From 277
Lead Subcategory Process Operations
V-17 Production Normalized Discharge From Double And 278
Single Fill Formation
V-18 Generalized Schematic For Leclanche Cell 279
Manufacture
V-19 Leclanche Subcategory Analysis 280
V-20 Generalized Lithium Subcategory Manufacturing 281
Process
V-21 Lithium Subcategory Analysis 282
V-22 Generalized Magnesium Subcategory Manufacturing 283
Process
V-23 Magnesium Subcategory Analysis 284
V-24 Generalized Zinc Subcategory Manufacturing Process 285
V-25 Zinc Subcategory Analysis 286
V-26 Production Of Zinc Powder-Wet Amalgamated Anodes 288
V-27 Production Of Zinc Powder-Gelled Amalgam Anodes 289
V-28 Production Of Pressed Zinc Oxide Electrolytically 290
Reduced Anodes
V-29 Production Of Pasted Zinc Oxide Electrolytically 291
Reduced Anodes
V-30 Production Of Electrodeposited Zinc Anodes 292
V-31 Production Of Silver Powder Pressed Electro- 293
lytically Oxided Cathodes
V-32 Production Of Silver Oxide (Ag2O) Powder 294
Thermally Reduced Or Sintered, Electrolytically
Formed Cathodes
XI
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
111-18 Major Production Operations In Water-Activated 133
Carbon-Zinc-Air Cell Manufacture
111-19 Major Production Operations In Alkaline-Manganese 134
Dioxide Battery Manufacture
111-20 Simplified Diagram Of Major Operations In Mercury- 135
Zinc (Ruben) Battery Manufacture
111-21 Value Of Battery Product Shipments 1963-1977 136
111-22 Geographical-Regional Distribution Of Battery 137
Manufacturing Plants
111-23 Distribution Of Lead Subcategory Production Rates 138
111-24 Distribution Of Employment At Lead Subcategory 139
Manufacturing Plants
IV-1 Summary Of Category Analysis 160
V-l Generalized Cadmium Subcategory Manufacturing 261
Process
V-2 Cadmium Subcategory Analysis 262
V-3 Production Of Cadmium Electrodeposited Anodes 264
V-4 Production Of Cadmium Impregnated Anodes 265
V-5 Production Of Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes 266
V-6 Production Of Nickel Impregnated Cathodes 267
V-7 Generalized Calcium Subcategory Manufacturing 268
Process
V-8 Calcium Subcategory Analysis 269
V-9 Lead Subcategory Generalized Manufacturing 270
Processes
V-10 Lead Subcategory Analysis 271
V-ll Production Of Closed Formation Wet Batteries 272
V-12 Production Of Damp Batteries 273
V-13 Production Of Dehydrated Batteries 274
x
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VII-18 Centrifugation 699
VII-19 Treatment Of Cyanide Waste By Alkaline Chlorination 700
VII-20 Typical Ozone Plant For Waste Treatment 701
VII-21 UV/Ozonation 702
VII-22 Types Of Evaporation Equipment 703
VII-23 Dissolved Air Flotation 704
VII-24 Gravity Thickening 705
VII-25 Ion Exchange With Regeneration 706
VII-26 Simplified Reverse Osmosis Schematic 707
VII-27 Reverse Osmosis Membrane Configurations 708
VII-28 Sludge Drying Bed 709
VII-29 Simplified Ultrafiltration Flow Schematic 710
VII-30 Vacuum Filtration 711
VIII-1 Simplified Logic Diagram System Cost Estimation 754
Program
VIII-2 Simple Waste Treatment System 755
VIII-3 Predicted Precipitation And Settling Costs - 756
Continuous
VIII-4 Predicted Costs For Precipitation And Settling 757
Batch
VIII-5 Chemical Precipitation And Settling Costs 758
VIII-6 Predicted Costs For Mixed-Media Filtration 759
VIII-7 Membrane Filtration Costs 760
VIII-8 Reverse Osmosis Or Ion Exchange Investment Costs 761
VIII-9 Reverse Osmosis Or Ion Exchange Labor Requirements 762
VIII-10 Reverse Osmosis Or Ion Exchange Material Costs 763
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-33 Chemical Treatment Of Silver Peroxide Cathode 295
Pellets
V-34 Production Of Pasted Silver Peroxide Cathodes 296
VII-1 Comparative Solubilities Of Metal Hydroxides And 682
Sulfide As A Function Of pH
VII-2 Effluent Zinc Concentrations vs. Minimum Effluent 683
PH
VII-3 Lead Solubility In Three Alkalies 684
VII-4 Hexavalent Chromium Reduction With Sulfur Dioxide 685
VII-5 Granular Bed Filtration 686
VII-6 Pressure Filtration 687
VII-7 Representative Types of Sedimentation 688
VII-8 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 689
Cadmium
VII-9 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 690
Chromium
VII-10 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 691
Copper
VII-11 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 692
Iron
VII-12 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 693
Lead
VII-13 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 694
Manganese
VII-14 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 695
Nickel And Aluminum
VII-15 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 696
TSS
VII-16 Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation Effectiveness 697
Zinc
VII-17 Activated Carbon Adsorption Column 698
XII
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-4 Lithium Subcategory BPT Treatment 848
IX-5 Magnesium Subcategory BPT Treatment 849
IX-6 Zinc Subcategory BPT Treatment 850
X-l Cadmium Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 938
X-2 Cadmium Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 939
X-3 Cadmium Subcategory BAT Option 3 Treatment 940
X-4 Cadmium Subcategory BAT Option 4 Treatment 941
X-5 Calcium Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 942
X-6 Calcium Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 943
X-7 Lead Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 944
X-8 Lead Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 945
X-9 Lead Subcategory BAT Option 3 Treatment 946
X-10 Lead Subcategory BAT Option 4 Treatment 947
X-ll Lithium Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 948
X-12 Lithium Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 949
X-13 Lithium Subcategory BAT Option 3 Treatment 950
X-14 Magnesium Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 951
X-15 Magnesium Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 952
X-16 Magnesium Subcategory BAT Option 3 Treatment 953
X-17 Zinc Subcategory BAT Option 1 Treatment 954
X-18 Zinc Subcategory BAT Option 2 Treatment 955
X-19 Zinc Subcategory BAT Option 3 Treatment 956
X-20 Zinc Subcategory BAT Option 4 Treatment 957
xv
-------
FIGURES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VIII-11 Reverse Osmosis Or Ion Exchange Power Requirements 764
VIII-12 Vacuum Filtration Investment Costs 765
VIII-13 Vacuum Filtration Labor Requirements 766
VIII-14 Vacuum Filtration Material Costs 767
VIII-15 Vacuum Filtration Electrical Costs 768
VIII-16 Holding Tank Investment Costs 769
VIII-17 Holding Tank Electrical Costs 770
VIII-18 Holding Tank Labor Requirements 771
VIII-19 Neutralization Investment Costs 772
VIII-20 Neutralization Labor Requirements 773
VIII-21 Carbon Adsorption Costs 774
VIII-22 Chemical Reduction Of Chromium Investment Costs 775
VIII-23 Annual Labor For Chemical Reduction Of Chromium 776
VIII-24 Costs For Vapor Recompression Evaporation 777
VIII-25 Lead Subcategory-Dehydrated Battery In-Process 778
Control Costs
VIII-26 Labor For Countercurrent Rinses Dehydrated 779
Batteries
VIII-27 In-Process Piping And Segregation Costs For The 780
Lead Subcategory
VIII-28 Holding Tank Costs For Battery Wash Water Recycle- 781
Lead Subcategory
VIII-29 In-Process Costing For Slow Charging Batteries 782
Lead Subcategory
IX-1 Cadmium Subcategory BPT Treatment 845
IX-2 Calcium Subcategory BPT Treatment 846
IX-3 Lead Subcategory BPT Treatment 847
xiv
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
III-l Survey Summary 81
III-2 Battery General Purposes And Applications 88
III-3 Anode Half-Cell Reactions 91
III-4 Cathode Half-Cell Reactions 91
III-5 Consumption Of Toxic Metals In Battery Manufacture 104
III-6 Battery Manufacturing Category Summary 140
III-7 Raw Materials Used In Lithium Anode Battery 111
Manufacture
IV-1 Subcategory Elements And Production Normalizing 161
Parameters (PNP)
IV-2 Operations At Battery Plants Included In Other 163
Industrial Categories (Partial Listing)
V-l Screening And Verification Analysis Techniques 297
V-2 Screening Analysis Results - Cadmium Subcategory 303
V-3 " Screening Analysis Results - Calcium Subcategory 307
V-4 Screening Analysis Results - Lead Subcategory 311
V-5 Screening Analysis Results - Leclanche Subcategory 315
V-6 Screening Analysis Results - Lithium Subcategory 319
V-7 Screening Analysis Results - Magnesium Subcategory 324
V-8 Screening Analysis Results - Zinc Subcategory 329
V-9 Verification Parameters 334
V-10 Cadmium Subcategory Process Elements (Reported 336
Manufacture)
V-ll Normalized Discharge Flows Cadmium Subcategory 337
Elements
V-12 Pollutant Concentrations In Cadmium Pasted And 338
Pressed Powder Anode Element Waste Streams
xvn
-------
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-29 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Cadmium 355
Subcategory Total Raw Waste Concentrations
V-30 Treatment In-Place At Cadmium Subcategory Plants 356
V-31 Performance Of Alkaline Precipitation, Settling 357
And Filtration - Cadmium Subcategory
V-32 Performance Of Settling - Cadmium Subcategory 358
V-33 Cadmium Subcategory Effluent Quality (From DCP's) 359
V-34 Normalized Discharge Flows Calcium Subcategory 360
Elements
V-35 Pollutant Concentrations In The Heat Paper Pro- 361
duction Element Waste Stream
V-36 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Heat Paper Pro- 362
duction Element Waste Stream
V-37 Treatment In-Place At Calcium Subcategory Plants 363
V-38 Effluent Characteristics From calcium Subcategory 364
Manufacturing Operations - DCP Data
V-39 Normalized Discharge Flows Lead Subcategory 365
Elements
V-40 Lead Subcategory Characteristics Of Individual 366
Process Wastes
V-41 Pasting Waste Characteristics (mg/1) 367
V-42 Pasting Waste Loadings (mg/kg) 368
V-43 Closed Formation Pollutant Characteristics Of Both 369
Wet And Damp Batteries
V-44 Closed Formation Waste Loadings Of Both Wet And 370
Damp Batteries
V-45 Open Formation Dehydrated Battery Waste 371
Character istics
V-46 Open Formation Dehydrated Battery Waste Loadings 372
V-47 Battery Wash Wastewater Characteristics 373
V-48 Battery Wash Wastewater Loadings 374
xix
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-13 Pollutant Mass Loadings In Cadmium Pasted And 339
Pressed Powder Anode Element Waste Streams
V-14 Pollutant Concentrations In The Cadmium Electro- 340
deposited Anode Element Waste Streams
V-15 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Cadmium Electro- 341
deposited Anode Element Waste Streams
V-16 Pollutant Concentrations And Mass Loadings In 342
The Cadmium Impregnated Anode Element Waste Streams
V-17 Pollutant Concentrations In The Nickel Electro- 343
deposited Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-18 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Nickel Electro- 344
deposited Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-19 Pollutant Concentrations In The Nickel Impregnated 345
Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-20 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Nickel Impregnated 346
Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-21 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Nickel 347
Impregnated Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-22 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Nickel 348
Impregnated Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-23 Pollutant Concentrations In The Floor And Equip- 349
ment Wash Element Waste Streams
V-24 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Floor And Equip- 350
ment Wash Element Waste Streams
V-25 Pollutant Concentrations In Employee Wash Element 351
Waste Streams
V-26 Pollutant Mass Loadings In Employee Wash Element 352
Waste Streams
V-27 Mean Concentrations And Pollutant Mass Loadings 353
In The Cadmium Powder Element Waste Streams
V-28 Cadmium Subcategory Effluent Flow Rates From 354
Individual Plants
XVlll
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-67 Normalized Flow Of Ancillary Operation Waste 405
Streams
V-68 Pollutant Concentrations In The Equipment And 406
Area And Cleanup Element Waste Stream
V-69 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Equipment And Area 407
Cleanup Element Waste Streams
V-70 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) In The Equipment And 408
Area Cleanup Element Waste Streams
V-71 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) In The Equipment And 409
Area Cleanup Element Waste Streams
V-72 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) In The Leclanche Sub- 410
category Total Raw Waste Concentrations
V-73 Treatment In-Place At Leclanche Subcategory 411
Plants
V-74 Leclanche Subcategory Effluent Quality (From DCPs) 412
V-75 Treatment Effectiveness At Plant B (Treatment 413
Consists Of Skimming And Filtration)
V-76 Normalized Discharge Flows Lithium Subcategory 414
Elements
V-77 Pollutant Concentrations In The Iron Disulfide 415
Cathode Element Waste Stream
V-78 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Iron Disulfide 416
Cathode Element Waste Stream
V-79 Pollutant Concentrations In The Lithium Scrap 417
Disposal Waste Stream
V-80 Treatment In-Place At Lithium Subcategory Plants 418
V-81 Effluent Characteristics Of Iron Disulfide 419
Cathode Element Waste Stream After Settling
Treatment
V-82 Normalized Discharge Flows Magnesium Subcategory 420
Elements
V-83 Pollutant Concentrations In The Developer Solution 421
Of The Silver Chloride Reduced Cathode Element
Waste Stream
xxi
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-49 Battery Repair And Floor Wash Waste 375
Characteristics
V-50 Battery Repair And Floor Wash Waste Loadings 376
V-51 Observed Discharge Flow Rates For Each Plant In 377
Lead Subcategory
V-52 Total Raw Waste For Visits 380
V-53 Lead Subcategory Total Raw Waste Loadings 382
V-54 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Lead Sub- 384
category Total Raw Waste Concentrations
V-55 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Lead Sub- 385
category Total Raw Waste Loadings
V-56 Treatment In-Place At Lead Subcategory Plants 386
V-57 Effluent Characteristics Reported By Plants 394
Practicing pH Adjustment And Settling Technology
V-58 Effluent Quality Data From Plants Practicing pH 395
Adjustment And Filtration
V-59 Effluent Quality Data From Plants Practicing pH 396
Adjustment Only
V-60 Effluent From Sampled Plants 397
V-61 Leclanche Subcategory Elements (Reported 399
Manufacture)
V-62 Normalized Discharge Flows Leclanche Subcategory 400
Elements
V-63 Pollutant Concentrations In The Cooked Paste 401
Separator Element Waste Streams
V-64 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Cooked Paste 402
Separator Element Waste Streams
V-65 Pollutant Concentrations In The Paper Separator 403
(With Mercury) Element Waste Streams
V-66 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Paper Separator 404
(With Mercury) Element Waste Streams
xx
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-100 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Zinc Oxide 440
Powder-Pasted Or Pressed, Reduced Anode Element
Waste Streams
V-101 Pollutant Concentrations In The Spent Amalgamation 441
Solution Waste Stream
V-102 Pollutant Concentrations In The Zinc Electro- 442
Deposited Anode Element Waste Stream
V-103 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Zinc Electro- 443
deposited Anode Element Waste Stream
V-104 Normalized Flows Of Post-Formation Rinse Waste 444
Streams
V-105 Pollutant Concentrations In The Silver Powder 445
Pressed And Electrolytically Oxidized Element
Waste Streams
V-106 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Silver Powder 446
Pressed And Electrolytically Oxidized Element
Waste Streams
V-107 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Silver Powder- 447
Pressed And Electrolytically Oxidized Cathode
Element Waste Streams
V-108 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Silver Powder- 448
Pressed And Electrolytically Oxidized Cathode
Element Waste Streams
V-109 Pollutant Concentrations In The Silver Oxide 449
(Ag2O) Powder-Thermally Reduced And Sintered,
Electrolytically Formed Cathode Element Waste
Streams
V-110 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Silver Oxide 450
(Ag20) Powder-Thermally Reduced And Sintered,
Electrolytically Formed Cathode Element Waste
Streams
V-lll Pollutant Concentrations In The Silver Peroxide 451
(AgO) Powder Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-112 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Silver Peroxide 452
(AgO) Powder Cathode Element Waste Streams
XXlll
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-84 Magnesium Subcategory Process Wastewater Flow 422
Rates From Individual Facilities
V-85 Treatment In-Place At Magnesium Subcategory 423
Plants
V-86 Zinc Subcategory Process Elements (Reported 424
Manufacture)
V-87 Normalized Discharge Flows Zinc Subcategory 426
Elements
V-88 Observed Flow Rates For Each Plant In Zinc 428
Subcategory
V-89 Pollutant Contentrations In The Zinc Powder- 429
Wet Amalgamated Anode Element Waste Streams
V-90 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Zinc Powder- 430
Wet Amalgamated Anode Element Waste Streams
V-91 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Zinc Powder- 431
Wet Amalgamated Anode Element Waste Streams
V-92 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Zinc Powder- 432
Wet Amalgamated Anode Element Waste Streams
V-93 Pollutant Concentrations In The Zinc Powder- 433
Gelled Amalgam Anode Element Waste Streams
V-94 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Zinc Powder- 434
Gelled Amalgam Anode Element Waste Streams
V-95 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Zinc Powder- 435
Gelled Amalgam Anode Element Waste Streams
V-96 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Zinc Powder- 436
Gelled Amalgam Anode Element Waste Streams
V-97 Pollutant Concentrations In The Zinc Oxide 437
Powder-Pasted Or Pressed, Reduced Anode Element
Waste Streams
V-98 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Zinc Oxide Powder- 438
Pasted Or Pressed, Reduced Anode Element Waste
Streams
V-99 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Zinc Oxide 439
Powder-Pasted Or Pressed, Reduced Anode Element
Waste Streams
xxii
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-130 Pollutant Concentrations In The Floor Wash Waste 470
Stream
V-131 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Floor Wash Waste 471
Stream
V-132 Pollutant Concentrations In The Equipment Wash 472
Waste Streams
V-133 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Equipment Wash 473
Waste Streams
V-134 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Equipment Wash 474
Waste Streams
V-135 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Equipment Wash 475
Waste Streams
V-136 Pollutant Concentrations In The Silver Powder 476
Production Element Waste Streams
V-137 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Silver Powder 477
Production Element Waste Streams
V-138 Pollutant Concentrations In The Waste Streams 478
From Silver Peroxide Production Element
V-139 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Waste Streams 479
From Silver Peroxide Production Element
V-140 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Zinc Sub- 480
category Total Raw Waste Concentrations
V-141 Treatment In-Place At Zinc Subcategory Plants 481
V-142 Treatment Practices And Effluent Quality At Zinc 482
Subcategory Plants Effluent Analysis
V-143 Performance Of Sulfide Precipitation-Zinc 483
Subcategory
V-144 Performance Of Lime, Settle, And Filter - Zinc 484
Subcategory
V-145 Performance Of Amalgamation - Zinc Subcategory 485
V-146 Performance Of Skimming, Filtration, Amalgamation, 486
And Carbon Adsorption - Zinc Subcategory
V-147 Performance Of Settling, Filtration And Ion 487
Exchange - Zinc Subcategory
xxv
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
V-113 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Silver Peroxide 453
(AgO) Powder Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-114 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Silver 454
Peroxide (AgO) Powder Cathode Element Waste Streams
V-115 Production Normalized Discharges From Cell Wash 455
Operations
V-116 Pollutant Concentrations In The Cell Wash Element 456
Waste Streams
V-117 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Cell Wash Element 457
Waste Streams
V-118 Statistical Analysis (mg/1) Of The Cell Wash Waste 458
Streams
V-119 Statistical Analysis (mg/kg) Of The Cell Wash Waste 459
Streams
V-120 Pollutant Concentrations In The Electrolyte 460
Preparation Waste Stream
V-121 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Electrolyte 461
Preparation Waste Stream
V-122 Pollutant Concentrations In The Silver Etch Waste 462
Stream
V-123 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Silver Etch Waste 463
Stream
V-124 Pollutant Concentrations In The Laundry Wash And 464
Employee Shower Waste Streams
V-125 Pollutant Concentrations In The Mandatory 465
Employee Wash Waste Stream
V-126 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Mandatory Employee 466
Wash Waste Stream
V-127 Pollutant Concentrations In The Reject Cell 467
Handling Waste Streams
V-128 Pollutant Concentrations In The Reject Cell 468
Handling Waste Streams
V-129 Pollutant Mass Loadings In The Reject Cell 469
Handling Waste Streams
xxiv
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE
VII-19 Precipitation - Settling - Filtration (LS&F)
Performance Plant C
VII-20 Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness
VII-21 Activated Carbon Performance (Mercury)
VII-22 Treatability Rating Of Priority Pollutants
Utilizing Carbon Adsorption
VII-23 Classes Of Organic Compounds Adsorbed On Carbon
VII-24 Ion Exchange Performance
VII-25 Membrane Filtration System Effluent
VII-26 Peat Adsorption Performance
VII-21 Ultrafiltration Performance
VII-28 Process Control Technologies In Use At Battery
Manufacture Plants
VIII-1 Cost Program Pollutant Parameters
VIII-2 Treatment Technology Subroutines
VIII-3 Wastewater Sampling Frequency
VIII-4 Waste Treatment Technologies For Battery Manu-
facturing Category
VIII-5 Lime Additions For Lime Precipitation
VIII-6 Reagent Additions For Sulfide Precipitation
VIII-7 Neutralization Chemicals Required
VIII-8 Water Treatment Component Costs - Hydroxide
Precipitation And Settling
VIII-9 Water Treatment Component Costs - Sulfide
Precipitation And Settling - Batch
VIII-10 Water Treatment Component Costs - Sulfide
Precipitation And Settling - Continuous
VIII-11 Water Treatment Component Costs - Mixed-
Media Filtration
PAGE
613
712
618
713
714
636
638
640
647
715
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
XXVll
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VI-1 Priority Pollutant Disposition 566
VI-2 Other Pollutants Considered For Regulation 571
VII-1 pH Control Effect On Metals Removal 575
VII-2 Effectiveness of Sodium Hydroxide For Metals 575
Removal
VII-3 Effectiveness of Lime And Sodium Hydroxide For 576
Metals Removal
VII-4 Theoretical Solubilities Of Hydroxides And Sulfide 577
Of Selected Metals In Pure Water
VII-5 Sampling Data From Sulfide Precipitation- 578
Sedimentation System
VII-6 Sulfide Precipitation-Sedimentation Performance 579
VII-7 Ferrite Co-Precipitation Performance 581
VII-8 Concentration Of Total Cyanide 586
VII-9 Multimedia Filter Performance 589
VII-10 Performance Of Sampled Settling Systems 593
VII-11 Skimming Performance 596
VII-12 Trace Organic Removal By Skimming 598
VII-13 Combined Metals Data Effluent Values (mg/1) 606
VII-14 L&S Performance Additional Pollutants 607
VII-15 Combined Metals Data Set - Untreated Wastewater 608
VII-16 Maximum Polluant Level In Untreated Wastewater - 609
Additional Pollutants
VII-17 Precipitation - Settling - Filtration (LS&F) 611
Performance Plant A
VII-18 Precipitation - Settling - Filtration (LS&F) 612
Performance Plant B
XXVI
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-9
IX-10
IX-10A
IX-11
IX-12
IX-13
IX-14
IX-15
IX-16
IX-17
IX-18 '
Floor And Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, Floor And
Equipment Wash, And Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Silver Powder Production
Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Nickel Hydroxide Production
Comparison Of Actual To BPT Annual Flow At
Cadmium Subcategory Plants
Flow Basis For Mass Discharge Limitations -
Calcium Subcategory
Calcium Subcategory Effluent Limitations
Heat Paper Production And Cell Testing
Summary Of Treatment In-Place At Lead Subcategory
855
856
856
857
857
858
858
859
860
861
862
Plants
IX-19 Flow Basis For BPT Mass Discharge Limitations - 863
Lead Subcategory
IX-20 Summary Of Zero Discharge For Lead Subcategory 864
Process Elements
Lead Subcategory BPT Effluent Limitations
IX-21 Closed Formation - Double Fill, Or Fill And Dump 865
IX-22 Open Formation - Dehydrated 865
IX-23 Battery Wash 866
IX-24 Floor Wash 866
IX-25 Battery Repair 867
IX-26 Comparison Of Actual To BPT Hourly Flow At Lead 868
Subcategory Plants
xxix
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VIII-12 Water Treatment Component Costs - Membrane 794
Filtration
VIII-13 Water Treatment Component Costs - Reverse Osmosis 795
Or Ion Exchange
VIII-14 Water Treatment Component Costs - Vacuum 796
Filtration
VIII-15 Water Treatment Component Costs - Holding And 797
Settling Tanks
VIII-16 Water Treatment Component Costs - pH Adjustment 798
(Neutralization)
VIII-17 Water Treatment Component Costs - Aeration 799
VIII-18 Water Treatment Component Costs - Carbon 800
Adsorption
VIII-19 Water Treatment Component Costs - Chrome 801
Reduction
VIII-20 Nonwater Quality Aspects Of Wastewater 802
Treatment
VIII-21 Nonwater Quality Aspects Of Sludge And Solids 803
Handling
VIII-22 Battery Category Energy Costs And Requirements 804
VIII-23 Wastewater Treatment Sludge RCRA Disposal Costs 805
IX-1 Flow Basis For BPT Mass Discharge Limitations - 851
Cadmium Subcategory
Cadmium Subcategory BPT Effluent Limitations
IX-2 Pasted And Pressed Powder Anodes 852
IX-3 Electrodeposited Anodes 852
IX-4 Impregnated Anodes 853
IX-5 Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes 853
IX-6 Nickel Impregnated Cathodes 854
IX-7 Cell Wash 854
IX-8 Electrolyte Preparation 855
xxviii
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-47 Silver Oxide Powder Cathodes, Formed 885
IX-48 Silver Peroxide Cathodes 886
IX-49 Nickel Impregnated Cathodes 886
IX-50 Cell Wash 887
IX-51 Electrolyte Preparation 887
IX-52 Silver Etch 888
IX-53 Employee Wash 888
IX-54 Reject Cell Handling 889
IX-55 Floor And Equipment Wash 889
IX-55A Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, Employee Wash, 890
Reject Cell Handling, And Floor And Equipment Wash
IX-56 Silver Peroxide Production 890
IX-57 Silver Powder Production 891
IX-58 Comparison Of Actual To BPT Annual Flow At Zinc 892
Subcategory Plants
IX-59 Sample Derivation Of The BPT 1-Day Lead Limitation 893
For Plant X
IX-60 Sample Derivation Of The BPT 1-Day Lead Limitation 894
For Plant Y
X-l Process Element Flow Summary Cadmium Subcategory 958
X-2 Process Element Wastewater Summary Cadmium 959
Subcategory
X-3 Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness Cadmium 961
Subcategory
X-4 Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems 962
Cadmium Subcategory - Total
X-5 Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems 963
Cadmium Subcategory - Direct Dischargers
xxxi
-------
TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-27 Summary Of BPT Treatment Effectiveness At Lead 873
Subcategory Plants
IX-28 Flow Basis For Mass Discharge Limitations - 874
Lithium Subcategory
IX-29
IX-30
IX-31
IX-32
IX-33
IX-34
IX-35
IX-36
IX-37
IX-38
IX-39
IX-40
IX-41
IX-42
IX-43
IX-44
IX-45
IX-46
Lithium Subcategory Effluent Limitations
Iron Disulfide Cathodes
Lead Iodide Cathodes
Heat Paper Production
Floor And Equipment Wash, Cell Testing, And
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Air Scrubbers
Flow Basis For Mass Discharge Limitations -
Magnesium Subcategory
Magnesium Subcategory Effluent Limitations
Silver Chloride Cathodes, Chemically Reduced
Silver Chloride Cathodes, Electrolytic
Floor And Equipment Wash
Cell Testing
Heat Paper Production
Air Scrubbers
Flow Basis For Mass Discharge Limitations -
Zinc Subcategory
Zinc Subcategory BPT Effluent Limitation
Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
Gelled Amalgam Anodes
Zinc Oxide Anodes, Formed
Electrodeposited Anodes
Silver Powder Cathodes, Formed
875
875
876
876
877
878
879
879
880
880
881
881
882
883
883
884
884
885
XXX
-------
NUMBER
X-25
X-26
X-27
X-28
X-29
X-30
X-31
X-32
X-33
X-34
X-35
X-36
X-37
X-38
X-39
X-40
X-41
X-42
X-43
TABLES
TITLE
Lead Subcategory BAT Effluent Limitations
Open Formation-Dehydrated
Battery Wash
Battery Repair
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Options
Leclanche Subcategory
Process Element Flow Summary Lithium Subcategory
Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness Lithium
Subcategory
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Lithium Subcategory
Lithium Subcategory Effluent Limitations
Lead Iodide Cathodes
Iron Disulfide Cathodes
Floor And Equipment Wash, Cell Testing, And
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Process Element Flow Summary Magnesium Subcategory
Summary of Treatment Effectiveness Magnesium
Subcategory
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Magnesium Subcategory
Magnesium Subcategory Effluent Limitations
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically Reduced
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
Cell Testing
Floor And Equipment Wash
Process Element Flow Summary Zinc Subcategory
Manufacturing Element Wastewater Summary Zinc
PAGE
978
978
979
980
981
982
983
985
985
986
987
988
989
991
991
992
992
993
994
Subcategory
XXXlll
-------
NUMBER
X-6
X-7
X-8
X-9
X-10
X-ll
X-12
X-12A
X-13
X-14
X-15
X-16
X-17
X-18
X-19
X-20
X-21
X-22
X-23
X-24
TABLES
TITLE
Cadmium Subcategory BAT Effluent Limitations
Electrodeposited Anodes
Impregnated Anodes
Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Employee Wash
Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, And
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Silver Powder Production
Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Nickel Hydroxide Production
Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness - Calcium
Subcategory
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Calcium Subcategory - Total
Process Element Flow Summary Lead Subcategory
Normal Plant Element Flows Lead Subcategory
Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness Lead
Subcategory
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Lead Subcategory - Normal Plant
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Lead Subcategory - Total
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
PAGE
964
964
965
965
966
966
967
967
968
968
969
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
Lead Subcategory - Direct Dischargers
xxx 11
-------
NUMBER
XI-3
XI-4
XI-5
XI-6
XI-7
XI-8
XI-9
XI-10
XI-11
XI-12
XI-13
XI-14
XI-15
XI-16
XI-17
XI-18
XI-19
XI-20
XI-21
XI-22
XI-23
TABLES
TITLE
Battery Repair
Lithium Subcategory New Source Performance
Standards
Lead Iodide Cathodes
Iron Disulfide Cathodes
Floor And Equipment Wash, Cell Testing, And
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Air Scrubbers
Magnesium Subcategory New Source Performance
Standards
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically Reduced
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
Cell Testing
Floor And Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
Zinc Subcategory New Source Performance Standards
Zinc Oxide Anodes, Formed
Electrodeposited Anodes
Silver Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Oxide Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Silver Etch
Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor And Equipment Wash
PAGE
1017
1018
1018
1019
1019
1020
1020
1021
1021
1022
1023
1023
1024
1024
1025
1025
1026
1026
1027
1027
1028
XXXV
-------
NUMBER
X-44
X-45
X-46
X-47
X-48
X-49
X-50
X-51
X-52
X-53
X-54
X-55
X-56
X-57
X-58
X-59
X-59A
X-60
X-61
X-62
XI-1
XI-2
TABLES
TITLE
Summary Of Treatment Effectiveness Zinc Subcategory
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Zinc Subcategory - Total
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Zinc Subcategory - Direct Dischargers
Zinc Subcategory BAT Effluent Limitations
Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
Gelled Amalgam Anodes
Zinc Oxide Anodes, Formed
Electrodeposited Anodes
Silver Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Oxide Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Silver Etch
Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor And Equipment Wash
Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell Handling,
And Floor And Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
Battery Category Costs
Lead Subcategory New Source Performance Standards
Open Formation - Dehydrated
Battery Wash
PAGE
997
998
999
1000
1000
1001
1001
1002
1002
1003
1003
1004
1004
1005
1005
1006
1006
1007
1007
1008
1016
1016
XXXIV
-------
NUMBER
XII-17 Battery Repair
TABLES
TITLE
Lead Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For New
Sources
XII-18 Open Formation - Dehydrated
XII-19 Battery Wash
XII-20 Battery Rapair
XII-21 Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Options
Leclanche Subcategory
XII-22 Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Lithium Subcategory
Lithium Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For
Existing Sources
XII-23 Lead Iodide Cathodes
XII-24 Iron Bisulfide Cathodes
XII-25 Floor And Equipment Wash, Cell Testing, And
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Lithium Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For
New Sources
XII-26 Lead Iodide Cathodes
XII-27 Iron Disulfide Cathodes
XII-28 Floor And Equipment Wash, Cell Testing, And
Lithium Scrap Disposal
XII-29 Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Magnesium Subcategory
Magnesium Subcategory Pretreatment Standards
For Existing Sources
XII-30 Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically Reduced
XII-31 Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
XII-32 Cell Testing
XII-33 Floor And Equipment Wash
PAGE
1053
1054
1054
1055
1056
1057
1059
1059
1059
1060
1061
1061
1062
1063
1065
1065
1066
1066
XXXVll
-------
NUMBER
XI-23A
XI-24
XI-25
XII-1
XII-2
XII-3
XII-4
XII-5
XII-6
XII-7
XII-8
XII-8A
XII-9
XII-10
XII-11
XII-12
XII-13
XII-14
XII-15
XII-16
TABLES
TITLE
Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell Handling,
And Floor And Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Cadmium Subcategory - Indirect Dischargers
Cadmium Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For
Existing Sources
Electrodeposited Anodes
Impregnated Anodes
Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Employee Wash
Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, And Employee
Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Silver Powder Production
Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Nickel Hydroxide Production
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Calcium Subcategory - Total
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Lead Subcategory - Indirect Dischargers
Lead Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For
Existing Sources
Open Formation-Dehydrated
Battery Wash
PAGE
1028
1029
1029
1043
1044
1044
1045
1045
1046
1046
1047
1047
1048
1048
1049
1049
1050
1051
1052
1052
XXXVI
-------
NUMBER
XII-54
XII-55
XII-56
XII-57
XII-58
XII-59
XII-60
XII-61
XII-62
XII-63
XII-64
XII-64A
XII-65
XII-66
TABLES
TITLE
Zinc Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For New
Sources
Zinc Oxide Anodes, Formed
Electrodeposited Anodes
Silver Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Oxide Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Silver Etch
Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor And Equipment Wash
Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell Handling,
And Floor And Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
PAGE
1078
1078
1079
1079
1080
1080
1081
1081
1082
1082
1083
1083
1084
1084
-------
NUMBER
XII-34
XII-35
XII-36
XII-37
XII-38
XII-39
XII-40
XII-41
XII-42
XII-43
XII-44
XII-45
XII-46
XII-47
XII-48
XII-49
XII-50
XII-51
XII-51A
XII-52
XII-53
TABLES
TITLE
Magnesium Subcategory Pretreatment Standards
For New Sources
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically Reduced
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
Cell Testing
Floor And Equipment Wash
Pollutant Reduction Benefits Of Control Systems
Zinc Subcategory - Indirect Dischargers
Zinc Subcategory Pretreatment Standards For
Existing Sources
Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
Gelled Amalgam Anodes
Zinc Oxide Anodes, Formed
Electrodeposited Anodes
Silver Powder Cathodes, Formed
Silver Oxide Powder, Cathodes, Formed
Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Cell Wash
Silver Etch
Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor And Equipment Wash
Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell Handling,
And Floor And Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
PAG:
1067
1067
1068
1068
1069
1070
1070
1071
1071
1072
1072
1073
1073
1074
1074
1075
1075
1076
1076
1077
1077
XXXVlll
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
Background
Pursuant to Sections 301, 304, 306, 307, and 501 of the Clean Water
Act, EPA collected and analyzed data for plants in the Battery
Manufacturing Point Source Category. There are no existing effluent
limitations or performance standards for this industry. This document
and the administrative record provide the technical bases for
proposing effluent limitations for existing direct dischargers using
best practicable and best available technology (BPT and BAT).
Effluent standards are proposed for existing indirect dischargers
(PSES), and new sources, for both direct dischargers (NSPS) and
indirect dischargers (PSNS).
Battery manufacturing encompasses the production of modular electric
power sources where part or all of the fuel is contained within the
unit and electric power is generated directly from a chemical reaction
rather than indirectly through a heat cycle engine. There are three
major components of a cell anode, cathode, and electrolyte plus
mechanical and conducting parts such as case, separator, or contacts.
Production includes electrode manufacture of anodes and cathodes, and
associated ancillary operations necessary to produce a battery.
Subcateqorization
The category is subcategorized on the basis of anode material and
electrolyte. This subcategorization was selected because most of the
manufacturing process variations are similar within these
subcategories and the approach avoids unnecessary complexity. The
data base includes the following eight subcategories:
Cadmium Lithium
Calcium Magnesium
Lead Nuclear
Leclanche Zinc
The nuclear subcategory was considered in the data base, but was not
considered for regulation because production had ceased and was not
expected to resume.
Within each subcategory manufacturing process operations (or elements)
were grouped into anode manufacture, cathode manufacture, and
ancillary operations associated with the production of a battery. The
development of a production normalizing parameter (pnp) for each
element was necessary to relate water use to various plant sizes and
-------
XL
-------
poorly maintained, or improperly operated (systems overloaded, solids
not removed, pH not controlled, etc.).
Wastewater Treatment
The control and treatment technologies available for this category and
used as the basis for the proposed regulation include both in-process
and end-of-pipe treatments. In-process treatment includes a variety
of water flow reduction steps and major process changes such as:
cascade and countercurrent rinsing (to reduce the amount of water used
to remove unwanted materials from electrodes); consumption of cleansed
wastewater in product mixes; and substitution of nonwastewater-
generating forming (charging) systems. End-of-pipe treatment
includes: hexavalent chromium reduction; chemical precipitation of
metals using hydroxides, carbonates, or sulfides; and removal of
precipitated metals and other materials using settling or
sedimentation; filtration; distillation; ion exchange; reverse
osmosis; and combinations of these technologies. While developing the
proposed regulation, EPA also considered the impacts of these
technologies on air quality, solid waste generation, water scarcity,
and energy requirements.
The effectiveness of these treatment technologies has been evaluated
and established by examining their performance on battery
manufacturing and other similar wastewaters. The data base for
hydroxide precipitation-sedimentation technology is a composite of
data drawn from EPA sampling and analysis of copper and aluminum
forming, battery manufacturing, porcelain enameling, and coil coating
effluents. A detailed statistical analysis done on the data base
showed substantial homogeneity in the treatment effectiveness data
from these five categories. This supports EPA's technical judgment
that these wastewaters are similar in all material respects for
treatment because they contain a range of dissolved metals which can
be removed by precipitation and solids removal. Electroplating data
were originally used in the data set, but were excluded after further
statistical analyses were performed. Similarly, precipitation-
sedimentation and filtration technology performance is based on the
performance of full-scale commercial systems treating multi-category
wastewaters which also are essentially similar to battery
manufacturing wastewaters.
The treatment performance data is used to obtain maximum daily and
monthly average pollutant concentrations. These concentrations (mg/1)
along with the battery manufacturing production normalized flows (I/kg
of production normalizing parameter) are used to obtain the maximum
daily and monthly average values (mg/kg) for effluent limitations and
standards. The monthly average values are based on the average of ten
consecutive sampling days. The ten day average value was selected as
the minimum number of consecutive samples which need to be averaged to
-------
production variations. The pnp was, in general, the weight of anode
or cathode material, or weight of cells produced.
Data
The data base for the battery manufacturing category includes 253
subcategory specific plants which employed over 33,000 people. Of the
253 plants, 25 discharge wastewater directly to surface waters, 150
discharge wastewater to publicly owned treatment works (POTW), and 78
have no discharge of process wastewater. Data collection portfolios
(dcp) were sent to 226 known battery companies in the U.S. and data
was requested for 1976. Data was returned by 96 percent of the
companies. The data base includes some data for 1977 and 1978.
Water is used throughout battery manufacturing to clean battery
components and to transport wastes. Water is used in the chemical
systems to make most electrodes and special electrode chemicals; water
is also a major component of most electrolytes and formation baths. A
total of 48 plants were visited for engineering analysis of which
eight were sampled for screening and 15 were sampled for verification
analysis. These visits enabled the Agency to characterize about 100
category specific wastewater generating processes, select the
pollutants for regulation, and evaluate wastewater treatment
performance in this category.
The most important pollutants or pollutant parameters generated in
battery manufacturing wastewaters are (1) toxic metals arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
and zinc; (2) nonconventional pollutants aluminum, cobalt, iron,
manganese, and COD; and (3) conventional pollutants oil and grease,
TSS, and pH. Toxic organic pollutants generally were not found in
large quantities although some cyanide was found in a few
subcategories. Because of the amount of toxic metals present, the
sludges generated during wastewater treatment generally contain
substantial amounts of toxic metals.
Current wastewater treatment systems in the battery manufacturing
category range from no treatment to sophisticated physical chemical
treatment (although frequently not properly operated) combined with
water conservation practices. Of the 253 plants in the data base, 25
percent of the plants have no treatment and do not discharge, 16
percent have no treatment and discharge, 21 percent have only pH
adjust systems, 3 percent have only sedimentation or clarification
devices, 24 percent have equipment for chemical precipitation and
settling, 7 percent have equipment for chemical precipitation,
settling and filtration, and 4 percent have other treatment systems.
Even though treatment systems are in-place at many plants, however,
the category is uniformly inadequate in wastewater treatment
practices. The systems in-place are generally inadequately sized,
-------
87 percent reduction in wastewater flow with BPT end-of-pipe treatment
are the basis for BAT limitations.
No BPT or BAT limitations are proposed for the calcium, Leclanche,
lithium, and magnesium subcategories. There are no direct dischargers
in the calcium and Leclanche subcategories, and low flows and toxic
pollutant loads do not justify national limitations for the lithium
and magnesium subcategories.
For new source direct dischargers, NSPS are proposed for the cadmium,
calcium, lead, Leclanche, lithium, magnesium, and zinc subcategories.
No discharge of process wastewater is proposed for the cadmium,
calcium, and Leclanche subcategories based on treatment using the end-
of-pipe control technology and water reuse. Standards based on flow
reduction and end-of-pipe treatment are proposed for the lead,
lithium, magnesium, and zinc subcategories.
For existing indirect dischargers, PSES are proposed for the cadmium,
lead, and zinc subcategories. The standards proposed are mass based
and equivalent to the BAT limitations. A standard based primarily on
the treatment effectiveness of lime and settle technology as end-of-
pipe treatment is proposed for the magnesium subcategory. No
discharge of process wastewater achieved by treatment using the end-
of-pipe control technology and water reuse is proposed for the
Leclanche subcategory. For PSNS the proposed standards are mass based
and equivalent to the NSPS technology.
No PSES standards are proposed for the calcium and lithium
subcategories because low flows and toxic pollutant loads do not
justify developing national standards.
BCT effluent limitations for the cadmium, lead, and zinc subcategories
are deferred pending adoption of the BCT cost test.
Other technology options beside those adopted as a basis for proposal
are available. The Agency will review all information and comments
submitted on this proposal before deciding which technology to select
and which limitations and standards to promulgate. The final
regulation may well be based upon a technology other than that which
forms the basis for this proposal.
-------
arrive at a stable slope on a statistically based curve relating one
day and 30 day average values and it approximates the most frequent
monitoring requirement of direct discharge permits.
Treatment Costs
The Agency estimated the costs of each control and treatment
technology using a computer program based on standard engineering cost
analysis. EPA derived unit process costs by applying plant data and
characteristics (production and flow) to each treatment process (i.e.,
metals precipitation, sedimentation, mixed-media filtration, etc.).
The program also considers what treatment equipment exists at each
plant. These unit process costs were added for each plant to yield
total cost at each treatment level. In cases where there is more than
one plant at one site, costs were calculated separately for each plant
and probably overstate the actual amount which would be spent at the
site where one combined treatment system could be used for all plants.
Regulation
On the basis of raw waste characteristics, in-process and end-of-pipe
treatment performance and costs, and other factors, EPA identified and
Classified various control and treatment technologies as BPT, BAT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. The proposed regulation, however, does not
require the installation of any particular technology. Rather, it
requires achievement of effluent limitations equivalent to those
achieved by the proper operation of these or equivalent technologies.
Except for pH requirements, the effluent limitations for BPT, BAT, and
NSPS are expressed as mass limitations a mass of pollutant per unit
of production (mg/kg). They were calculated by combining three
figures: (1) treated effluent concentrations determined by analyzing
control technology performance data; (2) production-weighted
wastewater flow for each manufacturing process element of each
subcategory; and (3) any relevant process or treatment variability
factor (e.g., mean versus maximum day). This basic calculation was
performed for each regulated pollutant or pollutant parameter and for
each wastewater-generating process element of each subcategory.
Pretreatment standards PSES and PSNS are also expressed as mass
limitations rather than concentration limits to ensure a reduction in
the total quantity of pollutant discharges.
For existing direct dischargers, BPT and BAT limitations are proposed
for the cadmium, lead, and zinc subcategories. BPT limitations are
based on the treatment effectiveness of lime and settle technology for
end-of-pipe treatment with wastewater discharge limited, in general,
to the present mean flow. In-process technologies causing an average
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
EPA has divided the battery manufacturing category into eight
subcategories for the purpose of effluent limitations and standards.
These subcategories are:
Cadmium Lithium
Calcium Magnesium
Lead Nuclear
Leclanche Zinc
These subcategories have been further subdivided into process elements
specific to basic manufacturing operations within the subcategory and
the proposed regulations are specific to these elements. The nuclear
subcategory is excluded from regulation since there are no currently
operating plants and there are no known plans to resume production.
1. The following effluent limitations are being proposed for
existing sources.
A. Subcategory A - Cadmium
(a) BPT Limitations
(1) Subpart A - Pasted and Pressed Powder Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 0.87 0.41
Nickel 3.81 2.70
Zinc 3.59 1.51
Cobalt 0.79 0.33
Oil and Grease 54.0 32.4
TSS 111.0 54.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(2) Subpart A - Electrodeposited Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
-------
-------
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
182.0
803.0
757.0
165.0
11400.0
23400.0
Within the range of 7.5
85.4
569.0
319.0
68.3
6830.0
11400.0
10.0 at all times
(5) Subpart A - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and grease
TSS
pH
525.0
2320.0
2180.0
476.0
32800.0
67300.0
Within the range of 7.5 -
246.0
1640.0
919.0
197.0
19700.0
32800.0
10.0 at all
times
(6) Subpart A - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, Floor
& Equipment Wash, and Employee Wash BPT
Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
5.93
26.1
24.6
5.37
370.0
759.0
Within the range of 7.5
2.78
18.5
10.4
2.22
222.0
370.0
10.0 at all times
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
223.0 105.0
983.0 697.0
927.0 391.0
202.0 83.7
14000.0 8370.0
28600.0 14000.0
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at
all times
(3) Subpart A - Impregnated Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
320.0 150.0
1407.0 998.0
1328.0 559.0
290.0 120.0
20000.0 12000.0
40900.0 20000.0
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at
all times
Subpart A - Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium used
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
0.29
1 .27
1 .20
0.26
18.0
36.9
0
0
0
0
10
18
14
90
51
1 1
8
0
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
10) Subpart A - Nickel Hydroxide Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel used
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and
TSS
PH
Grease
Within
35
155
147
31
2200
4510
the
.2
.0
.0
.9
.0
.0
range
16
110
61
13
1320
2200
of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(b) BAT Limitations
(1) Subpart A - Electrodeposited Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
11 .3
49.6
46.8
10.2
5.27
35.2
19.7
4.22
11
-------
(7) Subpart A - Cadmium Powder Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium powder produced
Cadmium 21.1 9.86
Nickel 92.7 65.7
Zinc 87.4 36.8
Cobalt 19.1 7.89
Oil and Grease 1320.0 785.0
TSS 2700.0 1320.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(8) Subpart A - Silver Powder Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Cadmium 6.79 3.18
Nickel 29.9 21.2
Silver 8.69 3.61
Zinc 28.2 11.9
Cobalt 6.15 2.55
Oil and Grease 424.0 .255.0
TSS 869.0 424.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(9) Subpart A - Cadmium Hydroxide Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
10
-------
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Cobalt 58.0 24.0
(5) Subpart A - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation,
and Employee Wash BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Cadmium 0.75 0.35
Nickel 3.29 2.33
Zinc 3.10 1.31
Cobalt 0.68 0.28
(6) Subpart A - Cadmium Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium powder produced
Cadmium 2.10 0.99
Nickel 9.27 6.57
Zinc 8.74 3.68
Cobalt 1.91 0.79
(7) Subpart A - Silver Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
13
-------
(2) Subpart A - Impregnated Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 64.0 30.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Cobalt 58.0 24.0
(3) Subpart A - Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 10.6 4.95
Nickel 46.6 33.0
Zinc 43.9 18.5
Cobalt 9.57 3.96
4) Subpart A - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 64.0 30.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
12
-------
C. Subcategory C - Lead
(a) BPT Limitations
(1) Subpart C - Closed Formation - Double Fill, or Fill
and Dump BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.86 0.45
Lead 0.067 0.059
Iron 0.56 0.29
Oil and Grease 9.00 5.40
TSS 18.5 9.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(2) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 17.1 9.0
Lead 1.35 1.17
Iron 11.1 5.67
Oil and Grease 180.0 108.0
TSS 369.0 180.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(3) Subpart C - Battery Wash
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
15
-------
Cadmium 1.03 0.48
Nickel 4.53 3.21
Silver 1.32 0.55
Zinc 4.27 1.80
Cobalt 0.93 0.39
(8) Subpart A - Cadmium Hydroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium used
Cadmium 0.05 0.021
Nickel 0.20 0.14
Zinc 0.19 0.078
Cobalt 0.04 0.017
Subpart A - Nickel Hydroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel used
Cadmium 5.28 2.48
Nickel 23.3 16.5
Zinc 22.0 9.24
Cobalt 4.79 1.98
B. Subcategory B - Calcium
(a) BPT Limitations
[Reserved]
(b) BAT Limitations
[Reserved]
14
-------
(b) BAT Limitations
(!) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
mg/kg of lead used
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
2.59
0.21
1 .68
1 .36
0.18
0.86
(2) Subpart C -
Battery Wash
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Average of daily
values for 10
consecutive
sampling days
Metric Units
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
mg/kg of lead used
lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
0.69
0.054
0.45
0.36
0.047
0.23
(3) Subpart C -
Battery Repair
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
0.27
0.021
0. 14
0.018
17
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
1 .37
0.11
0.89
14.4
29.5
Within the range of 7.5 -
0.72
0.10
0.46
8.64
14.4
10.0 at all times
(4) Subpart C - Floor Wash
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.78
0.062
0.51
8.20
16.8
Within the range of 7.5
0.41
0.053
0.26
4.92
8.20
10.at all times
(5) Subpart C - Battery Repair
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
0.27
0.021
0.18
2.80
5.74
Within the range of 7.5
0. 14
0.018
0.088
1 .68
2.8
10.0 at all times
16
-------
(2) Subpart G - Gelled Amalgam Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
0.29
0.17
0.28
0.91
0.29
13.6
27.9
0
0
0
0
0
8
13
12
068
12
38
23
16
6
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(3) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide, Formed Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
60.1
35.8
58.7
190.0
61.5
2860.0
5870.0
Within the range 7.5
24.3
14.3
24.3
80.1
48.6
1720.0
2860.0
10.0 at all times
(4) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
19
-------
Iron 0.17 0.088
D. Subcategory D - Leclanche
(a) BPT Limitations
[Reserved]
(b) BAT Limitations
[Reserved]
E. Subcategory E - Lithium
(a) BPT Limitations
[Reserved]
(b) BAT Limitations
[Reserved]
F. Subcategory F - Magnesium
(a) BPT Limitations
[Reserved]
(b) BAT Limitations
[Reserved]
G. Subcategory G - Zinc
(a) BPT Limitations
(1) Subpart G - Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units -
English Units
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
mg/kg of zinc
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
1 .60
0.95
1 .56
5.06
1 .64
76.0
156.0
Within the range of 7.5 -
0.65
0.38
0.65
2.13
1 .29
45.6
76.0
10.0 at all time
18
-------
Zinc 175.0
Manganese 56.4
Oil and Grease 2620.0
TSS 5370.0
pH Within the range of 7.5
73.4
44.6
1570.0
2620.0
10.0 at all times
(7) Subpart G -
Silver Peroxide Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc.
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
13.2
7.85
12.9
41 .8
13.5
628.0
1290.0
Within the range of 7.5
5.34
3.14
5.34
17.6
10.7
377.0
628.0
10.0 at all times
(8) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
689.0 279.0
410 164.0
2320.0 1640.0
673.0 279.0
2180.0 919.0
705.0 558.0
32800.0 19700.0
67300.0 32800.0
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at
all times
21
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
1340
798
1310
4250
1370
63800
131000
Within the range of 7.5 -
543.0
319.0
543.0
1790.0
1090.0
38300.0
63800.0
10.0 at all times
(5) Subpart G - Silver Powder, Formed Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
82.3
49.0
80.4
261 .0
84.3
3920.0
8040.0
Within the range of 7.5
33.3
19.6
33.3
110.0
66.7
2350.0
3920.0
10.0 at all times
6) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder, Formed Cathodes
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
55.0
32.8
53.7
22.3
13. 1
22.3
20
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 22.0 8.88
Mercury 13.1 5.22
Silver 21.4 8.88
Zinc 69.5 29.3
Manganese 22.5 17.8
Oil and Grease 1050.0 627.0
TSS 2140.0 1050.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(12) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver
powder produced
Chromium 8.91 3.61
Mercury 5.30 2.12
Silver 8.69 3.61
Zinc 28.2 11.9
Manganese 9.12 7.21
Oil and grease 424.0 255.0
TSS 869.0 424.0
pH Within the range 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(b) BAT Limitations
(1) Subpart G - Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
23
-------
(9) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, Employee
Wash, Reject Cell Handling, Floor and Equip-
ment Wash BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium
Cyanide
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
3.68
2.54
2.19
12.4
3.59
1 1 .7
3.77
175.0
359.0
Within the limits of 7.5 -
1 .49
1 .05
0.88
8.76
1 .49
4.91
2.98
105.0
175.2
10.0 at all
times
(10) Subpart G - Silver Etch
BPT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
20.7
12.3
20.2
65.3
21 .1
982.0
2020.0
Within the range of 7.5
8.35
4.91
8.35
27.5
16.7
589.0
982.0
10.0 at all times
(11) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
BPT Effluent Limitations
22
-------
(4) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 101.0 41.0
Mercury 60.3 24.1
Silver 98.8 41.0
Zinc 321.0 135.0
Manganese 104.0 81.9
(5) Subpart G - Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 12.5 5.05
Mercury 7.43 2.97
Silver 12.2 5.05
Zinc 39.5 16.7
Manganese 12.8 10.1
(6) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
25
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lbs/1, 000,000 Ibs of zinc
Chromium 0.23 0.093
Mercury 0.14 0.055
Silver 0.23 0.093
Zinc 0.73 0.31
Manganese 0.24 0.19
2) Subpart G - Gelled Amalgam Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 0.029 0.012
Mercury 0.017 0.007
Silver 0.028 0.012
Zinc 0.091 0.038
Manganese 0.029 0.023
3) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 9.10 3.69
Mercury 5.42 2.17
Silver 8.89 3.69
Zinc 28.9 12.2
Manganese 9.32 7.37
24
-------
9) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling & Floor and Equipment Wash
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.54 0.22
Cyanide 0.38 0.16
Mercury 0.33 0.13
Nickel 1.82 1.29
Silver 0.53 0.22
Zinc 1.72 0.72
Manganese 0.56 0.44
10) Subpart G - Silver Etch
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 3.13 1.27
Mercury 1.86 0.75
Silver 3.05 1.27
Zinc 9.90 4.17
Manganese 3.20 2.53
(11) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
27
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 8.34 3.38
Mercury 4.97 1.99
Silver 8.14 3.38
Zinc 26.4 11.1
Manganese 8.54 6.75
(7) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 2.00 0.81
Mercury 1.19 0.48
Silver 1.95 0.81
Zinc 6.33 2.67
Manganese 2.05 1.62
(8) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium 84.0 34.0
Mercury 50.0 20.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
Silver 82.0 34.0
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Manganese 86.0 68.0
26
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units -
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
mg/kg of lead used
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead
0.039
0.008
0.25
2.04
3.06
Within the limits of 7.5
used
0.016
0.002
0. 13
2.04
2.25
- 10.0 at all tim
(2) Subpart C - Battery Wash
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units -
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH
mg/kg of lead used
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead
0.011
0.002
0.067
0.54
0.81
Within the limits of 7.5
used
0.004
0.001
0.034
0.54
0.60
- 10.0 at all
times
(3) Subpart C - Battery Repair
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
Iron
0.004
0.0008
0.026
0.002
0.0003
0.013
29
-------
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 3.32 1.35
Mercury 1.98 0.79
Silver 3.25 1.35
Zinc 10.5 4.43
Manganese 3.40 2.69
(12) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 1.35 0.55
Mercury 0.80 0.32
Silver 1.32 0.55
Zinc 4.27 1.80
Manganese 1.38 1.09
2. The following standards are being proposed for new sources.
A. Subcategory A - Cadmium
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any
battery manufacturing operations.
B. Subcategory B - Calcium
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any
battery manufacturing operations.
C. Subcategory C - Lead
(1) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated
New Source Performance Standards
28
-------
and Lithium Scrap Disposal New Source
Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.040 0.016
Lead 0.011 0.010
Iron 0.14 0.068
TSS 1.62 1.19
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(4) Subpart E - Air Scrubbers New Source Performance
Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
TSS 434.0 212.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
F. Subcategory F - Magnesium
(1) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically
Reduced New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Lead 8.19 7.37
Silver 23.75 9.83
Iron 100.8 51.96
COD 4095.0 1999.0
31
-------
Oil and Grease 0.21 0.21
TSS 0.32 0.23
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
D. Subcategory D - Leclanche
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any
battery manufacturing operations.
E. Subcategory E - Lithium
(1) Subpart E - Lead Iodide Cathodes New Source
Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead
Chromium 23.4 9.46
Lead 6.31 5.68
Iron 77.6 39.8
TSS 946.0 694.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(2) Subpart E - Iron Disulfide Cathodes New Source
Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of iron disulfide
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of iron disulfide
Chromium 2.79 1.13
Lead 0.76 0.68
Iron 9.28 4.75
TSS 113.0 83.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
3) Subpart E - Floor and Equipment Wash, Cell Testing,
30
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead 0.009 0.008
Silver 0.027 0.011
Iron 0.12 0.059
COD 4.70 2.30
TSS 1.41 1.04
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0.at all times
(5) Subpart F - Air Scrubber
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
TSS 8467.0 4130.0
pH Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
G. Subcategory G - Zinc
(1) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 0.62 0.33
Mercury 0.43 0.19
Silver 0.62 0.28
Zinc 0.12 0.062
Manganese 0.98 0.75
Oil and Grease 32.5 32.5
TSS 48.8 35.8
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
33
-------
TSS
pH
1229.0 901.0
Within the range of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(2) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Lead
Silver
Iron
COD
TSS
pH
14
42
179
7250
2180
Within the range of 7.5 -
13
17
91
3540
1600
10.0 at
.1
.4
.4
.0
.0
all
times
(3) Subpart F - Cell Testing
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead
Silver
Iron
COD
TSS
pH
5.26
15.3
64.7
2630.0
789.0
Within the range of 7.5
4.74
6.31
33.2
1290.0
579.0
10.0 at all times
Subpart F - Floor and Equipment Wash
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
32
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 0.57 0.30
Mercury 0.39 0.17
Silver 0.57 0.25
Zinc 0.11 0.057
Manganese 0.90 0.69
Oil & Grease 29.8 29.8
TSS 44.7 32.8
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(5) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 0.14 0.072
Mercury 0.093 0.041
Silver 0.14 0.060
Zinc 0.027 0.014
Manganese 0.22 0.17
Oil & Grease 7.14 7.14
TSS 10.7 7.86
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(6) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium 5.70 3.03
Mercury 3.90 1.71
Nickel 5.70 2.49
Silver 5.70 2.52
35
-------
2) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 6.87 3.65
Mercury 4.70 2.06
Silver 6.87 3.04
Zinc 1.34 0.69
Manganese 10.9 8.31
Oil and Grease 362.0 362.0
TSS 542.0 398.0
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(3) Subpart G .- Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 0.85 0.45
Mercury 0.58 0.26
Silver 0.85 0.38
Zinc 0.17 0.085
Manganese 1.34 1.03
Oil & Grease 44.5 44.5
TSS 66.8 49.0
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(4) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
34
-------
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(9) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 0.23 0.12
Mercury 0.16 0.068
Silver 0.23 0.10
Zinc 0.044 0.023
Manganese 0.36 0.28
Oil & Grease 11.9 11.9
TSS 17.8 13.1
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(10) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 0.092 0.049
Mercury 0.063 0.027
Silver 0.092 0.041
Zinc 0.018 0.009
Manganese 0.15 0.11
Oil & Grease 4.82 4.82
TSS 7.24 5.31
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
3. The following pretreatment standards are being proposed for
existing sources.
A. Subcategory A - Cadmium
37
-------
Zinc 1.11 0.57
Manganese 9.00 6.90
Oil & Grease 300.0 300.0
TSS 450.0 330.0
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
(7) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling, & Floor and Equipment Wash
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.037 0.020
Cyanide 0.039 0.016
Mercury 0.026 0.011
Nickel 0.037 0.016
Silver 0.037 0.016
Zinc 0.008 0.004
Manganese 0.059 0.045
Oil & Grease 1.95 1.95
TSS 2.93 2.15
pH Within the limits of 7.5 - 10.0 at all times
8) Subpart G - Silver Etch
New Source Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 0.20 0.12
Mercury 0.15 0.064
Silver 0.20 0.094
Zinc 0.040 0.021
Manganese 0.34 0.26
Oil & Grease 11.2 11.2
TSS 16.8 12.3
36
-------
(4) Subpart A - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 64.0 30.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Cobalt 58.0 24.0
(5) Subpart A - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, and
Employee Wash Pretreatment Standards for
Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Cadmium 0.75 0.35
Nickel 3.29 2.33
Zinc 3.10 1.31
Cobalt 0.68 0.28
(6) Subpart A - Cadmium Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium powder produced
Cadmium 2.10 0.99
Nickel 9.27 6.57
Zinc 8.74 3.68
39
-------
1) Subpart A - Electrodeposited Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 11.3 5.27
Nickel 49.6 35.2
Zinc 46.7 19.8
Cobalt 10.2 4.22
(2) Subpart A - Impregnated Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 64.0 30.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Cobalt 58.0 24.0
3) Subpart A - Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 10.6 4.95
Nickel 46.6 33.0
Zinc 43.9 18.5
Cobalt 9.57 3.96
38
-------
Cadmium 5.28 2.48
Nickel 23.3 16.5
Zinc 22.0 9.24
Cobalt 4.79 1.98
B. Subcategory B - Calcium
[Reserved]
C. Subcategory C - Lead
(1) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated Pretreatment
Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 2.59 1.36
Lead 0.21 0.18
2) Subpart C - Battery Wash Pretreatment Standards
for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.69 0.36
Lead 0.054 0.047
(3) Subpart C - Battery Repair Pretreatment Standards
for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
41
-------
Cobalt 1.91 0.79
(7) Subpart A - Silver Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Cadmium 1.03 0.48
Nickel 4.53 3.21
Silver 1.32 0.55
Zinc 4.27 1.80
Cobalt 0.93 0.39
(8) Subpart A - Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium used
Cadmium 0.045 0.021
Nickel 0.20 0.14
Zinc 0.19 0.078
Cobalt 0.041 0.017
(9) Subpart A - Nickel Hydroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel used
40
-------
(3) Subpart F - Cell Testing
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Maximum for Maximum for
any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead 7.89 6.84
Silver 21.6 8.94
(4) Subpart F - Floor and Equipment Wash
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead 0.02 0.013
Silver 0.039 0.016
G. Subcategory G - Zinc
(1) Subpart G - Wet Amalgamated Powder Anode
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg
English Units - lb/1 ,
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
of zinc
000,000 Ib of zinc
0.23
0.14
0.23
0.73
0.24
0.093
0.055
0.093
0.31
0.19
43
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.27 0.14
Lead 0.021 0.018
D. Subcategory D - Leclanche
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any
battery manufacturing operations.
E. Subcategory E - Lithium
[Reserved]
F. Subcategory F - Magnesium
(1) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically Reduced
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lbs/1,000,000 Ibs of silver processed
Lead 368.7 319.6
Silver 1008.0 417.9
(2) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathodes - Electrolytic
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Lead 21.8 18.9
Silver 59.5 24.7
42
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 101.0 41.0
Mercury 60.3 24.1
Silver 98.8 41.0
Zinc 321.0 135.0
Manganese 104.0 81.9
(5) Subpart G - Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 12.5 5.05
Mercury 7.43 2.97
Silver 12.2 5.05
Zinc 39.5 16.7
Manganese 12.8 10.1
(6) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 8.34 3.38
Mercury 4.97 1.99
Silver 8.14 3.38
Zinc 26.4 11.1
Manganese 8.54 6.75
7) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
45
-------
(2) Subpart G - Gelled Amalgam Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
mg/kg of zinc
- lbs/1,000,000 Ibs of zinc
0.29 0.12
0.17 0.068
0.28 0.12
0.91 0.38
0.29 0.23
(3) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
9.10
5.42
8.89
28.9
9.32
3
2
3
12
69
17
69
2
7.37
4) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes Pretreatment
Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
44
-------
Chromium 0.54 0.22
Cyanide 0.38 0.16
Mercury 0.33 0.13
Nickel 1.82 1.29
Silver 0.53 0.22
Zinc 1.72 0.72
Manganese 0.56 0.44
(10) Subpart G - Silver Etch
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 3.13 1 .27
Mercury 1.86 0.75
Silver 3.05 1.27
Zinc 9.90 4.17
Manganese 3.20 2.53
(11) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 3.32- 1.35
Mercury 1.98 0.79
Silver 3.25 1.35
Zinc 10.5 4.43
Manganese 3.40 2.69
47
-------
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 2.00 0.81
Mercury 1.19 0.48
Silver 1.95 0.81
Zinc 6.33 2.67
Manganese 2.05 1.62
(8) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium 84.0 34.0
Mercury 50.0 20.0
Nickel 282.0 200.0
Silver 82.0 34.0
Zinc 266.0 112.0
Manganese 86.0 68.0
(9) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling, & Floor and Equipment Wash
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000>Ib of cells produced
46
-------
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.011 0.004
Lead 0.002 0.001
(3) Subpart C - Battery Repair Pretreatment Standards
for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.004 0.002
Lead 0.001 0.0003
D. Subcategory D - Leclanche
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any battery
manufacturing operations.
E. Subcategory E - Lithium
(1) Subpart E - Lead Iodide Cathodes Pretreatment Standards
for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead
Chromium 23.4 9.46
Lead 6.31 5.68
49
-------
12) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 1.35 0.55
Mercury 0.80 0.32
Silver 1.32 0.55
Zinc 4.27 1.80
Manganese 1.38 1.09
4. The following pretreatment standards are being proposed for
new sources.
A. Subcategory A - Cadmium
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutants from any battery
manufacturing operations.
B. Subcategory B - Calcium
There shall be no discharge of wastewater pollutant from any battery
manufacturing operations.
C. Subcategory C - Lead
(1) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated Pretreatment
Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.039 0.016
Lead 0.008 0.002
(2) Subpart c - Battery Wash
48
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Lead 14.5 13.1
Silver 42.1 17.4
(3) Subpart F - Cell Testing
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead 5.26 4.74
Silver 15.3 6.31
(4) Subpart F - Floor and Equipment Wash
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Lead 0.009 0.008
Silver 0.027 0.011
G. Subcategory G - Zinc
(1) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
51
-------
(2) Subpart E - Iron Bisulfide Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of iron disulfide
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of iron disulfide
Chromium 2.79 1.13
Lead 0.76 0.68
(3) Subpart E - Floor and Equipment Wash, Cell Testing,
and Lithium Scrap Disposal New Source
Performance Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.040 0.016
Lead 0.011 0.010
F. Subcategory F - Magnesium
(1) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathodes - Chemically
Reduced Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Lead 8.19 7.37
Silver 23.75 9.83
(2) Subpart F - Silver Chloride Cathode - Electrolytic
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
50
-------
4) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant
Pollutant
Property
or
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
mg/kg of silver applied
lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
0.57
0.39
0.57
0.11
0.90
0.30
0.17
0.25
0.057
0.69
5) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant
Pollutant
Property
or
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
mg/kg of silver applied
lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
14
093
14
027
0.22
0.072
0.041
0.060
0.014
0. 17
(6) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant
Pollutant
Property
or
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
mg/kg of nickel applied
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
53
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 0.62 0.33
Mercury 0.43 0.19
Silver 0.62 0.28
Zinc 0.12 0.062
Manganese 0.98 0.75
(2) Subpart GP- Electrodeposited Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 6.87 3.65
Mercury 4.70 2.06
Silver 6.87 3.04
Zinc 1.34 0.69
Manganese 10.9 8.31
(3) Subpart G - Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 0.85 0.45
Mercury 0.58 0.26
Silver 0.85 0.38
Zinc 0.17 0.085
Manganese 1.34 1.03
52
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver peroxide produced
Chromium 0.23 0.12
Mercury 0.16 0.068
Silver 0.23 0.10
Zinc 0.044 0.023
Manganese 0.36 0.28
(10) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 0.092 0.049
Mercury 0.063 0.027
Silver 0.092 0.040
Zinc 0.018 0.009
Manganese 0.15 0.11
5. Effluent limitations based on the best conventional treatment
are reserved at this time.
6. EPA is considering chemical precipitation, settling, and
filtration technology as the basis for BAT limitations and pretreatment
standards for existing sources for three subcategories. These
subcategories are:
Cadmium
Lead
Zinc
7. The following effluent limitations are being considered
for existing sources.
A. Cadmium Subcategory
55
-------
Chromium 5.70 3.03
Mercury 3.9 1.71
Nickel 5.70 2.49
Silver 5.70 2.52
Zinc 1.11 0.57
Manganese 9.00 6.90
(7) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling, Floor and Equipment Wash
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.037 0.020
Cyanide 0.039 0.016
Mercury 0.026 0.011
Nickel 0.037 0.016
Silver 0.037 0.016
Zinc 0.008 0.004
Manganese 0.059 0.045
Subpart G - Silver Etch
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 0.20 0.12
Mercury 0.15 0.064
Silver 0.20 0.094
Zinc 0.042 0.021
Manganese 0.34 0.26
(9) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
54
-------
Zinc 33.7 13.9
Cobalt 6.93 2.97
(4) Subpart A - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 40.0 16.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Cobalt 42.0 18.0
5) Subpart A - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation,
and Employee Wash BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Cadmium 0.47 0.19
Nickel 1.28 0.86
Zinc 2.38 0.98
Cobalt 0.49 0.21
6) Subpart A - Cadmium Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium powder produced
57
-------
(1) Subpart A - Electrodeposited Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 7.03 2.81
Nickel 19.4 13.0
Zinc 35.9 14.8
Cobalt 7.38 3.17
(2) Subpart A - Impregnated Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 40.0 16.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Cobalt 42.0 18.0
(3) Subpart A - Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 6.60 2.64
Nickel 18.2 12.2
56
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel used
Cadmium
Nickel
Zinc
Cobalt
3.30
9.08
16.9
3.47
B. Lead Subcategory
(1) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated
BAT Effluent Limitations
1 .32
6.1 1
6.93
1 .49
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
mg/kg of lead used
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
1 .74
0. 14
1 .68
0.83
0. 12
0.86
2) Subpart C -
Battery Wash
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Average of daily
values for 10
consecutive
sampling days
Metric Units
English Units
Copper
Lead
Iron
mg/kg of lead used
lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
0.46
0.036
0.45
0.22
0.032
0.23
3) Subpart C -
Battery Repair
BAT Effluent Limitations
59
-------
Cadmium 1.32 0.53
Nickel 3.62 2.43
Zinc 6.70 2.76
Cobalt 1.38 0.59
(7) Subpart A - Silver Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Cadmium 0.64 0.26
Nickel 1.77 1.19
Silver 0.93 0.39
Zinc 3.28 1.35
Cobalt 0.68 0.29
(8) Subpart A - Cadmium Hydroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium used
Cadmium 0.028 0.011
Nickel 0.077 0.052
Zinc 0.15 0.059
Cobalt 0.029 0.013
(9) Subpart A - Nickel Hydroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
58
-------
(3) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 8.02 3.25
Mercury 3.25 1.30
Silver 6.29 2.60
Zinc 22.1 9.10
Manganese 6.50 4.99
(4) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 89.5 36.3
Mercury 36.3 14.5
Silver 70.1 29.0
Zinc 247.0 102.0
Manganese 72.5 55.6
(5) Subpart G - Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
61
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.18 0.085
Lead 0.014 0.013
Iron 0.17 0.088
C. Zinc Subcategory
(1) Subpart G - Wet Amalgamated Powder Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lbs/1,000,000 Ibs of zinc
Chromium 0.21 0.083
Mercury 0.083 0.033
Silver 0.16 0.066
Zinc 0.56 0.23
Manganese 0.17 0.13
(2) Subpart G - Gelled Amalgam Anodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 0.025 0.010
Mercury 0.010 0.004
Silver 0.020 0.008
Zinc 0.069 0.029
Manganese 0.020 0.016
60
-------
(8) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium 74.0 30.0
Mercury 30.0 12.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Silver 58.0 24.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Manganese 60.0 46.0
(9) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling & Floor and Equipment Wash
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.48 0.20
Cyanide 0.26 0.11
Mercury 0.20 0.077
Nickel 0.71 0.48
Silver 0.38 0.16
Zinc 1.32 0.54
Manganese 0.39 0.30
(10) Subpart G - Silver Etch
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
63
-------
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 11.0 4.46
Mercury 4.46 1.78
Silver 8.62 3.57
Zinc 30.3 12.5
Manganese 8.91 6.83
(6) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 7.35 2.98
Mercury 2.98 1.19
Silver 5.76 2.38
Zinc 20.3 8.34
Manganese 5.96 4.57
(7) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 1.76 0.72
Mercury 0.72 0.29
Silver 1.38 0.57
Zinc 4.86 2.00
Manganese 1.43 1.10
62
-------
Zinc 3.28 1.35
Manganese 0.97 0.74
8. The following pretreatment standards are being considered
for existing sources.
A. Cadmium Subcategory
(1) Subpart A - Electrodeposited Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 7.03 2.81
Nickel 19.4 13.0
Zinc 35.9 14.8
Cobalt 7.38 3.17
2) Subpart A - Impregnated Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium
Cadmium 40.0 16.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Cobalt 42.0 18.0
(3) Subpart A - Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
65
-------
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 2.76 1.12
Mercury 1.12 0.45
Silver 2.16 0.90
Zinc 7.59 3.13
Manganese 2.23 1.71
(11) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver in silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 2.93 1.19
Mercury 1.19 0.48
Silver 2.30 0.95
Zinc 8.07 3.32
Manganese 2.38 1.82
(12) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
BAT Effluent Limitations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 1.19 0.48
Mercury 0.48 0.20
Silver 0.93 0.39
64
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium powder produced
Cadmium 1.32 0.53
Nickel 3.62 2.43
Zinc 6.70 2.76
Cobalt 1.38 0.59
(7) Subpart A - Silver Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Cadmium 0.64 0.26
Nickel 1.77 1.19
Silver 0.93 0.39
Zinc 3.28 1.35
Cobalt 0.68 0.29
(8) Subpart A - Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cadmium used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cadmium used
Cadmium 0.028 0.011
Nickel 0.077 0.052
Zinc 0.15 0.059
Cobalt 0.029 0.013
(9) Subpart A - Nickel Hydroxide Production
67
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 6.60 2.64
Nickel 18.2 12.2
Zinc 33.7 13.9
Cobalt 6.93 2.97
4) Subpart A - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Cadmium 40.0 16.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Cobalt 42.0 18.0
(5) Subpart A - Cell Wash, Electrolyte Preparation, and
Employee Wash Pretreatment Standards for
Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Cadmium 0.47 0.19
Nickel 1.28 0.86
Zinc 2.38 0.98
Cobalt 0.49 0.21
(6) Subpart A - Cadmium Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
66
-------
for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper
Lead
0.18
0.014
0.085
0.013
C. Zinc Subcategory
(1) Subpart G - Wet Amalgamated Powder
for Existing Sources
Anode Pretreatment Standards
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
Chromium
Mercury
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
mg/kg of zinc
- lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
0.21
0.083
0.16
0.56
0. 17
0.083
0.033
0.066
0.23
0.13
(2) Subpart G - Gelled Amalgam Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant
Property
Maximum for
any one day
Maximum for
monthly average
Metric Units
English Units
mg/kg of zinc
lbs/1,000,000 Ibs of zinc
69
-------
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel used
Cadmium 3.30 1.32
Nickel 9.08 6.11
Zinc 16.9 6.93
Cobalt 3.47 1.49
B. Lead Subcategory
(1) Subpart C - Open Formation - Dehydrated Pretreatment
Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 1.74 0.83
Lead 0.14 0.12
(2) Subpart C - Battery Wash Pretreatment Standards
for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of lead used
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of lead used
Copper 0.46 0.22
Lead 0.036 0.032
3) Subpart C - Battery Repair Pretreatment Standards
68
-------
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 11.0 4.46
Mercury 4.46 1.78
Silver 8.62 3.57
Zinc 30.3 12.5
Manganese 8.91 6.83
(6) Subpart G - Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing
Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
Chromium 7.35 2.98
Mercury 2.98 1.19
Silver 5.76 2.38
Zinc 20.3 8.34
Manganese 5.96 4.57
(7) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver applied
71
-------
Chromium 0.025 0.010
Mercury 0.010 0.004
Silver 0.020 0.008
Zinc 0.069 0.029
Manganese 0.020 0.016
(3) Subpart G - Zinc Oxide Formed Anodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc
Chromium 8.02 3.25
Mercury 3.25 1.30
Silver 6.29 2.60
Zinc 22.1 9.10
Manganese 6.50 4.99
(4) Subpart G - Electrodeposited Anodes Pretreatment
Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of zinc deposited
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of zinc deposited
Chromium 89.5 36.3
Mercury 36.3 14.5
Silver 70.1 29.0
Zinc 247.0 102.0
Manganese 72.5 55.6
(5) Subpart G - Silver Powder Formed Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
70
-------
(10) Subpart G - Silver Etch
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver processed
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver processed
Chromium 2.76 1.12
Mercury 1.12 0.45
Silver 2.16 0.90
Zinc 7.59 3.13
Manganese 2.23 1.71
(11) Subpart G - Silver Peroxide Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver om silver peroxide produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver in silver
peroxide produced
Chromium 2.93 1.19
Mercury 1.19 0.48
Silver 2.30 0.95
Zinc 8.07 3.32
Manganese 2.38 1.82
(12) Subpart G - Silver Powder Production
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
73
-------
Chromium 1 .76 0.72
Mercury 0.72 0.29
Silver 1.38 0.57
Zinc 4.86 2.00
Manganese 1.43 1.10
(8) Subpart G - Nickel Impregnated Cathodes
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of nickel applied
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of nickel applied
Chromium 74.0 30.0
Mercury 30.0 12.0
Nickel 110.0 74.0
Silver 58.0 24.0
Zinc 204.0 84.0
Manganese 60.0 46.0
9) Subpart G - Cell Wash, Employee Wash, Reject Cell
Handling, & Floor and Equipment Wash
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Pollutant or
Pollutant Maximum for Maximum for
Property any one day monthly average
Metric Units - mg/kg of cells produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of cells produced
Chromium 0.48 0.20
Cyanide 0.26 0.11
Mercury 0.20 0.077
Nickel 0.71 0.48
Silver 0.38 0.16
Zinc 1.32 0.54
Manganese 0.39 0.30
72
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
LEGAL AUTHORITY
This report is a technical background document prepared to support
effluent limitations and standards under authority of Sections 301,
304, 306, 307, 308, and 501 of the Clean Water Act (Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as Amended, (the Clean Water Act or the Act).
These effluent limitations and standards are in partial fulfillment of
the Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v.
Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified March 9, 1979. This
document also fulfills the requirements of sections 304(b) and (c) of
the Act. These sections require the Administrator, after consultation
with appropriate Federal and State Agencies and other interested
persons, to issue information on the processes, procedures, or
operating methods which result in the elimination or reduction of the
discharge of pollutants through the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available, the best available
technology economically achievable, and through the implementation of
standards of performance under Section 306 of the Act (New Source
Performance Standards).
Background
The Clean Water Act
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. 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);
and by July 1, 1983, these dischargers were required to achieve
effluent limitations requiring the application of the best available
technology economically achievable which will result in reasonable
further progress toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge
of all pollutants (BAT), 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; and new and existing sources which introduce pollutants
into publicly owned treatment works (POTW) 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
75
-------
Metric Units - mg/kg of silver powder produced
English Units - lb/1,000,000 Ib of silver powder produced
Chromium 1.19 0.48
Mercury 0.48 0.20
Silver 0.93 0.39
Zinc 3.28 1.35
Manganese 0.97 0.74
74
-------
In keeping with its emphasis on toxic pollutants, the Clean Water Act
of 1977 also revises the control program for non-toxic pollutants.
Instead of BAT for
304(a)(4) (including
fecal coliform and
achievement by July 1
application of the
(BCT). The factors
conventional pollutants identified under Section
biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids,
pH), the new Section 301 (b) (2) (E) requires
, 1984, of effluent limitations requiring the
best conventional pollutant control technology
considered in assessing BCT for an industry
include the costs of attaining a reduction in effluents and the
effluent reduction benefits derived compared to the costs and effluent
reduction benefits from the discharge of publicly owned treatment
works (Section 304(b) (4) (B) . The cost methodology for BCT has not
been proposed and BCT is presently deferred. For non-toxic,
nonconventional pollutants, Sections 301 (b) (2) (A) and (b)(2)(F)
require achievement of BAT effluent limitations within three years
after their establishment or July~ 1, 1984, whichever is later, but not
later than July 1 , 1987.
GUIDELINE DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
The effluent guidelines for battery manufacturing were developed from
data obtained from previous EPA studies, literature searches, and a
plant survey and evaluation. Initially, information from EPA records
was collected and a literature search was conducted. This information
was then catalogued in the form of individual plant summaries
describing processes performed, production rates, raw materials
utilized, wastewater treatment practices, water uses and wastewater
characteristics.
In addition to providing a quantitative description of the battery
manufacturing category, this information was used to determine if the
characteristics of the category as a whole were uniform and thus
amenable to one set of effluent limitations and standards. Since the
characteristics of the plants in the data base and the wastewater
generation and discharge varied widely, the establishment of
subcategories was determined to be necessary. The initial
subcategorization was made by using recognized battery type as the
subcategory description:
Lead Acid
Nickel-Cadmium (Wet
Nickel-Cadmium (Dry
Carbon-Zinc (Paper)
Carbon-Zinc (Paste)
Mercury (Ruben)
Alkaline-Manganese
Magnes i urn-Carbon
Process)
Process)
Carbon-Zinc (Air)
Silver Oxide-Zinc
Magnesium Cell
Nickel-Zinc
Lithium Cell
Mercury (Weston)
Lead Acid Reserve
Miniature Alkaline
77
-------
enforceable directly against any owner or operator of any source which
introduces pollutants into POTW (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, 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, Section 306 of the Act requires promulgation of
regulations for NSPS. Sections 304(g), 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 EPA was unable to promulgate many of these regulations by the
dates contained 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 March 9, 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 feature
is its incorporation into the Act of several of the basic elements of
the Settlement Agreement program for priority pollutant control.
Sections 301(b)(2)(A) and 301(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 controls. Moreover, to strengthen the
toxics control program, Section 304(e) of the Act authorizes the
Administrator to prescribe best management practices (BMPs) to prevent
the release of toxic and hazardous 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.
76
-------
Anode Material Designation for This Document
Cadmium Anode Cadmium
Calcium Anode Calcium
Lead Anode Lead
Zinc Anode, Acid Electrolyte Leclanche
Lithium Anode Lithium
Magnesium Anode Magnesium
Zinc Anode, Alkaline Electrolyte Zinc
Radioisotopes Nuclear
As discussed fully in Section IV, the zinc anode is divided into two
groups based on electrolyte type because of substantial differences in
manufacture and wastes generated by the two groups. As detailed in
Section IV and V, further segmentation using a matrix approach is
necessary to fully detail each subcategory. Specific manufacturing
process elements requiring control for each subcategory are presented
in Section IV followed by a detailed technical discussion in Section
V.
After establishing subcategorization, the available data were analyzed
to determine wastewater generation and mass discharge rates in terms
of production for each subcategory. In addition to evaluating
pollutant generation and discharges, the full range of control and
treatment technologies existing within the battery manufacturing
category was identified. This was done considering the pollutants to
be treated and the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics
of these pollutants. Special attention was paid to in-process
technologies such as the recovery and reuse of process solutions, the
recycle of process water, and the curtailment of water use.
The information as outlined above was then evaluated in order to
determine what levels of technology were appropriate as a basis for
effluent limitations for existing sources based on the best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT) and best
available technology economically achievable (BAT). Levels of
technology appropriate for pretreatment of wastewater introduced into
a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) from botb new and existing
sources were also identified as were the new source performance
standards (NSPS) based on best demonstrated control technology,
processes, operating methods, or other alternatives (BDT) for the
control of direct discharges from new sources. In evaluating these
technologies various factors were considered. These included
treatment technologies from other industries, any pretreatment
requirements, the total cost of application of the technology in
relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved, the age of
equipment and plants involved, the processes employed, the engineering
aspects of the application of various types of control technique
79
-------
To supplement existing data, EPA sent a data collection portfolio
(dcp) under authority of Section 308 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended, to each known battery manufacturing company.
In addition to existing and plant supplied information (via dcp), data
were obtained through a sampling program conducted at selected sites.
Sampling consisted of a screening program at one plant for each listed
battery type plus verification at up to 5 plants for each type.
Screen sampling was used to select pollutant parameters for analysis
in the second or verification phase of the program. The designated
priority pollutants (65 .toxic pollutants) and typical battery
manufacturing pollutants formed the basic list for screening.
Verification sampling and analysis was conducted to determine the
source and quantity of the selected pollutant parameters in each
subcategory.
Conventional nomenclature of batteries provided little aid in
development of effluent limitations and standards. SIC groupings are
inadequate because they are based on the end use of the product, not
composition of the product, or manufacturing processes. Based on the
information provided by the literature, dcp, and the sampling program,
the initial approach to subcategorization using battery type was
reviewed. Of the initial 16 battery types no production of mercury
(Weston) cells was found. The miniature alkaline type was dropped
because it is not a specific battery type but merely a size
distinction involving several battery types (e.g., alkaline-manganese,
silver oxide-zinc, and mercury-zinc (Ruben)). In addition to the
original battery types, the dcp's disclosed seven additional battery
types (silver chloride-zinc, silver oxide-cadmium, mercury-cadmium,
mercury and silver-zinc, mercury and cadmium-zinc, thermal, and
nuclear). Nuclear batteries, however, have not been manufactured
since 1978. Since they constitute a distinct subcategory, they have
been included in subcategorization discussion, but are not otherwise
considered in this document. Mercury and silver-zinc batteries have
not been manufactured since 1977, but do not constitute a single
subcategory and therefore will be discussed where appropriate. The
other five additional battery types are considered in this document.
An analysis of production methods, battery structure and electrolytic
couple variations for each battery type revealed that there are
theoretically about 600 distinct variations that could require further
subgrouping. Based on dcp responses and plant visits, over 200
distinct variations have been positively identified. Because of the
large number of potential subgroupings associated with
subcategorization by battery type, a subcategorization basis
characterizing these variations was sought. Grouping by anode
material accomplishes this objective and results in the following
subcategories:
78
-------
the category. In the survey, some plants responded with 1977 or 1978
data, and some provided 1976 data although production has subsequently
ceased. Table III-l summarizes the survey responses received in terms
of number of plants that provided information in each subcategory.
Another column was added to include information obtained in the
survey, by phone or by actual plant visit, that a plant was no longer
active in a subcategory. The total number of plant responses is
larger than the 133 company responses, since many companies own more
than one plant and information was requested on each site owned or
operated by the company. Also, some sites manufacture batteries in
more than one subcategory; four are active in three subcategories and
nine are active in two subcategories. Due to changes in ownership and
changes in production lines, the number of companies and the number of
plants and sites active in the category often vary. The result is
that about 230 sites are currently included in this category. All
information received was reviewed and evaluated, and will be discussed
as appropriate in subsequent sections.
TABLE III-l
SURVEY SUMMARY
SUBCATEGORY NUMBER OF PLANTS NUMBER OF PLANTS
(Information Received) (Currently Active)
Cadmium
Calcium
Lead
Leclanche
Lithium
Magnesium
Nuclear
Zinc
Totals 253 247
Total Number of Plant Sites in Category - 230.
*Includes plate manufacturers and assemblers.
The second phase of the data collection effort included visiting
selected plants, for screening and verification sampling of
wastewaters from battery manufacturing operations. The dcp's served
as a primary source in the selection of plants for visitation and
sampling. Specific criteria used for site selection included:
1. Distributing visits according to the type of battery manu-
factured.
81
-------
process changes, and non-water quality environmental impact (including
energy requirements).
Sources of Industry Data
Data on the battery manufacturing category were gathered from
literature studies, previous industry studies by the Agency, a plant
survey and evaluation, and inquiries to waste treatment equipment
manufacturers. These data sources are discussed below.
Literature Study - Published literature in the form of books, reports,
papers, periodicals, and promotional materials was examined. The most
informative sources are listed in Section XV. The material research
covered battery chemistry, the manufacturing processes utilized in
producing each battery type, waste treatment technology, and the
specific market for each battery type.
EPA Studies - A previous preliminary and unpublished EPA study of the
battery manufacturing segment was reviewed. The information included
a summary of the industry describing: the manufacturing processes for
each battery type; the waste characteristics associated with this
manufacture; recommended pollutant parameters requiring control;
applicable end-of-pipe treatment technologies for wastewaters from the
manufacture of each battery type; effluent characteristics resulting
from this treatment; and a background bibliography. Also included in
these data were detailed production and sampling information on
approximately 20 manufacturing plants.
Plant Survey and Evaluation - The collection of data pertaining to
facilities that manufacture batteries was a two-phased operation.
First, a mail survey was conducted by EPA. A dcp was mailed to each
company in the country known or believed to manufacture batteries.
This dcp included sections for general plant data, specific production
process data, waste management process data, raw and treated
wastewater data, waste treatment cost information, and priority
pollutant information based on 1976 production records. A total of
226 dcp's were mailed. From this survey, it was determined that 133
companies were battery manufacturers, including full line
manufacturers and assemblers. Of the remaining 93 data requests that
were mailed, 9 companies were no longer manufacturing batteries, 15
were returned as undeliverable, and 69 companies were in other
business areas.
For clarification, the following terminology is used in this document.
Battery manufacturing sites are physical locations where battery
manufacturing processes occur. Battery plants are locations where
subcategory-specific battery manufacturing processes occur. Battery
facilities are locations where final battery type products or their
components are produced and is primarily used for economic analysis of
80
-------
situ operation at plants that were often not battery manufacturers but
had similar wastewater characteristics (primarily toxic metal wastes).
Utilization of Industry Data
Data collected from the previously described sources are used
throughout this report in the development of a base for BPT and BAT
limitations, and NSPS and pretreatment standards. Previous EPA
studies and information in the literature provided the basis for the
initial battery subcategorization discussed in Section IV. This sub-
categorization was further refined to an anode grouping basis as the
result of information obtained from the plant survey and evaluation.
Raw wastewater characteristics for each subcategory presented in
Section V were obtained from screening and verification sampling
because raw waste information from other sources was so fragmented and
incomplete that it was unusable. Selection of pollutant parameters
for control (Section VI) was based on both dcp responses and plant
sampling. These provided information on both the pollutants which
plant personnel felt would be in their wastewater discharges and those
pollutants specifically found in battery manufacturing wastewaters as
the result of sampling. Based on the selection of pollutants
requiring control and their levels, applicable treatment technologies
were identified and then studied and discussed in Section VII of this
document. Actual waste treatment technologies utilized by battery
plants (as identified in dcp and seen on plant visits) were also used
to identify applicable treatment technologies. The cost of treatment
(both individual technologies and systems) based primarily on data
from equipment manufacturers is contained in Section VIII of this
document. Finally, dcp data and sampling data are utilized in
Sections IX, X, XI, XII, and XIII (BPT, BAT, NSPS, Pretreatment, and
BCT, respectively) for the selection of applicable treatment systems
and the presentation of achievable effluent levels and actual effluent
levels obtained for each battery subcategory.
INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION
Background
The industry covered by this document makes modular electric power
sources where part or all of the fuel is contained within the unit.
Electric power is generated directly from a chemical reaction rather
than indirectly through a heat cycle engine. Batteries using a radio-
active decay source where a chemical reaction is part of the operating
system were considered.
Historical - Electrochemical batteries and cells were assembled by
Alessandro Volta as early as 1798. His work establishing the
relationship between chemical and electrical energy came 12 years
after the discovery of the galvanic cell by Galvani, and 2000 years
83
-------
2. Distributing visits among various manufacturers of each battery
type.
3. Selecting plants whose production processes were representative
of the processes performed at many plants for each subcategory.
Consideration was also given to the understanding of unique
processes or treatment not universally practiced but applicable
to the industry in general.
4. A plant's knowledge of its production processes and waste
treatment system as indicated in the dcp.
5. The presence of wastewater treatment or water conservation
practices.
Forty-eight plants were visited and a wastewater sampling program was
conducted at nineteen of these plants. The sampling program at each
plant consisted of two activities: first, the collection of technical
information, and second, water sampling and analysis. The technical
information gathering effort centered around a review and completion
of the dcp to obtain historical data as well as specific information
pertinent to the time of the sampling. In addition to this, the
following specific technical areas were covered during these visits.
1. Water use for each process step and waste constituents.
2. Water conservation techniques.
3. In-process waste treatment and control technologies.
4. Overall performance of the waste treatment system and future
plans or changes anticipated.
5. Particular pollutant parameters which plant personnel thought
would be found in the waste stream.
6. Any problems or situations peculiar to the plant being visited.
All of the samples collected were kept on ice throughout each day of
sampling. At the end of each day, samples were preserved according to
EPA protocol and sent to laboratories for analysis per EPA protocol.
Details of this analysis and of the overall sampling program results
are described in Section V of this document.
Waste Treatment Equipment Manufacturers - Various manufacturers of
waste treatment equipment were contacted by phone or visited to de-
termine cost and performance data on specific technologies. Infor-
mation collected was based both on manufacturers' research and on in-
82
-------
New battery systems are introduced even today. In the past decade
implantable lithium batteries have been developed for heart
pacemakers, tens of thousands of which are in use. Huge development
programs have been funded for electric powered automobiles. The
liquid sodium-liquid sulfur system is one of the new "exotic" systems
being studied. Advancing technology of materials coupled with new
applications requirements will result in development of even newer
systems as well as the redevelopment of older systems for new
applications. Figure III-l (Page 116), graphically illustrates the
amplitude of systems in use or under development in 1975 for
rechargeable batteries. This plot of theoretical specific energy
versus equivalent weight of reactants clearly shows the reason for
present intensive developmental efforts on lithium and sodium
batteries, and the Edison battery (Fe/NiOOH) and the zinc-nickel oxide
battery.
Battery Definitions and Terminology - Batteries are named by various
systems. Classification systems include end-use, size, shape, anode-
cathode couple, inventor's name, electrolyte type, and usage mode.
Thus a flashlight battery (end-use), might also be properly referred
to as a D-Cell (size), a cylindrical cell (shape), a zinc-manganese
dioxide cell (anode-cathode couple), a Leclanche cell (inventor), an
acid cell (electrolyte type), and a primary cell (usage mode),
depending on the context. In the strictest sense, a cell contains
only one anode-cathode pair, whereas a battery is an assemblage of
cells connected in series to produce a greater voltage, or in parallel
to produce a greater current. Common usage has blurred the
distinction between these terms, and frequently the term battery is
applied to any finished entity sold as a single unit, whether it
contains one cell, as do most flashlight batteries, or several cells,
as do automobile batteries. In this document the marketed end product
is usually referred to as a battery. Manufacturing flow charts and
construction diagrams reveal the actual assembly details.
In this document, the terms "battery" and "cell" are used only for
self-contained galvanic devices, i.e., those devices which convert
chemical energy to electrical energy and which do not require a
separate chemical reservoir for operation of the device. Cells where
one of the reacting materials is oxygen supplied by the atmosphere in
which the cell operates are included as well as cells which contain
all of the reacting chemicals as part of the device. In some
literature, reference is made to electrolysis cells or batteries of
electrolysis cells. Those devices are for chemical production or
metal winning and are not covered by this discussion. Fuel cells,
although functioning as galvanic devices, must be supplied with the
chemical energy from an external source, and are not considered in
this document.
85
-------
after the use of devices in the Middle East, which from archeological
evidence, appear to be galvanic cells. Volta used silver and zinc
electrodes in salt water for his cells. Soon after Volta's
experiments, Davy, and then Faraday, used galvanic cells to carry out
electrolysis studies. In 1836 Daniell invented the cell which now
bears his name. He used a copper cathode in copper sulfate solution
separated by a porous cup from a solution of zinc sulfate in dilute
sulfuric acid which contained the amalgamated zinc anode. In I860,
Plante presented to the French Academy of Sciences the lead acid
storage battery he had developed, and in 1868 Leclanche developed the
forerunner of the modern dry cell. Leclanche used an amalgamated zinc
anode and a carbon cathode surrounded by manganese dioxide and
immersed both in an ammonium chloride solution. The portable dry cell
was developed in the late 1880s by Gassner who prepared a paste
electrolyte of zinc oxide, ammonium chloride and water in a zinc can,
inserted the carbon rod and manganese dioxide, then sealed the top
with plaster of Paris. The cell was produced commercially. Several
other acid-electrolyte cells using amalgamated zinc anodes and carbon
or platinum cathodes saw limited use prior to 1900.
Lalande and Chaperon developed a caustic soda primary battery about
1880 which was used extensively for railroad signal service.
Amalgamated zinc anodes and cupric oxide cathodes were immersed in a
solution of sodium hydroxide. A layer of oil on the surface of the
electrolyte prevented evaporation of water, and the formation of solid
sodium carbonate by reaction of carbon dioxide in the air with the
caustic soda electrolyte. Batteries with capacities to 1000 ampere
hours were available.
A storage battery of great commercial importance during the first half
of this century was the Edison cell. Although the system is not manu-
factured today, a large volume of research is being directed toward
making it a workable automotive power source. The system consists of
iron anodes, potassium hydroxide electrolyte, and nickel hydroxide
cathodes. The iron powder was packed in flat "pockets" of nickel-
plated steel strips. The nickel hydroxide, with layers of nickel
flakes to improve conductivity, was packed in tubes of nickel-plated
steel strips. The batteries were rugged and could withstand more
extensive charge-discharge cycling than lead acid storage batteries.
Their greater cost kept them from replacing lead acid batteries.
Another cell only recently displaced from the commercial market is the
Weston cell. For decades the Weston cell, consisting of an
amalgamated cadmium anode and a mercurous sulfate cathode in a cadmium
sulfate solution, was used as a voltage reference standard in
industrial instruments. Introduction of new solid state devices and
circuits has displaced the Weston cell from most of its former
industrial applications, and it is no longer commercially available.
84
-------
specified operating conditions and allow comparison of the ability of
different battery systems to meet the requirements of a given
application. Figure III-2 (Pagell?) illustrates how these measures of
performance are used to compare battery systems with each other and
with alternative power sources.
The suitability of a battery for a given application is determined not
only by its voltage and current characteristics, and the available
power and energy. In many applications, storage characteristics and
the length of time during which a battery may be operational are also
important. The temperature dependence of battery performance is also
important for some applications. Storage characteristics of batteries
are measured by shelf-life and by self-discharge, the rate at which
the available stored energy decreases over time. Self-discharge is
generally measured in percent per unit time and is usually dependent
on temperature. In some battery types, self-discharge differs during
storage and use of the battery. For rechargeable cells, cycle-life,
the number of times a battery may be recharged before failure, is
often an important parameter.
Battery Applications and Requirements - Batteries are used in so many
places that it would be impractical to try to name all of them. Each
application presents a unique set of battery performance requirements
which may place primary emphasis on any specific performance parameter
or combination of parameters. The applications maybe useful however,
in considering groups for which the general purpose and primary
performance requirements are similar. Such groups are shown in Table
III-2.
87
-------
The essential parts of an electrochemical cell designed as a portable
source of electrical power are the same regardless of the size of the
unit. From the smallest cell used in a watch to the massive storage
batteries used in telephone branch exchanges there is an anode, some-
times called the negative plate, a cathode, also called the
positive plate, and electrolyte. The anode and cathode are referred
to by the general term electrodes. One or both electrodes consist of
a support or grid which serves as a mechancial support and
current collector, and the active material which actually undergoes
electrochemical reaction to produce the current and voltage
characteristics of the cell. Sometimes the active material is the
electrode structure itself. The combination of an inert current
collecting support and active material is an electrode system. For
convenience, in this document as well as in many publications, the
terms cathode or anode are used to designate the cathode system or the
anode system.
Most practical modern batteries contain insulating porous separators
between the electrodes. The resulting assembly of electrodes and
electrolyte is contained in a protective case, and terminals attached
to the cathode and anode are held in place by an insulating material.
The operating characteristics of a battery are described by several
different parameters referred to collectively as the battery
performance. Voltage and current will vary with the electrical load
placed on the battery. In some batteries, the voltage will remain
relatively constant as the load is changed because internal resistance
and electrode polarization are not large. Polarization is the measure
of voltage decrease at an electrode when current density is increased.
Current density is the current produced by a specified area of
electrode - frequently milliamperes per square centimeter. Thus, the
larger the electrode surface the greater the current produced by the
cell unit at a given voltage.
Battery power is the instantaneous product of current and voltage.
Specific power is the power per unit weight of battery; power density
is the power per unit volume. Watts per pound and
watts per cubic foot, are common measures of these performance
characteristics. Power delivered by any battery depends on how it is
being used, but to maximize the power delivered by a battery the
operating voltage must be substantially less than the open-circuit or
no-load voltage. A power curve is sometimes used to characterize
battery performance under load, but because the active materials are
being consumed, the power curve will change with time. Because
batteries are self-contained power supplies, additional ratings of
specific energy and energy density must be specified. These are
commonly measured in units of watthours per pound and
watthours per cubic foot, respectively. These latter measures
characterize the total energy available from the battery under
86
-------
Remote location operation such as arctic meteorological stations and
orbiting spacecraft requires very high reliability and long operating
life. Cost is usually of no consequence because the overall cost of
launching a satellite or travel to a remote location overshadows any
possible battery cost. Rechargeability is required because solar
cells (solid state devices producing small electrical power levels
directly from solar illumination) can be used to recharge the
batteries during sunlight periods to replace the energy used in brief
periods of high power demand for transmissions or satellite equipment
operation. High power density for meteorological stations and high
specific power for satellites is therefore more important than high
energy density or high specific energy because the rechargeability
requirement means energy can be replaced. Additional requirements are
reliable operation over a wider range of temperatures than is usually
experienced in temperate earth regions, and sealed operation to
prevent electrolyte loss by gassing on charge cycles.
Voltage leveling and voltage standards are similar. Voltage leveling
is a requirement for certain telephone systems. The batteries may be
maintained in a charged state, but voltage fluctuations must be
rapidly damped and some electrochemical systems are ideally suited to
this purpose. An additional requirement is the provision of standby
power at very stable voltages. Such operation is an electrochemical
analogue of a surge tank of a very large area, maintaining a constant
liquid head despite many rapid but relatively small inflows and
outflows. The use of batteries for secondary voltage standards
requires stability of voltage over time and under fluctuating loads.
Though similar to the voltage leveling application, the devices or
instruments may be portable and are not connected to another
electrical system. Frequently power is supplied by one battery type
and controlled by a different battery type. Usually cost is a
secondary consideration, but not completely ignored. For secondary
voltage standards, wide temperature ranges can usually be avoided, but
a flat voltage-temperature response is important over the temperature
range of application. Power and energy density as well as specific
power and energy also become secondary considerations in both of these
applications.
Battery Function and Manufacture
The extremely varied requirements outlined above have led to the
design and production of many types of batteries. Because battery
chemistry is the first determiner of performance, practically every
known combination of electrode reactions has been studied - at least
on paper. Many of the possible electrode combinations are in use in
batteries today. Others are being developed to better meet present or
projected needs. Some have become obsolete, as noted earlier. Short
discussions on the electrochemistry of batteries, battery
89
-------
Table III-2
1 .
Purpose
Portable electric power
Application
toys,
flashlights,
calculators
pocket
2. Electric power storage
3. Standby or emergency
electrical power
4. Remote location electrical power
5. Voltage leveling
6. Secondary voltage standard
automobile batteries, solar
powered electrical systems
emergency lighting for
hallways and stairways,
life raft radio beacons
spacecraft, meteorological
stations, railway signals
telephone exchanges and PBXs
regulated power supplies
The requirements for a flashlight battery are: low cost, long shelf
life, suitability for intermittent use, and moderate operating life.
The household user expects to purchase replacement cells at low cost
after a reasonable operating life, but does expect long periods before
use or between uses.
An automobile battery must be rechargeable, produce large currents to
start an engine, operate both on charge and discharge over a wide
temperature range, have long life, and be relatively inexpensive when
replacement is necessary. The user looks for high power density,
rechargeability, and low cost.
Standby lighting, and life raft emergency radio beacons represent two
similar applications. For standby lighting power in stairways and
halls, the battery is usually a storage battery maintained in a
constant state of readiness by the electrical power system and is
activated by failure of that primary system. Such a battery system
can be activated and then restored to its original state many times
and hence can be more expensive and can have complex associated
equipment. Weight is no problem, but reliable immediate response,
high energy density and power density are important. The emergency
radio beacon in a life raft is required to be 100 percent reliable
after storage of up to several years. It will not be tested before
use, and when activated will be expected to operate continuously until
completely discharged. Light weight may be important. Instantaneous
response is not a requirement although a short time for activation is
expected.
88
-------
TABLE II1-3
ANODE HALF-CELL REACTIONS (electrolyte)
Cd + 20H- < > Cd(OH)2 + 2e (alkaline)
Ca < > Ca*2 + 2e (nonaqueous inorganic)
Pb + H2S04 < > PbS04 + 2H* + 2e (acidic)
Zn < > Zn*2 + 2e (acidic)
Li < > Li* + e (molten salt, organic, nonaqueous inorganic)
Mg < > Mg*2 + 2e (sea water)
Zn + 20H- < > Zn(OH)2 + 2e (alkaline)
TABLE II1-4
CATHODE HALF-CELL REACTIONS (electrolyte)
e + NiOOH + H20 < > Ni(OH)2 + OH- (alkaline)
4e + Ag202 + 2H20 < > 2Ag + 40H- (alkaline)
2e + Ag20 + H20 < > 2Ag + 20H- (alkaline)
2e + HgO + H20 < > Hg + 20H- (alkaline)
2e + Pb02 + S04-2 + 4H* < > PbS04 + 2H20 (acid)
2e + 2Mn02 + 2NH4C1 + Zn+2 <> Mn203 + H20 + Zn(NH3)2Cl2 (acid
2e + 2AgCl + Zn+2 < > 2Ag + ZnCl2 (acid)
e + TiS2 + Li* < > TiS2:Li (propylene carbonate)
2e + 2S02 < > S204~2 (acetonitrile)
4e + 2SOC12 + 4 Li* < > 4 LiCl + (S0)2 (thionyl chloride)
2e + I2 + 2 Li* < > 2 Lil [poly(2 vinyl)propylene]
2e + PbI2 + 2Li* < > 2 Lil + Pb (nonaqueous inorganic)
2e + PbS + 2Li* < > Li2S + Pb (nonaqueous inorganic)
e ป Mn02 + HZ0 < > MnOOH + OH- (alkaline)
e + MnOOH + H20 < > Mn(OH)2 + OH- (alkaline)
8e + m-C6H4(N02)2 + 6NH4* + Mg*2 < > m-bis-CซH4(NHOH)2
+ 6NH3 + Mg(OH)2 (ammonia)
2e + PbCl2 < > Pb + 2C1- (sea water)
e + CuCl < > Cu + Cl- (sea water)
e + AgCl < > Ag + Cl- (sea water)
4e + 0, + 2H,0 < > 40H- (alkaline)
91
-------
construction, and battery manufacturing are presented to help orient
the reader.
Battery Chemistry - The essential function of the electrodes in a
battery is to convert chemical energy into electrical energy and
thereby to drive electrical current through an external load. The
driving force is measured in volts, and the current is measured in
amperes. The discrete charges carrying current in the external
circuit, or load, are electrons, which bear a negative charge. The
driving force is the sum of the electromotive force, or EMF, of the
half-cell reactions occurring at the anode and the cathode. The
voltage delivered by a cell is characteristic of the overall chemical
reaction in the cell. The theoretical open-circuit (no-load) voltage
of a cell or battery can be calculated from chemical thermodynamic
data developed from non-electrochemical experiments. The cell voltage
is related to the Gibbs free energy of the overall chemical reaction
by an equation called the Nernst equation. The variable factors are
temperature and concentration of the reactants and products.
Voltages (or more properly the EMF) of single electrode reactions are
often used in comparing anodes of cathodes of different types of
cells. These single electrode (or half-cell) voltages are actually
the voltages of complete cells in which one electrode is the standard
hydrogen electrode having an arbitrarily assigned value of zero. In
all such calculations, equilibrium conditions are assumed.
In this brief discussion, only the net half-cell reactions are discus-
sed. The very complex subject of electrode kinetics, involving a
study of exactly which ionic or solid species are present and in what
quantities, can be found in any of several electrochemistry textbooks.
The anode supplies electrons to the external circuit - the half-cell
reaction is an oxidation. The cathode accepts electrons from the
external circuit - the reaction is a reduction. Half-cell reactions
can occur in either forward or reverse direction, at least in theory.
Some, however, cannot be reversed in a practical cell. Tables III-3
and II1-4 show the reactions as they are used in practical cells for
delivery of power. In those cells that are rechargeable, charging
reverses the direction of the reaction as written in the tables.
90
-------
Long shelf life is frequently a requirement for batteries. Shelf life
is limited both by deterioration of battery separators and by
corrosion (self-discharge) of electrodes which decreases the available
electrical energy and may also result in other types of cell failure.
As an example, corrosion of the zinc anode in Leclanche cells may
result in perforation of the anode and leakage of the electrolyte.
Compatability of the active material of the electrodes in contact with
the electrolyte to minimize these self-discharge reactions is an
electrochemical engineering problem. Two of the approaches to this
problem are outlined here.
Some applications require only one-time use, and the electrolyte is
injected into the cell just before use, thereby avoiding long time
contact of electrode with electrolyte. The result is a reserve
battery. One reserve battery design (now abandoned) used a solid
electrolyte and the battery was constructed in two parts which were
pressed together to activate it. The parts could be separated to
deactivate the battery. Up to 25 cycles of activation-deactivation
were reported to be possible. Reserve batteries are usually found in
critical applications where high reliability after uncertain storage
time justifies the extra expense of the device.
In other applications, long shelf life in the activated state is
required. This allows repeated intermittent use of the battery, but
is achieved at the price of somewhat lower certainty of operation than
is provided by reserve cells. Special fabrication methods and
materials then must be used to avoid self-discharge by corrosion of
the anode. In Leclanche cells, the zinc is protected from the acid
electrolyte by amalgamating it; in some magnesium cells a chemical
reaction with the electrolyte forms a protective film which is
subsequently disrupted when current is drained; in some lithium bat-
teries, the very thin film formed by chemical reaction with
electrolyte conducts lithium ions at a rate sufficiently high to be
usable for power delivery. All three types of cells require the use
of specific chemicals and special assembly techniques.
Operation of cells in the rechargeable mode places additional
constraints on the chemical components and construction materials. In
aqueous-electrolyte cells, vented operation may be possible, as with
lead acid automotive and nickel cadmium batteries. Or, the cells may
be sealed because remote operation prevents servicing and water
replacement. Cells with liquid organic or inorganic electrolyte also
are sealed to prevent escape of noxious vapors. Organic liquids used
in cells manufactured in the U. S. today include: methyl formate,
acetonitrile, methyl acetate, and dioxolane. Inorganic liquids
include thionyl chloride and ammonia.
Sealed operation of rechargable cells introduces two major problems
relating to pressure buildup that must be accommodated by design and
93
-------
Most of the battery systems currently produced are based on aqueous
electrolytes. However, lithium and thermal batteries, and at least
one magnesium cell, have non-aqueous electrolyte. Because lithium
reacts vigorously with water, organic or non-aqueous inorganic
electrolytes are usually, but not always, used with this very high
energy anode metal. Thermal batteries are made with the electrolyte
in a solid form and are activated by melting the electrolyte with a
pyrotechnic device just prior to use. One type of magnesium reserve
cell uses a liquid ammonia electrolyte which, is injected under
pressure just prior to use.
In aqueous systems, any of the anode reactions can be coupled with any
of the cathode reactions to make a working cell, as long as the
electrolytes are matched and the overall cell reaction can be balanced
at electrical neutrality. As examples:
Leclanche:
anode: Zn < > Zn+2 + 2e (acid)
cathode: 2e + 2Mn02 + 2NH4C1 + Zn+2 < > MN203 + H20 + Zn(NH3)2Cl2 (acid)
cell: Zn + 2Mn02 + 2NH4C1 < > Mn203 + H20 + Zn(NH3)2Cl2
Alkaline Manganese;
anode: Zn + 20H- < > Zn(OH)2 + 2e (alkaline)
cathode: e + Mn02 + H20 < > MnOOH + OH~ (alkaline)
e + MnOOH- + H20 < > Mn(OH)2 + OH- (alkaline)
cell: Zn + Mn02 + 2H20 < > Zn(OH)2 + Mn(OH)2
One essential feature of an electrochemical cell is that all
conduction within the electrolyte must be ionic. In aqueous
electrolytes the conductive ion may be H+ or OH-. In some cases metal
ions carry some of the current. Any electronic conduction between the
electrodes inside the cells constitutes a short circuit. The driving
force established between the dissimilar electrodes will be dissipated
in an unusable form through an internal short circuit. For this
reason, a great amount of engineering and design effort is applied to
prevent formation of possible electronic conduction paths and at the
same time to achieving low internal resistance to minimize heating and
power loss.
Close spacing of electrodes and porous electrode separators leads to
low internal electrolyte resistance. But if the separator
deteriorates in the chemical environment, or breaks under mechanical
shock, it may permit electrode-electrode contact resulting in cell
destruction. Likewise, in rechargeable cells, where high rates of
charging lead to rough deposits of the anode metal, a porous separator
may be penetrated by metal "trees" or dendrites, causing a short
circuit. The chemical compatibility of separators and electrolytes is
an important factor in battery design.
92
-------
than ambient temperature. For some high-power drain applications such
as prime mover power plants and central station power, it is feasable
to build a high-temperature system to take advantage of the improved
electrode kinetics and reduced electrolyte resistance. Of course the
kinetics of corrosion processes are also enhanced, so additional
materials problems must be overcome.
For the majority of cells that must be operated at a temperature
determined by the environment, the only practical way to achieve
greater power outputs is to increase the active surface area of the
electrodes. The usual approach to increasing surface area is to
subdivide the electrode material. Powdered or granular active
material is formed into an electrode with or without a structural
support. The latter may also function as a current collector.
The limitation to increasing the surface area is the fact that a mass
of finely divided active material immersed in electrolyte will tend to
lose surface area with time, a phenomenon similar to Ostwald ripening
of silver halide photograph emulsion. The smaller particles, which
provide the large surface area, dissolve in the electrolyte, and the
larger particles grow even larger. The nature of the electrolyte and
active mass is the main determinant of the extent of this phenomenon.
A further limitation to the power drain available from porous
electrodes results from a phenomenon called concentration
polarization. Total ampere-hours available are not affected by this
process, but the energy delivered is limited. In a thick porous body
such as a tube or pocket type electrode, the electrolyte within the
narrow, deep pores of the electrode can become overloaded with ionic
products of electrode reaction or depleated of ions required for
electrode reaction. For instance, at the negative plate of a
lead-acid battery, sulfate ions are required for the reaction:
Pb + S04 < > PbS04 + 2e
When an automotive battery is fully charged the concentration of
sulfuric acid, hence sulfate ions, is very high. Large currents can
be sustained for sufficient time to crank a cold engine until it
starts. However, when the battery is "low" (i.e. the sulfate ion
concentration throughout the battery is low) sufficient sulfate ions
are initially present in the pores of the negative plate to sustain
the negative plate reaction for a brief period of cranking the engine,
then the sulfate is so drastically depleted that the cranking current
cannot be sustained. If the battery is allowed to "rest" a few
minutes, the rather slow process of diffusion will replenish sulfate
ions in the interior of the pores and in effect return to effective
use that "deep" surface area. The battery appears to come to "life"
again. Cranking currents will again deplete the supply of ions and
the battery is "dead." If a "light" load, such as a radio is placed on
95
-------
materials. Pressure changes normally occur during discharge-charge
cycling and must be accommodated by the battery case and seal designs.
Many applications also require cells to accept overcharging. In
nickel-cadmium cells, the oxygen or hydrogen pressure would build to
explosive levels in a short time on overcharge. As a result, cells
are designed with excess uncharged negative material so that when the
nickel electrode is completely charged, the cadmium electrode will
continue to charge, and oxygen evolved at the nickel electrode will
migrate under pressure to the cadmium and be reduced before hydrogen
evolution occurs. A steady state is reached where continuous
overcharge produces no harmful effects from pressure and no net change
in the composition of electrodes or electrolytes. The excess
uncharged negative material ensures that hydrogen is not evolved.
Oxygen recombination is used because the alternative reaction of
hydrogen recombination at an excess uncharged positive electrode
proceeds at very low rates unless expensive special catalysts are
present.
Cell reversal is the other operational phenomenon requiring chemical
and electrochemical compensation. Cell reversal occurs when a battery
of cells is discharged to a point that one cell in the battery has
delivered all of its capacity (i.e., the active material in at least
one electrode is used up) but other cells are still delivering power.
The current then travels through the depleted cell in the same
direction but the cell becomes an electrolytic cell.
In a nickel-cadmium battery, cell reversal results in hydrogen
generation at the nickel electrode or oxygen generation at the cadmium
electrode. Cells can be designed to avoid pressure build-up in those
instances where reversal may occur. One method is the incorporation
of an antipolar mass (APM) in the nickel electrode. The APM is
Cd(OH)2. When cell reversal occurs, the APM is reduced to cadmium
metal. However, by using the proper amount of APM, oxygen generated
at the cell anode builds to sufficient pressure to react with the
metallic cadmium in the APM before all of the Cd(OH)2 is reduced.
Thus, the oxygen generation-reduction cycle discussed above is
established and hydrogen evolution is avoided. For the oxygen cycle
to function for either overcharge or cell reversal, the
-------
specific operations are illustrated by reference to particular battery
types. Ten battery types were chosen to illustrate a range of
materials, applications, and sizes. Figures II1-3 through II1-12
(Pages 118-127) are drawings or cutaway views of these 10 batteries.
Figures 111-13 through 111-20 (Pages 128-135) are simplified
manufacturing process flow diagrams for these same batteries.
Reference to the figures should help to understand the discussion.
Anodes
Anodes are prepared by at least four basic methods depending on the
strength of the material and the application, i.e., high current drain
or low current drain. Once the electrodes are fabricated they may
require a further step, formation, to render them active. As noted
earlier, anodes are metals when they are in their final or fully
charged form in a battery. Some anodes such as lithium anodes, and
zinc anodes for some Leclanche cells, are made directly by cutting and
drawing or stamping the pure metal sheet. Lithium, because of its
flexibility, is either alloyed with a metal such as aluminum, or is
attached to a grid of nickel or other rigid metal. Drawn sheet zinc
anodes are rigid enough to serve as a cell container.
Zinc anodes for some alkaline-manganese batteries are made from a
mixture of zinc powder, mercury, and potassium hydroxide. Zinc is
amalgamated to prevent hydrogen evolution and thus, corrosion at the
anode.
Anodes for most lead-acid batteries and some nickel-cadmium cells are
prepared from a paste of a compound of the anode metal (lead oxides or
cadmium hydroxide, respectively). Additives may be mixed in, and then
the paste is applied to a support structure and dried.
The techniques for preparing the compounds of the anode metal may be
unique to the battery manufacturing process. For pocket-type nickel
cadmium batteries, cadmium metal is oxidized in a high temperature air
stream, then hydrated to cadmium hydroxide. Graphite, to increase
conductivity, and iron oxide, to keep the cadmium in a porous state
during cycling, may be mixed into the cadmium hydroxide.
Organic expanders, lampblack, and barium sulfate are added to the
paste mixture for lead-acid battery anodes. The expanders maintain
the lead in a porous state during charge-discharge cycling. The
organic expanders coat the lead particles, preventing agglomeration.
Barium sulfate holds the lead grains apart. Lampblack aids in the
formation step.
In addition to physically applying the active material to the support
structure as a metal or compound, some anode active materials are
prepared from soluble metal compounds. High-rate nickel-cadmium
97
-------
the nearly "dead" battery the diffusion process may be able to supply
sufficient ions on a continuing basis so that the battery appears to
be functioning normally.
The above example is familiar to many people. Similar phenomena occur
in any battery with porous electrodes. In some primary batteries the
discharge products may increase in concentration to a point of
insolubility and permanently block off active material surface. Thus
a battery may deliver significantly fewer ampere-hours to a
predetermined cut-off voltage when used at the C/2 ampere rate than at
the C/20 ampere rate where C is the theoretical ampere-hour capacity
of the battery and the numerical denominator is in hours.
Concentration polarization also limits the rate at which rechargeable
batteries can be charged. Use of higher charging voltages to shorten
the recharge time can result in gassing (e.g., production of hydrogen
or oxygen in aqueous electrolyte cells) because the electrolyte
constituents required for charging become depleted in the vicinity of
the electrode and a different, unwanted reaction begins to carry the
current. This is an inefficient mode of operation. In rechargeable
cells there is an additional consideration in preparing porous
electrodes. The surface area of the electrodes must be substantially
the same after recharge as it was after the initial formation
charging. It is of little benefit to provide large surface area in
the manufacture of the cell if it cannot be sustained during a usable
number of cycles.
The steps used to manufacture batteries with stable,
large-surface-area electrodes are outlined for several types of
batteries to show similarities and differences in methods. Further
details of techniques for each specific battery type are given in
Section V.
Battery Manufacture - The details of battery construction vary with
the type of battery. For the usual liquid electrolyte batteries the
steps are: manufacture of structural components, preparation of
electrodes, and assembly into cells. Fabrication of the structural
components cell cases or caps, terminal fittings or fixtures,
electrode support grids, separators, seals, and covers are all
manufacturing processes not directly involving the electrochemistry of
the cell. These components may be fabricated by the battery producer,
or they may be supplied by other manufacturers. The steps considered
to be battery manufacturing operations are: anode and cathode
fabrication, and ancillary operations (all operations not primarily
associated with anode and cathode manufacture, or structural component
fabrication).
Discussion of the manufacturing operations is divided into three
parts-anodes, cathodes, and ancillary operations. In each part,
96
-------
Primary battery anodes are almost always prepared in the active form,
and require no formation step. Rechargeable battery anodes almost
always go through a formation step.
Cathodes
Cathode active materials are never metals despite the common usage of
the metal type to designate the cathode active material. "Nickel"
cathodes are actually nickel hydroxide; "mercury" cathodes, are
actually mercury oxide; "manganese" cathodes (alkaline-manganese
battery) are manganese oxide (pyrolusite). Non-metals such as iodine
(lithium-iodine battery) and meta-dinitrobenzene (magnesium-ammonia
reserve battery) are the other kinds of cathode active materials used.
Manufacturing of cathodes for batteries is not necessarily more
complex than that of the anodes, however, cathode production
encompasses a broader variety of raw materials for use in different
battery types.
Cathode active materials are weak electronic conductors at best, and
usually possess slight mechanical strength. Therefore, most cathodes
must have a metallic current conducting support structure. In
addition, a conducting material is frequently incorporated into the
active mass. Structural reinforcement may be in the form of a wire
mesh, a perforated metal tube, or inert fibrous material (woven or
felted). Conducting materials added to the cathode active mass are
almost invariably carbon or nickel.
Preparation of the cathode active material in the battery plant is
usually restricted to the metal oxides or hydroxides. Cathode active
materials for two of the ten battery types discussed here, nickel
hydroxide, and leady oxide, are specific to battery manufacturing and
are usually produced in the battery plant. Cathode active materials
for the other types are usually purchased directly from chemical
suppliers. For nickel-cadmium pressed powder (pocket-electrode) cells
nickel hydroxide is produced by dissolution of nickel powder in
sulfuric acid. The nickel sulfate solution is reacted with sodium
hydroxide. The resulting nickel hydroxide is centrifuged, mixed with
some graphite, spray dried, compacted, and mixed with additional
graphite. For high-rate cells, nickel oxide is precipitated in the
pores of a nickel plaque immersed in nickel nitrate. A process
analogous to those described for preparation of high-rate cadmium
anodes is used. Lead-acid batteries require a specific oxidation
state of lead oxide (24 to 30 percent free lead) referred to by
industry as "leady oxide," which is produced by the ball mill or
Barton process. This leady oxide is used for both the anode and the
cathode. Chemical production of cathode active materials which are
used specifically for batteries is considered part of battery
manufacturing usually as an ancillary operation.
99
-------
battery anodes are prepared by impregnating a porous nickel plaque
with a solution of cadmium nitrate. The plaque is transferred to an
alkali solution or is made the cathode of an electrolysis cell.
Either technique precipitates the cadmium as the hydroxide which is
subsequently converted to metallic cadmium in the forming step.
To sum up, the active mass for anodes is usually prepared as the
massive metal, finely divided metal, finely divided metal compound, or
as a soluble salt of the metal which is precipitated onto a carrier or
support structure. In most batteries, there is an additional support
structure, such as the paste for the negative active mass of a lead-
acid battery which is pressed into a grid of lead or a lead alloy.
Different types of nickel-cadmium batteries exemplify three approaches
to fabrication of anodes. As noted above, the cadmium for pocket type
anodes is admixed with other materials then loaded into the pockets of
a perforated nickel or steel sheet. The method of precipitating an
insoluble cadmium compound from a solution of a soluble cadmium salt
in the pores of a porous powder metallurgical nickel plaque was also
described above. For some cells, highly porous cadmium powder is
mixed with cadmium compounds and pasted onto a support structure.
Chemical production of anode active materials which are specifically
used for batteries, is considered part of battery manufacturing. This
process is usually considered as an ancillary operation.
The final step in anode preparation for many types of batteries is
formation, or charging, of the active mass. The term "formation" was
first used to describe the process by which Plante plates were
prepared for lead-acid batteries. In that process, lead sheet or
another form of pure lead was placed in sulfuric acid and made anodic,
generating a surface layer of lead sulfate, then cathodic, reducing
that layer to lead which remained in the finely divided state.
Repeated cycling generated a deep layer of finely divided lead for the
anodes. Few lead-acid anodes are made that way today, but the term
"formation" has remained to designate the final electrochemical steps
in preparation of electrodes for any type of battery.
Formation may be carried out on individual electrodes or on pairs of
electrodes in a tank of suitable electrolyte, e.g. sulfuric acid for
lead-acid battery plates, or potassium hydroxide for nickel-cadmium
battery electrodes. Formation of anodes by themselves requires an
inert, gassing, counter-electrode. More often the electrodes for a
battery are formed in pairs. The cathodes are arranged in the tank in
opposition to the anodes or are interspaced between the anodes. Fre-
quently, electrodes are formed in the cell or battery after final
assembly. However the electrodes are physically arranged, current is
passed through the electrodes to charge them. For some battery types,
charge-discharge cycling up to seven times is used to form the
electrode.
98
-------
state after forming. For some cell types, chemical processes rather
than electrolysis are used to form nickel hydroxide and silver oxide
cathodes or reactive materials prior to physical application to the
electrode support.
Ancillary Operations
Ancillary operations are all those operations unique to the battery
manufacturing point source category which are not included
specifically under anode or cathode fabrication. They are operations
associated mainly with cell assembly and battery assembly. Also
chemical production for anode or cathode active materials used only
for batteries (discussed above) is considered an ancillary operations.
Cell assembly is done in several ways. The electrodes for rectangular
nickel cadmium batteries are placed in a stack with a layer of
separator material between each electrode pair and inserted into the
battery case. Almost all lead-acid batteries are assembled in a case
of hard rubber or plastic with a porous separator between electrode
pairs. The cells or batteries are filled with electrolyte after
assembly.
Cylindrical cells of the Leclanche or the alkaline-manganese type are
usually assembled by insertion of the individual components into the
container. For Leclanche batteries, a paper liner which may be
impregnated with a mercury salt is inserted in the zinc can; then
depolarizer mixture, a carbon rod, and electrolyte are added. The
cell is closed and sealed, tested, aged, and tested again. Batteries
are assembled from cylindrical cells to produce higher voltages.
Several round cells can be placed in one battery container and series
connections are made internally. Two terminals are added and the
batteries are sealed.
Miniature button cells of the alkaline-manganese and mercury-zinc
types are assembled from pellets of the electrode active mass plus
separator discs, or the electrodes may be pressed directly in the cell
case to assure electrical contact and to facilitate handling during
assembly. <
Leclanche foliar cell batteries are a specialty product which
illustrate the possibility of drastically modifying the conventional
battery configuration when a need exists. The bipolar electrodes and
separators are heat sealed at the edges. After each separator is
positioned, electrolyte is applied to it before the next electrode is
placed. When the battery is completed the entire assembly is
sandwiched between two thin aluminum sheets. Assembly is completely
automated. The resulting six-volt battery is about three inches by
four inches by three-sixteenths of an inch thick and has high specific
101
-------
Manganese dioxide for Leclanche cells and alkaline-manganese cells is
mixed with graphite to increase conductivity. For Leclanche cells,
the mixture may be compacted around the carbon cathode rod, or is
poured into the cell as a loose powder and compacted as the carbon rod
is inserted. For alkaline-manganese cells, analagous procedures are
used except that the cathode active material takes the shape of a
cylinder against the wall of the nickel-plated steel can and no carbon
rod is used. In the foliar-cell Leclanche battery the manganese
dioxide is printed onto a conducting plastic sheet. The other side of
the sheet bears the zinc anode film to produce a bipolar electrode.
(Bipolar electrodes perform the same function as an anode and cathode
of two separate cells connected in series.)
The magnesium-ammonia reserve battery uses a different type of cathode
structure. A glass fiber pad containing the meta-dinitrobenzene (m-
DNB), carbon, and ammonium thiocyanate is placed against a stainless
steel cathode current collector. Activation of the battery causes
liquid ammonia to flood the cell space, saturate the pad, and dissolve
the dry acidic salt (ammonium thiocyanate) and the cathode active
material (m-DNB). The m-DNB functions as a dissolved cathodic
depolarizer.
The cathode active material for the carbon-zinc (air) cell is oxygen
from the air. Therefore, the principal function of the cathode struc-
ture is to provide a large area of conductive carbon surface in the
immediate vicinity of the electrolyte-air contact region. Air must
have free access through the exposed pores of the rigid structure.
Electrolyte in the wetted surface pores must have a continuous path to
the body of the electrolyte to provide the ionic conduction to the
anode. The porous carbon body is wetproofed on the electrolyte
surface to prevent deep penetration and saturation or flooding of the
pores by electrolyte.
The mercury-zinc cell uses a compacted cathode active material.
Mercuric oxide mixed with graphite is pressed into pellets for use in
miniature cells, or is pressed directly into the cell case.
In sum, cathode fabrication almost always includes a rigid, current-
carrying structure to support the active material. The active
material may be applied to the support as a paste, deposited in a
porous structure by precipitation from a solution, fixed to the
support as a compacted pellet, or may be dissolved in an electrolyte
which has been immobilized in a porous inert structure.
The formation step for cathodes of rechargeable batteries is much the
same as that for anodes. Nickel cathodes may be formed outside or
inside the assembled cell in a potassium hydroxide electrolyte. Lead
cathodes for lead-acid batteries are handled in a manner similar to
that used to make anodes, except they remain in the lead peroxide
100
-------
and assemble the final battery products without performing all of the
manufacturing process steps on-site. Other plants only manufacture
battery components, and perform battery manufacturing process
operations without producing finished batteries. Finally, some
battery plants have fully integrated on-site production operations
including metal forming and inorganic chemicals manufacture which are
not specific to battery manufacturing.
The reactive materials in most modern batteries include one or more of
the following toxic metals: cadmium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc.
Cadmium and zinc are used as anode materials in a variety of cells,
and lead is used in both the cathode and anode in the familiar lead-
acid storage battery. Mercuric oxide is used as the cathode reactant
in mercury-zinc batteries, and mercury is also widely used to
amalgamate the zinc anode to reduce corrosion and self discharge of
the cell. Nickel hydroxide is the cathode reactant in rechargeable
nickel cadmium cells, and nickel or nickel plated steel may also serve
as a support for other reactive materials. As a result of this
widespread use, these toxic metals are found in wastewater discharges
and solid wastes from almost all battery plants. Estimated total
annual consumption of these materials in battery manufacture is shown
in Table III-5. Since only lead-acid batteries are reclaimed on a
significant scale, essentially all of the cadmium, mercury, nickel,
and zinc consumed in battery manufacture will eventually be found in
liquid or solid wastes either from battery manufacturers or from
battery users.
Water is used in battery manufacturing plants in preparing reactive
materials and electrolytes, in depositing reactive materials on
supporting electrode structures, in charging electrodes and removing
impurities, and in washing finished cells, production equipment and
manufacturing areas. Volumes of discharge and patterns of water use
as well as the scale of production operations, wastewater pollutants,
and prevalent treatment practices vary widely among different battery
types, but show significant similarities among batteries employing a
common anode reactant and electrolyte. Table II1-6 (Pagel40) and the
following discussion summarizes the characteristics of plants
manufacturing batteries in each of the groups based on anode and
electrolyte.
103
-------
power and power density. Shelf life is several years and operating
lifetime depends on drain rate.
A contrasting battery is the carbon-zinc (air) cell. The cast amalga-
mated zinc anodes positioned on each side of a porous carbon air elec-
trode are attached to the cover of the cell. Dry potassium hydroxide
and lime are placed in the bottom of the cell case, the cover is put
in place and sealed, and a bag of dessicant is placed in the filler
opening. The cell is shipped dry and the user adds water to activate
it. This cell has a very low power density but a very long operating
life.
Ancillary operations for this document, beside specific chemical
production, include some dry operations as well as cell washing,
battery washing, the washing of equipment, floors and operating
personnel. Because the degree of automation varies from plant to
plant for a given battery type, the specific method of carrying out
the ancillary operations is not as closely identifiable with a battery
type as are the anode and cathode fabrication operations.
INDUSTRY SUMMARY
The battery manufacturing industry in the United States includes 247
active plants operated by 132 different companies. In all, the
industry produced approximately 1.8 million tons of batteries valued
at 2.1 billion dollars in 1976, and employed over 33 thousand workers.
As Figure 111-21 (Page 136) shows, the value of industry products has
increased significantly in recent years. This growth has been
accompanied by major shifts in battery applications, and the emergence
of new types of cells and the decline and phase - out of other cell
types as commercially significant products* Present research activity
in battery technology and continuing changes in electronics and
transportation make it probable that rapid changes in battery
manufacture will continue. The rapid changes in battery manufacturers
is reflected in the age of battery manufacturing plants. Although a
few plants are more than 60 years old, battery manufacturing plants
are fairly new with over half reported to have been built in the past
twenty years. Most have been modified even more recently. Figure
111-22 (page 137) displays where battery plants are located throughout
the U.S. and within EPA regions.
Plants commonly manufacture a variety of cells and batteries differing
in size, shape, and performance characteristics. Further, a
signficant number of plants produce cells using different reactive
couples but with a common anode material, (e.g., mercury-zinc and
alkaline manganese batteries both use a zinc anode). Thirteen plants
currently produce cells or batteries using two or more different anode
materials and therefore are considered in two or more subcategories.
Some battery manufacturing plants purchase finished cell components
102
-------
process water use and discharge include wet scrubbers, electrolyte
preparation, cell wash, floor wash, and employee showers and hand wash
intended to remove process chemicals. The most significant pollutants
carried by these waste streams are the toxic metals, cadmium, nickel,
and silver. The waste streams are predominantly alkaline and
frequently contain high levels of suspended solids including metal
hydroxide precipitates.
Treatment commonly used included settling or filtration for the
removal of solids at 8 of 9 plants which indicated process wastewater
discharge; two plants also indicated the use of coagulants, and seven
plants use pH adjustment. Two plants indicated the use of material
recovery, five plants have sludges hauled by a contractor and one
plant has its sludge landfilled. On-site observations at several
plants indicate that the treatment provided is often rudimentary and
of limited effectiveness. Battery process wastewater discharges from
five cadmium anode battery manufacturing plants in the data base flow
directly to surface waters, and four plants discharge to municipal
sewers. Recently, one direct discharge plant in the data base has
added additional treatment including 100 percent recycle and has no
discharge of wastewater. Currently there are three plants which moved
their operations to other plants, three plants with no discharge to
navigable waters of the United States and four plants which discharge
wastewater to surface waters. Wastewater treatment provided was not
related to the discharge destination.
Cadmium anode batteries are produced in a broad range of sizes and
configurations corresponding to varied applications. They range from
small cylindrical cells with capacities of less than one ampere-hour
to large rectangular batteries for industrial applications with
capacities in excess of 100 ampere-hours. In general, batteries
manufactured in the smaller cell sizes are sealed, whereas the larger
units are of "open" or vented construction.
Manufacturing processes vary in accordance with these product
variations and among different facilities producing similar products.
Raw materials vary accordingly. All manufacturers use cadmium or
cadmium salts (generally nitrate or oxide) to produce cell anodes, and
nickel, silver, mercury or their salts to produce cell cathodes. The
specific materials chosen depend on details of the process as
discussed in Section V. Generally supporting materials are also used
in manufacturing the electrodes to provide mechanical strength and
conductivity. Raw materials for the electrode support structures
commonly include nickel powder and nickel or nickel plated steel
screen. Additional raw materials include nylon, polypropylene and
other materials used in cell separators, sodium and potassium
hydroxide used as process chemicals and in the cell electrolyte,
cobalt salts added to some electrodes, and a variety of cell case,
seal, cover and connector materials.
105
-------
Table III-5
Consumption of Toxic Metals in Battery Manufacture*
METAL ANNUAL CONSUMPTION
Metric Tons Tons
Cadmium 730 . 800
Lead 980,000 1,080,000
Mercury 670 740
Nickel 1,200 1,300
Zinc 27,000 29,000
* Based on 1976 data provided in dcp's. Numbers shown are sums of
provided data. Because response to the raw materials questions was
incomplete, actual consumption will be higher by 10 to 20 percent.
Cadmium Subcateqory
Cadmium anode cells presently manufactured are based on nickel-
cadmium, silver-cadmium, and mercury-cadmium couples. Nickel-cadmium
batteries are among the most widely used rechargeable cells finding
applications in calculators, radios and numerous other portable
electronic devices in addition to a variety of industrial
applications. Total annual shipments of nickel-cadmium batteries were
valued at over $100 million in 1977. Silver-cadmium battery man-
ufacture is limited in terms of product weight amounting to less than
one percent of the amount of nickel-cadmium batteries manufactured.
Small quantities of mercury-cadmium batteries are manufactured for
military and industrial applications. Presently 10 plants are
manufacturing batteries in the cadmium subcategory. Total annual
production is estimated to be 5251 metric tons (5790 tons) of
batteries with three plants producing over 453.5 metric tons (500
tons) of batteries, and one producing less than 0.907 metric ton (1
ton) of batteries. Plants vary in size and in number of employees.
Total subcategory employment is estimated to be 2500.
Process wastewater flows from this subcategory are variable and total
114,000 1/hr (30,100 gal/hr). Most plants have flows of <18,925 1/hr
(<5,000 gal/hr) while two plants have no process wastewater flows.
Normalized process wastewater flows based on the total weight of
cadmium anode cells produced vary from 0 to 782 I/kg (94 gal/lb) and
averages 148 I/kg (18 gal/lb), with the subcategory having a median
flow of 49 I/kg (6 gal/lb). The substantial variations shown in
wastewater discharges from these plants reflect major manufacturing
process variations, especially between batteries using pressed or
pasted electrodes and sintered electrodes. These are addressed in
detail in Section V. The most significant use of process water in
cadmium anode battery manufacture is in the deposition of electrode
active materials on supporting substrates and in subsequent electrode
formation (charging) prior to assembly into cells. These operations
are also major sources of process wastewater. Additional points of
104
-------
owned or operated 42 percent of the plants in this subcategory,
consumed over 793,650 metric tons (875,000 tons) of pure lead and
produced over 1.1 million metric tons (1.2 million tons) of batteries.
In 1977, total lead subcategory product shipments were valued at about
1.7 billion dollars. The number of employees reported by plants in
the lead subcategory ranged from 1 to 643 with total employment
estimated to be 18,745. Most of the plants employing fewer than 10
employees were found to be battery assemblers who purchased charged or
uncharged plates produced in other plants. The distribution of plants
in the lead subcategory in terms of production and number of employees
is shown in Figures 111-23 and 111-24 (Page 138 and 139).
With the exception of lead-acid reserve batteries which are man-
ufactured at only one site, all products in this subcategory are
manufactured using similar materials and employ the same basic cell
chemistry. Products differ significantly in configuration and in
manufacturing processes, however, depending on end use. Lead-acid
battery products include cells with immobilized electrolytes used for
portable hand tools, lanterns, etc.; conventional rectangular
batteries used for automotive starting, lighting and ignition (SLI)
applications; sealed batteries for SLI use; and a wide variety of
batteries designed for industrial applications.
Manufacturers of SLI and industrial lead acid batteries have commonly
referred to batteries shipped with electrolyte as "wet-charged"
batteries and those shipped without electrolyte as "dry-charged"
batteries. The term "dry-charged" batteries which is used to mean any
battery shipped without electrolyte includes both damp-charged
batteries (damp batteries) and dehydrated plate batteries (dehydrated
batteries). Dehydrated batteries usually are manufactured by charging
of the electrodes in open tanks (open formation), followed by rinsing
and dehydration prior to assembly in the battery case. Damp batteries
are usually manufactured by charging the electrodes in the battery
case after assembly (closed formation), and emptying the electrolyte
before final assembly and shipping. The term "wet-charged" batteries
is used to mean any battery shipped with electrolyte. Wet-charged
batteries (wet batteries) are usually manufactured by closed formation
processes, but can also be produced by open formation processes.
Details of these formation process operations are discussed in Section
V.
Dehydrated plate batteries afford significantly longer shelf-life than
wet batteries or damp batteries. In 1976, sixty plants reported the
production of 239,000 metric tons (268,000 tons) of dehydrated plate
batteries; this accounted for over 18 percent of all lead acid
batteries produced. Twenty-seven plants reported producing damp
batteries, which account for 9.3 percent of the subcategory total, or
121,000 metric tons (136,000 tons). Contacts with battery
manufacturers have indicated a substantial reduction in dehydrated
107
-------
Calcium Subcategory
All calcium anode batteries presently produced are thermal batteries
for military and atomic applications. Three plants presently
manufacture these batteries to comply with a variety of military
specifications, and total production volume is limited. The total
production of thermal batteries by these plants was not determined
since one plant which produced no process wastewater reported that
thermal cell production data were not available. The other two
plants, however, showed total thermal battery production amounting to
less than 23 metric tons (25 tons). Total employment for the three
plants manufacturing in the calcium subcategory is estimated to be
240.
Process water use and discharge in this subcategory are limited. Two
plants discharge wastewater to municipal sewers and one plant reports
no discharge of wastewater. Wastewater discharge is reported from the
process operation which is involved in producing the reactive material
used to heat the cell for activation, and for testing the cells. The
cell anode, cathode, and electrolyte are all produced by dry processes
from which no wastewater discharges are reported. The reported volume
of process wastewater discharge from calcium anode cell manufacture
varies between 0 and 37.9 1/hr. (10 gal/hr). In terms of the weight
of thermal batteries produced the flow varies from 0 to 2.5 I/kg (0.67
gal/lb). The most significant pollutant found in these waste streams
is hexavalent chromium which is present primarily in the form of
barium chromate. Another pollutant found in these wastewaters is
asbestos. Wastewater treatment presently provided is limited to
settling for removal of suspended solids (including BaCr04). One
plant reports that sludge wastes are contractor hauled.
Lead Subcateqory
The lead subcategory, encompassing lead acid reserve cells and the
more familiar lead acid storage batteries, is the largest subcategory
both in terms of number of plants and volume of production. It also
contains the largest plants and produces a much larger total volume of
wastewater.
The lead group includes 184 battery manufacturing plants of which some
144 manufacture electrodes from basic raw materials, and almost 40
purchase electrodes prepared off-site and assemble them into batteries
(and are therefore termed assemblers). Most plants which manufacture
electrodes also assemble them into batteries. In 1976, plants in the
lead group ranged in annual production from 10.5 metric tons (11.5
tons) to over 40,000 metric tons (44,000 tons) of batteries with the
average production being 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) per year.
Total annual battery production in this subcategory is estimated to be
1.3 million kkg (1.43 million tons) of batteries. Seven companies
106
-------
carbon-zinc air batteries, only "dry" cells which use ammonium
chloride in the electrolyte are included in this subcategory. Carbon-
zinc air depolarized batteries which use alkaline electrolytes are
included in the zinc subcategory. The Leclanche subcategory also
includes the production of pasted paper separator material containing
mercury for use in battery manufacture.
Plants in this subcategory produce a total of over 108,000 metric tons
(111,000 tons) of batteries and employ approximately 4,200 persons.
Individual plant production ranges from approximately 1.4 metric tons
(1.5 tons) to 24,000 metric tons (26,000 tons). In 1977, the total
value of product shipments in this subcategory was over 261 million
dollars.
A wide variety of cell and battery configurations and sizes are
produced in this subcategory including cylindrical cells in sizes from
AAA to No. 6, flat cells which are stacked to produce rectangular
nine-volt transistor batteries, various rectangular lantern batteries,
and flat sheet batteries for photographic applications. Only the flat
photographic cells are somewhat different in raw material use and
production techniques. For specific cell configurations, however,
significant differences in manufacturing processes and process
wastewater generation are associated with differences in the cell
separator chosen (e.g., cooked paste, uncooked paste, pasted paper).
Major raw materials used in the manufacture of batteries in this
subcategory include zinc, mercury, carbon, manganese dioxide, ammonium
chloride, zinc chloride, silver chloride, paper, starch, flour, and
pitch or similar materials for sealing cells. Plastics are also used
in producing flat cells for photographic use. The zinc is most often
obtained as sheet zinc pre-formed into cans which serve as both cell
anode and container although some plants form and clean the cans on
site. For one type of battery, zinc powder is used. The mercury,
used to amalgamate the zinc and reduce internal corrosion in the
battery, is generally added with the cell electrolyte or separator.
It amounts to approximately 1.7 percent by weight of the zinc
contained in these cells.
Process water use in this subcategory is limited, and process
wastewater production results primarily from cleaning production
equipment used in handling cathode and electrolyte materials. Process
wastewater is also reported from the production and setting of cooked
paste cell separators and from the manufacture of pasted paper
separator material.
Estimated total process wastewater flow rates reported by plants in
this subcategory range from 0 to 2,158 1/hr (570 gal/hr) with an
average of 208 1/hr (55 gal/hr). Twelve plants reported zero
discharge of process wastewater. The maximum reported volume of
109
-------
battery manufacture since 1976 due largely to the introduction of
sealed wet charged batteries using calcium alloy grids which provide
improved shelf-life.
Major raw materials for all of these battery types include lead, leady
oxide, lead oxide, lead alloys, sulfuric acid, battery cases, covers,
filler caps, separators and other plastic rubber or treated paper
components. Generally, additional materials including carbon, barium
sulfate, and fibrous materials are added in the manufacture of
electrodes. Many manufacturers use epoxy, tar, or other similar
materials to seal battery cases, especially in manufacturing
industrial batteries. Common alloying elements used in the lead
alloys are antimony, calcium, arsenic and tin. Antimony may be used
at levels above 7 percent while arsenic, calcium, and tin are
generally used only in small percentages (1 percent).
Patterns of water usage and wastewater discharge are found to vary
significantly among lead battery plants. Variations result both from
differences in manufacturing processes and from differences in the
degree and type of wastewater control practiced. In general, the
major points of process water use are in the preparation and
application of electrode active materials, in the "formation"
(charging) of the electrodes, and in washing finished batteries.
Process wastewater discharges may result from wet scrubbers, floor and
equipment wash water and employee showers and hand washes used to
remove process materials.
The total volume of discharge from lead subcategory battery plants
varies between 0 and 62,000 1/hr (16,400 gal/hr) with a mean discharge
rate of 5,800 1/hr (1,532 gal/hr) and a median discharge rate of 3,500
1/hr (925 gal/hr). When normalized on the basis of the total amount
of lead used in battery manufacture, these discharge flows vary
between 0 and 52.3 I/kg (6.37 gal/lb) with an average of 4.816 I/kg
(0.577 gal/lb). Over 60 percent of lead subcategory plants discharge
wastewater to POTW. The wastewater from these plants is
characteristically acidic as a result of contamination with sulfuric
acid electrolyte and generally contains dissolved lead and suspended
particulates which are also likely to contain lead. The prevailing
treatment practice is to treat the wastewater with an alkaline reagent
to raise its pH, and to provide settling to remove particulates and
precipitated lead. In-process treatment and reuse of specific waste
streams is also common.
Leclanche Subcateqory
Plants included in this subcategory manufacture the conventional
carbon-zinc Leclanche cell and some silver chloride-zinc and carbon-
zinc air cells as well. All of the battery types included have in
common an acidic (chloride) electrolyte and a zinc anode. Among
108
-------
control and area cleanup. One plant also reports process water use in
manufacturing reactive materials for activating thermal batteries, as
discussed in conjunction with calcium anode batteries. Three of seven
plants manufacturing lithium anode batteries reported process
wastewater discharges which ranged from 3.9 1/hr (1.0 gal/hr) to 150
1/hr (39 gal/hr). The maximum reported flow rate includes 60 1/hr (16
gal/hr) resulting from the manufacture of heating elements.
Wastewater streams from plants in this subcategory may be expected to
vary considerably in their chemical composition because of the widely
varying raw materials and processes used. Raw materials reported to
be used in lithium anode battery manufacture are shown in Table II1-7.
TABLE II1-7
RAW MATERIALS USED IN LITHIUM ANODE BATTERY
MANUFACTURE
Acetonitrile Lithium Perchlorate
Aluminum Methyl Acetate
Aluminum Chloride Methyl Formate
Barium Chromate Nickel
Carbon Oil
Dioxolane Paper
Glass Fiber Poly-2-Vinyl Pyridine
Hydrochloric Acid Potassium Chloride
Iodine Potassium Perchlorate
Iron Steel
Iron Disulfide Sulfur
Isopropyl Alcohol Sulfur Dioxide
Lead Teflon
Lead Iodide Tetraphenyl Boron
Lithium Thionyl Chloride
Lithium Bromide Titanium Disulfide
Lithium Chloride Vanadium Pentoxide
Lithium Fluoborate Zirconium
Pollutants reported to be present include lead, chromium and cadmium.
In addition, asbestos, iron, lithium, sodium sulfite and suspended
solids may be anticipated in waste streams from specific operations.
Cadmium results from electroplating cell uses and is therefore not
attributable to operations included for regulation under this subcate-
gory. Chromium and asbestos originate in the manufacture of thermal
activators for high temperature military batteries as discussed for
calcium anode cells. Wastewater treatment and control practices at
the plants in this subcategory are limited to settling and pH
adjustment. Three plants report pH adjustment of process wastewater
while one plant reports only filtration. Two plants report no
111
-------
process wastewater per unit of production (weight of cells produced)
in this subcategory is 6.4 I/kg (0.76 gal/lb) and the average value is
0.45 I/kg (0.054 gal/lb). All plants reporting process wastewater
discharge in this subcategory discharge to municipal treatment
systems. Significant flow rate variations among plants in this
subcategory are attributable to manufacturing process differences, to
variations in equipment cleanup procedures employed, and the degree of
water conservation practiced at each plant.
The most significant pollutants in waste streams from plants in this
subcategory are mercury, zinc, ammonium chloride, particulate
manganese dioxide and carbon, and starch and flour (used in separator
manufacture). Treatment technologies applied are variable but
generally include provisions for suspended solids removal. Four
plants_ report the use of filtration, and one plant reports the use of
settling tanks. Treatment by adsorption is reported by one plant, and
three plants report pH adjustment. Some plants discharge without
treatment, and the use of contractor hauling for disposal of some
waste streams is common.
Lithium Subcateqory
This subcategory encompasses the manufacture of batteries that employ
lithium as the reactive anode material. At present, the batteries
included in this subcategory are generally high-cost, special purpose
products manufactured in limited volumes. These include batteries for
heart pacemakers, lanterns, watches, and special military
applications. A variety of cell cathode materials are presently used
with lithium anodes including iodine, sulfur dioxide, thionyl
chloride, and iron disulfide. Electrolytes in these cells are
generally not aqueous and may be either solid or liquid organic
materials or ionic salts (used in thermally activated cells).
Because the commercial manufacture of lithium anode batteries is
relatively new and rapidly changing, 1976 production figures were not
available in all cases. Three of seven plants reporting lithium anode
battery manufacture reported production for 1977, 1978 and 1979
because the plants had commenced operation after 1976. Based on 1976
figures where available and data for other years where necessary,
total annual production of lithium anode cells is estimated to be over
22.2 metric tons (24.5 tons). Individual plant production ranges from
less than 50 kg (100 Ibs) to 14 metric tons (15.5 tons). Total
employment for this subcategory is estimated to be 400.
Because of lithium's high reactivity with water, anode processing and
most cell assembly operations are performed without the use of process
water. In fact they are usually accomplished in areas of controlled
low humidity. Process water is used, however, in producing some cell
cathodes, either for washing reactive materials or for air pollution
110
-------
Significant pollutants in wastewater streams resulting from magnesium
anode battery manufacture include hexavalent chromium, silver, lead,
fluorides, oil and grease, ammonia, and suspended solids. Treatment
practices presently applied to these wastes include pH adjustment,
settling, and filtration, which is practiced at two plants. One plant
utilizes pH adjustment and filtration, and one plant uses filtration
only.
Zinc Subcateqory
Zinc anode alkaline electrolyte batteries are presently manufactured
using six different cathode reactants: manganese dioxide, mercuric
oxide, nickel hydroxide, monovalent and divalent oxides of silver, and
atmospheric oxygen. A wide range of cell sizes, electrical capacities
and configurations are manufactured, and both primary and secondary
(rechargeable) batteries are produced within this subcategory. The
manufacture of zinc-anode alkaline electrolyte batteries is increasing
as new battery designs and applications are developed. These products
presently find use in widely varying applications including toys and
calculators, flashlights, satellites, and railroad signals. In the
future, zinc anode batteries may provide motive power for automobiles.
In 1976, 17 plants produced approximately 23,000 metric tons (25,000
tons) of batteries in this subcategory. Individual plant production
of zinc anode alkaline electrolyte batteries ranged from 0.36 metric
tons (0.40 tons) to 7,000 metric tons (7,700 tons).
Of the 16 plants currently producing these batteries, 5 manufacture
more than one type of battery in this subcategory. Employment for
this subcategory is estimated to be 4,680.
Raw materials used in producing these batteries include zinc, zinc
oxide, mercury, manganese dioxide, carbon, silver, silver oxide,
silver peroxide, mercuric oxide, nickel and nickel compounds, cadmium
oxide, potassium hydroxide, sodium hydroxide, steel, and paper. Zinc
is obtained either as a powder or as cast electrodes depending on the
type of cell being produced. Process raw materials at specific plants
vary significantly depending on both the products produced and the
production processes employed. Zinc and zinc oxide are both used to
produce zinc anodes. Mercury is used both to produce mercuric oxide
cell cathode material and to amalgamate zinc anodes to limit cell
corrosion and self discharge. Manganese dioxide is blended with
carbon to form cathodes for alkaline manganese cells and is also
included in cathode mixes for some mercury and silver oxide batteries.
Silver is used in the form of wire screen as a support grid for cell
electrodes, and in the form of powder for the production of silver
oxide cathode materials. Silver oxide is used in the production of
both silver oxide and silver peroxide cell cathodes, and silver
peroxide is also obtained directly for use in silver oxide cell
1 13
-------
discharge of wastewater, four plants discharge to a municipal sewer,
and one plant discharges to surface waters.
Magnesium Subcategory
The magnesium subcategory encompasses the manufacture of magnesium-
carbon batteries, magnesium-vanadium pentoxide thermal cells, ammonia
activated magnesium anode cells, and several different types of
magnesium reserve cells using metal chloride cathodes. These cell
types are manufactured at eight plants with total annual production
amounting to 1220 metric tons (1340 tons). Annual production at
individual plants range from 0.4 metric tons (0.5 tons) to 570 metric
tons (630 tons) of magnesium anode batteries. Over 85 percent of all
magnesium anode batteries produced are magnesium carbon cells. Total
employment for this subcategory is estimated to be 350.
A wide variety of raw materials are used in the manufacture of
magnesium anode batteries because of the diversity of cell types
manufactured. While the anode is magnesium in every case, principal
raw materials used in cathode manufacture include manganese dioxide,
barium chromate, lithium chromate, magnesium hydroxide, and carbon for
magnesium-carbon batteries; vanadium pentoxide for thermal batteries;
copper chloride, lead chloride, silver, or silver chloride for
magnesium reserve cells; and m-dinitrobenzene for ammonia activated
cells. Electrolyte raw materials for these cells include magnesium
perchlorate, magnesium bromide and ammonia. Separators are most often
reported to be cotton or paper.
As for raw materials, product and process differences among plants in
this subcategory result in significant variability in wastewater flow
rates and characteristics. The production of process wastewater is
reported by four of the eight plants active in this subcategory.
Processes reported to yield process wastewater include alkaline and
acid cleaning and chromating. of magnesium anodes (which is not
considered as battery process wastewater), chemical reduction and
electrolytic oxidation processes and separator processing in the
production of silver chloride cathodes, fume scrubbers, battery
testing, and activator manufacture for thermal batteries. Floor and
equipment wash process water was also reported. Process wastewater
from only two of these sources was reported by two plants. All other
waste streams were indicated by only one manufacturer of magnesium
anode batteries. This diversity among plants in sources of wastewater
is reflected in discharge flow rates which range from 0 to 5200 1/hr
(1370 gal/hr) or when normalized on the basis of the weight of cells
produced, from 0 to 1,160 I/kg (139 gal/lb). The average discharge
flow rate from plants in this subcategory is 670 1/hr (180 gal/hr),
which is equivalent to 8.8 I/kg (1.05 gal/lb) of magnesium anode
batteries produced.
112
-------
are creating strong demand for existing battery products and for new
ones.
The advent of transistor electronics, and subsequently of integrated
circuits, light emitting diodes, and liquid crystal devices has
resulted in the development of innumerable portable electronic devices
such as radios, calculators, toys, and games, which are powered by
batteries. This has resulted in the development of new mass markets
for cells in small sizes and has led to the rapid commercialization of
new cell types. The extremely low power drains of some digital
electronic devices have created markets for low power, high energy
density, long life cells and have resulted in the commercial
development of silver oxide-zinc and lithium batteries. Solid state
technology has also reduced or eliminated markets for some battery
types, most notably mercury (Weston) cells which were widely used as a
voltage reference in vacuum tube circuits. Continued rapid change in
electronics and growth in consumer applications are anticipated with
corresponding change and growth in battery markets.
In transportation technology and power generation, tightening fuel
supplies and increasing costs are directing increased attention toward
electrical energy storage devices. The development and increasing use
of battery powered electric automobiles and trucks are creating an
increasing market for large battery sizes with high energy and power
densities. Increasing application of batteries for peak shaving in
electrical power systems is also an anticipated development creating
higher demand for batteries in larger sizes.
In summary, while, as with Lalande, Edison and Weston cells in the
past, some battery types may become obsolete, the overall outlook is
for growth in the battery industry. Increased production of many
current products and the development of new battery types are likely.
Based on general industry patterns, conversion of battery plants from
one type of product where demand for specific battery types is not
strong to another is more likely than plant closings.
115
-------
cathodes. Nickel and nickel compounds are used in producing cathodes
for nickel-zinc batteries identical to those used in some nickel-
cadmium batteries. Potassium and sodium hydroxide are used in cell
electrolytes (which may also include zinc oxide and mercuric oxide)
and as reagents in various process steps. Steel is used in cell
cases, and paper and plastics are used in cell separators and
insulating components.
Process water use and wastewater generation is highly variable among
the products and manufacturing processes included in this subcategory.
In general terms, major points of water use and discharge include zinc
anode amalgamation, electrodeposition of electrode reactive materials,
oxidation and reduction of electrode materials, nickel cathode
impregnation and formation, cell wash, floor and equipment cleaning,
and sinks and showers. Only some of these uses and discharge sources
are encountered at each plant, and their relative significance varies.
The total volume of process wastewater produced varies from 4 1/hr (1
gal/hr) to 26,000 1/hr (7,000 gal/hr) and averages 4,300 1/hr (1,100
gal/hr). In terms of the weight of cells produced, this corresponds
to a maximum flow of 400 I/kg (48 gal/lb) and an average flow per unit
of product of 3.8 I/kg (0.46 gal/lb).
The pollutants found in waste streams from plants producing batteries
in this subcategory are primarily metals. Zinc and mercury are
encountered in most wastewater streams. Silver, mercury, and nickel
are found in waste streams resulting from the manufacture of specific
cell types, and hexavalent chromium is found in some waste streams as
a result of the use of chromates in cell wash operations. Wastewater
discharges in this subcategory are predominantly alkaline and may
contain significant concentrations of suspended solids. Oil and
grease and organic pollutants are also encountered. Wastewater
treatment provided is also variable, but commonly includes solids
removal by settling or filtration (12 plants). Sulfide precipitation
is practiced at two sites, oil skimming is practiced at one plant, and
carbon adsorption is practiced at two plants. One plant has upgraded
its system to include ion exchange and metals recovery. Several
plants employ amalgamation with zinc for the removal of mercury from
process waste streams from this subcategory. Most treatment is
performed as pretreatment for discharge to POTW since 11 plants
discharge to municipal sewers. Three plants discharge to surface
waters and two of the active plants have no wastewater discharge.
INDUSTRY OUTLOOK
The pattern of strong growth and rapid change which has characterized
the battery industry during the past decade may be expected to
continue in the future. A number of technological changes which have
occurred in recent years and which are anticipated in the near future
114
-------
1000
SPECIFIC ENERGY, W-HR/KG
100
100
1000
1000
100
COMBUSTION
ENGINES
ALKALINE
MnO
HEAVY
DUTY
LECLANCHE
ORGANIC
ELECTROLYTE
CELLS
LOW-DRAIN
LECLANCHE
0.1
6 10 20 40 60 100
SPECIFIC ENERGY WATT HOURS/LB
200
400
0.4
1000
FIGURE 111-2
PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY OF VARIOUS BATTERY SYSTEMS
117
-------
3000
2000
1000
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
-Li/S
Li/CI2
.Na/AIR
-Li/FtS2
Li/Se
Li/CuS
.Li/FซS
-ISIa/S
10
-6 HO
<ง>
O
O
O
Zn/NiOOH-
Fซ/NiOOH
TYPE OF ELECTROLYTES
MOLTEN SALT OR CERAMIC
AQUEOUS
ORGANIC
MOLTEN SALT AND AQUEOUS
Cd/NiOOH'
Pb/PbO2
20 40 60 80 100
EQUIVALENT WEIGHT, G/EQUIVALENT
200
300 400
FIGURE IIM
THEORETICAL SPECIFIC ENERGY AS A FUNCTION OF EQUIVALENT WEIGHT AND
CELL VOLTAGE FOR VARIOUS ELECTROLYTIC
COUPLES
116
-------
NICKEL-PLATED
STEEL COVER
NICKEL-PLATED
STEEL CASE
NICKEL POSITIVE
CONTACT LUG
NYLON GASKET
SEAL
POLYETHYLENE
INSULATOR
POLYETHYLENE
INSULATOR
POSITIVE PLATE
(NICKEL CATHODE)
.SEPARATOR
NICKEL NEGATIVE
CONTACT LUG
NEGATIVE PLATE
(CADMIUM ANODE)
FIGURE IM-4
CUTAWAY VIEW OF A CYLINDRICAL NICKEL-CADMIUM BATTERY (SIMILAR IN
PHYSICAL STRUCTURE TO CYLINDRICAL LEAD ACID BATTERIES)
119
-------
TERMINAL
TERMINAL COMB
PLATE TABS
BAFFLE
NEGATIVE PLATE
(CADMIUM ANODE)
SEPARATOR
POSITIVE PLATE
(NICKEL CATHODE)
CELL JAR
FIGURE Hl-3
CUTAWAY VIEW OF AN IMPREGNATED SINTERED PLATE NICKEL-CADMIUM CELL
(SIMILAR IN PHYSICAL STRUCTURE TO SOME
SILVER OXIDE-ZINC AND NICKEL-ZINC CELLS)
118
-------
METAL CA
EXPANSION
ZINC CAN
(ANODE)
SEPARATOR
METAL COVER
NSULATING WASHER '
SUB SEAL
CARBON ELECTRODE
(CATHODE)
1-0
INCHES
METAL BOTTO
BOTTOM INSULATOR
COMPLETE CELL
FIGURE III-6
CUTAWAY VIEW OF A CYLINDRICAL LECLANCHE CELL (SIMILAR IN PHYSICAL
STRUCTURE TO SOME CARBON-ZINC-AIR AND SILVER CHLORIDE-ZINC DRY CELLS)
121
-------
VENT PLUGS
TAPERED
TERMINAL
POSTS
CONTAINER
POST STRAP
COVER
PLATE LUGS
POSITIVE
PLATE
SEPARATORS
NEGATIVE PLATE
ELEMENT RESTS
SEDIMENT SPACE
FIGURE III-5
CUTAWAY VIEW OF LEAD ACID STORAGE BATTERY
120
-------
POLYESTER
JACKET
CATHODE CURRENT
COLLECTOR
ANODE CURRENT
COLLECTOR
DEPOLARIZER
LITHIUM ANODE
FLUOROCARBON
PLASTIC JACKET
PLASTIC LAYERS SEPARATE
DEPOLARIZER FROM CASE
LITHIUM ENVELOPE AND
FLUOROCARBON PLASTIC JACKET
SEPARATE DEPOLARIZER FROM CASE
FIGURE III-8
CUTAWAY VIEW OF TWO SOLID ELECTROLYTE
LITHIUM CELL CONFIGURATIONS
123
-------
GAS GENERATOR
TOP CAP
DRIVE DISK
ACTIVATOR
CUP
OUTER
CASE
BATTERY
ASSEMBLAGE
B-C SECTION
TERMINAL PLATE
LANCE
ELECTROLYTE
RESERVOIR
BULKHEAD
QUAD RING
3 INCHES
A SECTION
EXAMPLE SHOWN FOR LJQUID-AMMONIA-ACT1VATED MAGNESIUM RESERVE BATTERY:
CATHODE - CARBON DEPOLARIZED META-OINITROBENZENE
ANODE - MAGNESIUM
ELECTROLYTE - DRY AMMONIUM THIOCYANATE ACTIVATED BY LIQUID AMMONIA
FIGURE III-9
CUTAWAY VIEW OF A RESERVE TYPE BATTERY ("A" SECTION AND "B-C"
SECTION CONTAIN ANODE AND CATHODE)
124
CONNECTOR
(CONDUCTIVE SHEET)
SEPARATOR CONTAINING
ELECTROLYTE
ADHESIVE AROUND EDGE
OF SEPARATOR
MANGANESE DIOXIDE ON
CONDUCTIVE PLASTIC ON ALUMINUM
POSITIVE END (ป)
OMPLETED BATTERY
ASSEMBLED ON CARD
WITH CONTACT HOLES
THICKNESS. 1/4 INCH
FIGURE III-7
EXPLODED VIEW OF A FOLIAR LECLANCHE BATTERY USED IN FILM PACK
122
-------
FILLER
TUBE CAP
FILLER TUBE
FOR WATER
SOLID CAUSTIC SODA
CYLINDRICAL
ZINC ANODE
CARBON CATHODE
MIXTURE OF
PELLETED LIME
AND GRANULAR
CAUSTIC SODA
FIGURE 111-10
CUTAWAY VIEW OF A CARBON-ZINC-AIR CELL
125
-------
ONE PIECE COVER
(+) PLATED STEEL
ELECTROLYTE-
POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE
CATHODE-MANGANESE
DIOXIDE MIX
SEPARATORS -
NON WOVEN FABRIC
INSULATING TUBE -
POLYETHYLENE COATED
KRAFT
METAL SPUR
INSULATOR -
PAPERBOARD
METAL WASHER
CAN - STEEL
CURRENT COLLECTOR -
BRASS
ANODE - AMALGAMATED
POWDERED ZINC
JACKET -
TIN PLATED
LITHOGRAPHED
STEEL
EAL - NYLON
INNER CELL BOTTOM -
STEEL
PRESSURE SPRING -
PLATED SPRING STEEL
RIVET - BRASS
OUTER BOTTOM (-)
PLATED STEEL
FIGURE 111-11
CUTAWAY VIEW OF AN ALKALINE-MANGANESE BATTERY
(SIMILAR IN PHYSICAL STRUCTURE TO CYLINDRICAL
MERCURY-ZINC BATTERIES)
126
-------
CELL CAN
ANOOC CAP
CATHODE
(MERCURIC)
OXIDE MIX
ANODE
(AMALGAMATED
ZINC)
FIGURE 111-12
CUTAWAY VIEW OF A MERCURY-ZINC (RUBEN) CELL (SIMILAR IN PHYSICAL
STRUCTURE TO ALKALINE-MANGANESE AND SILVER OXIDE-ZINC BUTTON CELLS)
127
-------
POSITIVE PLATE PROCESS
NICKEL
POWDER
NICKEL
STRIP
SINTERED
STRIP
RAW
MATERIALS-
IMPREGNATION
METAL RAW
SCREEN MATERIALS
\
BRUSH
M
NEGATIVE
PLATE
PROCESS
FORMATION
SEPARATOR-
NICKEL PLATED
STEEL CASE
ASSEMBLY
POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE
SODIUM HYDROXIDE -
WATER
ELECTROLYTE
ADDITION
PRODUCT
FIGURE MI-13
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN NICKEL-CADMIUM BATTERY MANUFACTURE
128
-------
LEAD-
LEAD OXIDE
SULFURIC-
ACID
LEAOY OXIDE
PRODUCTION
PIG LEAD
MIXER
PASTING
MACHINE
WITH DRYER
1
GRID
CASTING
MACHINE
CURING
OF PLATES
SEPARATORS
BATTERY CASE
4 COVER
STACKER
I
WELD
ASSEMBLED
ELEMENTS
ASSEMBLY
I
BURN POST
SULFURIC
ACID
PRODUCT
FIGURE 111-14
SIMPLIFIED DIAGRAM OF MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN LEAD ACID
BATTERY MANUFACTURE
129
-------
WATER, STARCH,
ZINC CHLORIDE,
MERCUROUS CHLORIDE,
AMMONIUM CHLORIDE
ADDITION
OF PASTE
J_
nvB/ii - I
ZINC CANS
DEPOLARIZER
(MANGANESE DIOXIDE
* CARBON BLACK)
MIX
ELECTROLYTE
(AMMONIUM CHLORIDE +
ZINC CHLORIDE + WATER)
CARBON ROD
DEPOLARIZER AND
ELECTROLYTE ADDED
SUPPORT
WASHER ADDED
PASTE
SETTING
CELL
SEALED
CARBON ROD
PAPER LINED
ZINC CANS
CRIMP
I
___ ALTERNATE PRODUCTION STEPS
AGE AND
TEST
PRODUCT
FIGURE 111-15
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN LECLANCHE BATTERY MANUFACTURE
130
-------
IODINE-
POLY-2-VINYL-PYRIDINE-
CATHODE
MIX
ELECTROLYTE
LITHIUM-
DECREASE
ANODE
CELL CASE,
CONTACTS,
SEALS
ASSEMBLY
TEST
J
PRODUCT
FIGURE 111-16
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN
LITHIUM-IODINE BATTERY MANUFACTURE
131
-------
CARBON-
OE1ONIZE
WATER
SLURRY
PREPARATION
MAGNESIUM
STRIP
i
DRY
PUNCH
PUNCH
CATHODE
ANODE
ASSEMBLY
AMMONIA
-AMMONIUM-
THIOCYANATE
PRODUCT
FIGURE 111-17
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN AMMONIA-ACTIVATED MAGNESIUM
RESERVE CELL MANUFACTURE
132
-------
CONTAINER
LIME
CAUSTIC
POTASH
DRY ELECTROLYTE
PLACED IN
CONTAINER
MANGANESE
DIOXIDE
GRAPHITE
CHARCOAL
POWDER
POROUS ACTIVATED
CARBON
ELECTRODE
ELECTRODE
INSERTED
AMALGAMATED
ZINC ELECTRODE
INSERTED
ZINC
ELECTRODE
SEALED
TEST AND
PACK
PRODUCT
FIGURE IN-18
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN WATER ACTIVATED
CARBON-ZINC-AIR CELL MANUFACTURE
133
-------
BINDER,
CARBON &
MANGANESE
DIOXIDE
ZINC &
MERCURY
FORMED INTO
CATHODE
CONTAINER
PRODUCED
CATHODE
INSERTED
POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE.
WATER & BINDER
1
SEPARATOR
INSERTED
-^
ELECTROLYTE
ANODE
*
ANODE
INSERTED
CURRENT
COLLECTOR
RIVET AND
SEAL INSERTED
CRIMP
OJ
PRODUCT
TEST AND
PACK
COVERS
ATTACHED
PRESSURE
SPRING
INSERTED
JACKET AND
PAPER
INSULATOR
ATTACHED
P RE-TEST
CELL WASH
FIGURE 111-19
MAJOR PRODUCTION OPERATIONS IN ALKALINE-
MANGANESE DIOXIDE BATTERY MANUFACTURE
-------
CASE
WELDED
MERCURIC
OXIDE
GRAPHITE
MANGANESE
DIOXIDE
CATHODE
CATHODE
PRESSED
INTO CASE
SODIUM
HYDROXIDE
WATER
ZINC
MERCURY
AMALGAM
TOP AND
GASKET ADDED
PRODUCT
FIGURE 111-20
SIMPLIFIED DIAGRAM OF MAJOR OPERATIONS IN MERCURY-ZINC (RUBEN)
BATTERY MANUFACTURE
135
-------
2800
a\
400
63
YEAR *FROM U.S. DEPT. OF COMMERCE DATA
1977 CENSUS OF MANUFACTURERS
FIGURE 111-21
VALUE OF BATTERY PRODUCT SHIPMENTS 1963-1977*
-------
U)
5-9 PLANTS
A 1-4 PLANTS
BASED ON TOTAL OF 2S3 PLANTS
1X EPA REGIONS
FIGURE III-22
GEOGRAPHICAL-REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF BATTERY MANUFACTURING PLANTS
-------
u>
00
50
40
ป
0.
li.
O
K
U
ffl
2
D 20
Z
to
REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF PLANTS
IN INDICATED PRODUCTION RANGE
0 ' 4
12
16 ' 20 ' 24 ' 28 32 ' 36
PRODUCTION (METRIC TONS X 103)
40
44
48
52
FIGURE 111-23
DISTRIBUTION OF LEAD SUBCATEGORY PRODUCTION RATES
-------
u>
vo
so
40
30
20
10
REPRESENTS THE NUMBER OF PLANTS
HAVING THE INDICATED RANGE OF
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
100
ZOO
300 400
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES
500
700
FIGURE 111-24
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYMENT AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING
PLANTS
-------
TABLE III-6
BATIEFQf MANUraCIURING CATEGORY SUfARY
(TOTAL DATA. BASE)
Batteries
Subcategory Manufactured
Ca.lnium Nickel-Cadmium
Silver Cadmium
Mercury Cadmium
Calcium Thermal
Lead Lead Acid
Leclanche Carbon Zinc
M Carbon Zinc,
** Air Depolarized
Silver Chloride-Zinc
Lithium Lithium
Thermal
Number of
Plants
13
3
184
20
7
Total Annual Production
kkg (tons)
5,250 (5,790)
<23 ( <25)
1,300,000 (1,430,000)
108,000 (119,000)
<23 ( <25)
Total Number
of Ehployees
2,500
240
18,745
4,200
400
Magnesium
Zinc
Magnesium Carbon
Magnesium Reserve
Thermal
Alkaline Manganese
Silver Oxide-Zinc
Mercury Zinc
Carbon Zinc-Air
Depolarized
Nickel Zinc
17
1,220 (1,340)
350
23,000 (25,000) 4,680
Dischargers
Direct PCOW Zero
5U)1
4(5)1-
2 1
15 118 51
0 8 12
142
134
3 11 3
Total Process
Wastewater Flow
Vyr (106) [gaVyrdO6)]
748
0.36
3.91
60.3
(198)
0.13 (0.034)
7,106 (1,877)
16.7 (4.41)
(0.095)
(1.03)
(15.9)
TOTALS
252'
1,437,516 (1,581,180) 31,115
25(24)1 150 77(78)1
7,935.40 (2,096.469)
NOTES:
I One direct discharge plant recently changed to zero discharge.
2 Tfotal does not include nuclear subcategory (1 plant).
-------
SECTION IV
INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION
Subcategorization should take into account pertinent industry
characteristics, manufacturing process variations, water use,
wastewater characteristics, and other factors which are important in
determining a specific grouping of industry segments for the purpose
of regulating wastewater pollutants. Division of the industry segment
into subcategories provides a mechanism for addressing process and
product variations which result in distinct wastewater
characteristics. Effluent limitations and standards establish mass
limitations on the discharge of pollutants and are applied, through
the permit issuance process, to specific dischargers. To allow the
national standard to be applied to a wide range of sizes of production
units, the mass of pollutant discharge must be referenced to a unit of
production. This factor is referred to as a production normalizing
parameter and is developed in conjunction with Subcategorization.
In addition to processes which are specific to battery manufacturing,
many battery plants report other process operations. These
operations, generally involve the manufacture of battery components
and raw materials and may include operations such as stamping, forming
or electroplating. These operations are not considered in this
document.
SUBCATEGORIZATION
Factors Considered
After examining the nature of the various segments of the battery
manufacturing category and the operations performed therein, the
following Subcategorization factors were selected for evaluation.
Each of these factors is discussed in the ensuing paragraphs, followed
by a description of the process leading to selection of the anode
Subcategorization.
1. Waste Characteristics
2. Battery Type
3. Manufacturing Processes
4. Water Use
5. Water Pollution Control Technology
6. Treatment Costs
7. Effluent Discharge Destination
8. Solid Waste Generation and Disposal
9. Size of Plant
10. Age of Plant
11. Number of Employees
12. Total Energy Requirements (Manufacturing Process
141
-------
and Waste Treatment and Control)
13. Non-Water Quality Characteristics
14. Unique Plant Characteristics
Waste Characteristics - While subcategorization is inherently based on
waste characteristics, these are primarily determined by
characteristics of the manufacturing process, product, raw materials,
and plant which may provide useful bases for subcategorization.
Battery Type - Battery type as designated by reactive couples or
recognized battery types (as in the case of magnesium reserve or
thermal cells), was initially considered as a logical basis for
subcategorization. This basis has two significant shortcomings.
First, batteries of a given type are often manufactured using several
different processes with very different wastewater generation
characteristics. Second, it was found that batteries of several types
were often manufactured at a single site with some process operations
(and resultant wastewater streams) common to the different battery
types. Since modification of battery type subcategories to reflect
all process variations and product combinations results in over 200
subcategories, battery type was found to be unacceptable as the
primary basis for subcategorization. Battery type is, however,
reflected to a significant degree in manufacturing process con-
siderations and in anode metal.
Manufacturing Processes - The processes performed in the manufacture
of batteries are the sources of wastewater generation, and thus are a
logical basis for the establishment of subcategories. In this
category, however, similar processes may be applied to differing raw
materials in the production of different battery types yielding
different wastewater characteristics. For example, nickel, cadmium
and zinc electrodes may all be produced by electrodeposition
techniques. Further, the number of different manufacturing process
sequences used in producing batteries is extremely large although a
smaller number of distinct process operations are used in varying com-
binations. As a result of these considerations, neither overall
process sequence nor specific process operations were found to be
suitable as primary bases for subcategorization. However, process
variations that result in significant differences in wastewater
generation are reflected in the manufacturing process elements for
which specific discharge allowances were developed within each
subcategory.
Water Use - Water use alone is not a comprehensive enough factor upon
which to subcategorize because water use is related to the various
manufacturing processes used and product quality needed. While water
use is a key element in the limitations and standards established, it
is not directly related to the source or the type and quantity of the
waste. For example, water is used to rinse electrodes and to rinse
142
-------
batteries. The amounts of water used for these processes might be
similar, but the quantity of pollutants generated is significantly
different.
Water Pollution Control Technology/ Treatment Costs, and Effluent
Discharge Destination - The necessity for a subcategorization factor
to relate to the raw wastewater characteristics of a plant
automatically eliminates certain factors from consideration as
potential bases for subdividing the category. Water pollution control
technology, treatment costs, and effluent discharge destination have
no effect on the raw wastewater generated in a plant. The water
pollution control technology employed at a plant and its costs are the
result of a requirement to achieve a particular effluent level for a
given raw wastewater load. The treatment technology does not affect
the raw wastewater characteristics. Likewise, the effluent discharge
destination does not affect the raw wastewater characteristics.
So1id Waste Generation and Disposal - Physical and chemical solid
waste characteristics generated by the manufacture of batteries can be
accounted for by subcategorization according to battery type since
this determines some of the resultant solid wastes from a plant.
Solid wastes resulting from the manufacture of batteries includes
process wastes (scrap and spent solutions) and sludges resulting from
wastewater treatment. The solid waste characteristics (high metals
content), as well as wastewater characteristics, are a function of the
specific battery type and manufacturing process. However, not all
solid wastes can be related to wastewater generation and be used for
developing effluent limitations and standards. Also, solid waste
disposal techniques may be identical for a wide variety of solid
wastes but cannot be related to pollutant generation. These factors
alone do not provide a sufficient base for subcategorization.
Size oฃ Plant - The size of a plant is not an appropriate
subcategorization factor since the wastewater characteristics per unit
of production are essentially the same for different size plants that
have similar processing sequences. However, the size of a plant is
related to its production capacity. Size is thus indirectly used to
determine the effluent limitations since these are based on production
rates. But, size alone is not an adequate subcategorization parameter
because the wastewater characteristics of plants are also dependent on
the type of processes performed.
Age of Plant - While the relative age of a plant may be important in
considering the economic impact of a regulation, it is not an
appropriate basis for subcategorization because it does not take into
consideration the significant parameters which affect the raw
wastewater characteristics. In addition, a subcategorization based on
age would have to distinguish between the age of the plant and the age
of all equipment used in the plant which is highly variable. Plants
143
-------
in this industry modernize and replace equipment relatively
frequently, and changes of subcategories would often result.
Subcategorization using this factor is therefore infeasible.
Number of Employees - The number of employees in a plant does not
directly provide a basis for subcategorization since the number of
employees does not reflect the production processes used, the
production rates, or water use rates. Plants producing batteries
varied widely in terms of number of production employees. The volume
and characteristics of process wastewater was found to not have any
meaningful relationship with plant employment figures.
Total Energy Requirements - Total energy requirements were excluded as
a subcategorization parameter primarily because energy requirements
are found to vary widely within this category and are not meaningfully
related to wastewater generation and pollutant discharge.
Additionally, it is often difficult to obtain reliable energy
estimates specifically for production and waste treatment. When
available, estimates are likely to include other energy requirements
such as lighting, air conditioning, and heating energy.
Non-Water Quality Aspects - Non-water quality aspects may have an
effect on the wastewater generated in a plant. For example, wet
scrubbers may be used to satisfy air pollution control regulations.
This could result in an additional contribution to the plant's
wastewater flow. However, it is not the primary source of wastewater
generation in the battery manufacturing category, and therefore, not
acceptable as an overall subcategorization factor.
Unique Plant Characteristics - Unique plant characteristics such as
geographical location, space availability, and water availability do
not provide a proper basis for subcategorization since they do not
affect the raw waste characteristics of the plant. Dcp data indicate
that plants in the same geographical area do not necessarily have
similar processes and, consequently may have different wastewater
characteristics. However, process water availability may be a
function of the geographic location of a plant, and the price of water
may necessitate individual modifications to procedures employed in
plants. For example, it has been generally observed that plants
located in areas of limited water supply are more likely to practice
in-process wastewater control procedures to reduce the ultimate volume
of discharge. These procedures however, can also be implemented in
plants that have access to plentiful water supplies and thus,
constitute a basis for effluent control rather than for
subcategorization.
A limitation in the availability of land space for constructing a
waste treatment facility may in some cases affect the economic impact
of a limitation. However, in-process controls and water conservation
144
-------
can be adopted to minimize the size and thus land space required for
the treatment facility. Often, a compact treatment unit can easily
handle wastewater if good in-process techniques are utilized to
conserve raw materials and water.
Subcateqorization Development
After reviewing and evaluating data for this category, the initial
battery type subcategorization was replaced by the anode material,
electrolyte approach. This development is discussed below in detail.
Upon initiation of the study of the battery manufacturing category,
published literature and data generated in a preliminary study of the
industry were reviewed, and a preliminary approach to
subcategorization of the industry was defined. This approach was
based on electrolytic couples (e.g. nickel-cadmium and silver oxide-
zinc) and recognized battery types (e.g. carbon-zinc, alkaline
manganese, and thermal cells). The weight of batteries produced was
chosen as the production basis for data analysis. This approach
provided the structure within which a detailed study of the industry
was conducted, and was reflected in the data collection portfolio used
to obtain data from all battery manufacturing plants. In addition,
sites selected for on-site data collection and wastewater sampling
were chosen to provide representation of the significant electrolytic
couples and battery types identified in the data collection
portfolios.
As discussed in Section III, the preliminary review of the category
resulted in the identification of sixteen distinct electrolytic
couples and battery types requiring consideration for effluent
limitations and standards. A review of the completed dcp's returned
by the industry revealed four additional battery types requiring study
but did not initially result in any fundamental change in the approach
to subcategorization.
As the detailed study of the industry proceeded, however, it became
apparent that the preliminary approach to subcategorization would not
be adequate as a final framework for the development of effluent
limitations and standards. It was determined that further breakdown
of the original battery type subcategories would be required to
encompass existing and possible process and product variations. The
number of subcategories ultimately required using this approach was
likely to approach 200. This approach was likely to result in
redundant regulations and possible confusion about applicability in
some cases.
Review of dcp responses and on-site observations at a number of plants
revealed that there was substantial process diversity among plants
producing a given battery type, and consequently little uniformity in
145
-------
wastewater generation and discharge. For most cell types, several
different structures and production processes were identified for both
anode and cathode, and it was observed that these could be combined
into many variations. The data also revealed that not all plants
performed all process operations on-site. Some battery manufacturing
plants produced cell electrodes or separators which were not assembled
into batteries within the plant, and others purchased some or all of
the components which were used in producing the finished batteries
shipped from the plant. To reflect these differences in manufacturing
processes it would have been necessary to divide the preliminary
battery type subcategories into approximately 200 subcategories to
accommodate those presently existing and into nearly 600 subcategories
to encompass all of the obvious variations possible in new sources.
The data obtained from the industry also showed that most production
operations are not separated by battery type. Manufacture of more
than one battery type at a single location is common, and some
production operations are commonly shared by different battery types.
Raw material preparation, cell washes, and the manufacture of specific
electrodes (most often the anode) are often commonly performed for the
production of different battery types. Production schedules at some
of these plants make the association of production activity (and
therefore wastewater discharge) in these operations with specific
battery types difficult.
Many operations are intermittent and variable, and there is often a
considerable lag between the preparation of raw materials and
components, and the shipment of finished batteries. The redundant
inclusion of production operations under several different battery
types is undesirable in any case.
Subcategorization of the battery category was re-evaluated and
redefined in light of the industry characteristics discussed above.
In the development of the final Subcategorization approach, objectives
were to:
1. Encompass the significant variability observed in processes
and products within battery manufacturing operations
2. Select a Subcategorization basis which yielded a manageable
number of subcategories for the promulgation of effluent
limitations and standards
3. Minimize redundancy in the regulation of specific process
effluents
4. Facilitate the determination of applicability of subcategory
guidelines and standards to specific plants
146
-------
5. Subcategorize so that, to the maximum extent possible,
plants fall within a single subcategory
Available data show that where multiple cell types are produced, and
especially where process operations are common to several types, the
cells frequently have the same anode material. As a result, cell
anode was considered as a subcategorization basis. Significant
differences in wastewater volume and characteristics between plants
producing zinc anode cells with alkaline electrolytes and Leclanche
cells necessitated further subcategorization based on cell
electrolyte. Subcategorization on these bases yielded eight
subcategories: cadmium, calcium, lead, Leclanche, lithium, magnesium,
nuclear, and zinc.
These subcategories preserve most of the recognized battery types
within a single subcategory and greatly reduce the redundancy in
covering process operations. They also limit the number of plants
producing batteries under more than one subcategory to thirteen.
Recognized battery types which are split under this approach are
carbon-zinc air cells which are manufactured with both alkaline and
acidic electrolytes, and thermal batteries which are produced with
calcium, lithium, and magnesium anodes. In both cases, however,
significant variations in process water use and discharge exist within
the preliminary battery type subcategories, and these are reflected in
the breakdown resulting from anode based subcategorization. In most
cases where process operations are common to multiple battery types,
the processes fall within a single subcategory. Where plants produce
batteries in more than one subcategory, manufacturing processes are
generally completely segregated.
Identification of these anode .groups as subcategories for effluent
limitations purposes was also favored by an examination of wastewater
characteristics and waste treatment practices. In general, plants
manufacturing batteries with a common anode reactant were observed to
produce wastewater streams bearing the same major pollutants (e.g.
zinc and mercury from zinc anode batteries, cadmium and nickel from
cadmium anode batteries). As a result, treatment practices at these
plants are similar.
A battery product within a subcategory is produced from a combination
of anode manufacturing processes, cathode manufacturing processes and
various ancillary operations (such as assembly associated operations,
and chemical powder production processes specific to battery
manufacturing). Within each group (anode, cathode, or ancillary)
there are numerous manufacturing processes or production functions.
These processes or functions may generate independent wastewater
streams with significant variations in wastewater characteristics. TO
obtain specific waste characteristics for which discharge allowances
could be developed, the following approach was used (Figure IV-1, Page
147
-------
160). Individual process waste streams (subelements) can be combined
to obtain specific flow and waste characteristics for a manufacturing
process or function with similar production characteristics which
generates a process wastewater stream. Some manufacturing processes
are not associated with any subelements; these will be discussed in
Section V. Each significant battery manufacturing process or
production function is called an element in this document. For
example, in the cadmium subcategory, a nickel cathode can be produced
for a nickel-cadmium battery. One method of producing this cathode is
by sintering nickel paste to a support structure and impregnating
nickel salts within the pores of the sintered nickel. Several process
waste streams can be associated with this manufacturing process such
as, electrode rinse streams, spent solution streams, and air scrubber
wastewater streams. All of these subelements are related to
production of nickel impregnated cathodes, which is the element. At
the element level, flows and pollutant characteristics can be related
to production. Elements are combined or can be combined in various
ways at specific plants at the subcategory level. Wastewater
treatment can be related to this level which is considered the level
of regulation. The detailed information which led to the adoption of
the above subcategorization approach is presented in the discussion of
process wastewater sources and characteristics in Section V of this
document.
FINAL SUBCATEGORIES AND PRODUCTION NORMALIZING PARAMETERS
The final approach to subcategorization based on anode reactant
material and electrolyte composition yielded the following
subcategories:
Cadmium . Lithium
Calcium . Magnesium
Lead . Nuclear
Leclanche . Zinc
Specific elements within each subcategory and corresponding production
normalizing parameters are summarized in Table IV-1 (page 161).
Selection of each production normalizing parameter is discussed within
each subcategory discussion.
Cadmium Subcateqory
This subcategory encompasses the manufacture of all batteries in which
cadmium is the reactive anode material. Cadmium anodes for these
cells are manufactured by three distinct processes and combined with
either nickel, silver, or mercury cathodes. Nickel cathodes are
produced by three different techniques, and silver and mercury
cathodes by one each. In addition, eight ancillary process operations
producing wastewater discharges were identified at plants in this
148
-------
subcategory. These process variations are considered as individual
elements for discharge limitations under this subcategory.
Characteristics of each of the process elements discussed above
resulted in the selection of production normalizing parameters. It
was necessary to select specific production normalizing parameters for
each process element because production activity areas in different
elements was not found to be reliably related on a day-to-day basis at
some plants. The selected parameters, cadmium in the anode, active
metal in the cathode, and total cell weight for ancillary operations
(except for chemical powder production which is weight of metal in the
powder produced or weight of metal used) correspond with the available
production data and water use in the process operations addressed.
Use of active metal (cadmium, nickel, mercury or silver) as the
production normalizing parameter for anode and cathode production
operations reflects the fact that water use and discharge in these
operations can be associated almost exclusively with the deposition,
cleaning, and formation (charging) of the active material. Similarly,
the weight of metal in the chemical powder used or produced (cadmium,
nickel, and silver) is the logical production normalizing parameter in
considering discharges from chemical powder production. Other
ancillary operations generally produce smaller volumes of process
wastewater which are related to the total cell assembly or the overall
level of production activity. The total weight of cadmium anode
batteries produced was found to be the best production normalizing
parameter for these discharges which could be readily derived from
data available from most plants. The use of water in washing cells
should correlate most closely with the cell surface area. Surface
area data were not available, however, and total product weight was
the best available approximation to it.
Alternatives to the production normalizing parameters discussed above
were evaluated and include:
1. the use of battery weight for all operations
2. electrode surface area
3. total electrode weight
4. battery electrical capacity
5. number of employees
Total battery weight was found to be readily available from most
manufacturers, and was initially considered a logical choice for the
production normalizing parameter for these plants. This parameter
would have allowed the use of a single parameter for all waste sources
149
-------
in a plant, potentially simplifying the application and enforcement of
effluent limitations. Following plant visits, it became evident,
however, that production patterns at some plants would render this
production normalizing parameter inapplicable, and that production
variations resulted in significant variability between production
activity in the major wastewater producing operations and the weight
of batteries ultimately shipped. Some plants were identified which
produced cell electrodes but did not produce finished batteries, and
others indicated the production of finished batteries from electrodes
processed at other locations. For such plants the battery weight
production normalizing parameter is clearly inapplicable to the
determination of wastewater discharges from electrode manufacturing
operations. Batteries are produced in this subcategory for a wide
range of applications and in many different configurations. As a
result, the ratio of battery weight to the weight of reactive
materials contained by the battery varies significantly. Since the
most significant water use and wastewater discharge is associated with
the reactive materials, the use of battery weight as a production
normalizing parameter for all operations would not result in uniform
application of effluen| limitations and standards to plants in this
subcategory.
Since most of the wastewater discharge volume associated with
electrode production results from depositing materials on or removing
impurities from electrode surfaces, electrode surface area was
considered a possible choice as the production normalizing parameter
for these operations. Significant difficulty is encountered in
defining the surface area, however, and data were not available. The
difficulty results from the fact that the electrodes generally have
significant porosity and irregular surfaces, and it is the total
wetted surface rather than the simple projected area which determines
the volume of wastewater generated. Since this area could not be
readily determined, electrode surface area was not chosen as the
production normalizing parameter for these operations.
Total electrode weights were found to be less desirable than active
material weights because the use of process water is involved pri-
marily with the active materials. Since most electrodes produced in
this subcategory include non-reactive support and current collecting
structures which account for varying fractions of the total electrode
weight, the relationship between electrode weight and wastewater
volume is less consistent than the relationship between wastewater
volume and the weight of reactive materials in the electrode.
Electrical capacity of the battery should, in theory, correspond
closely to those characteristics of cell electrodes most closely
associated with process water use and discharge during manufacture.
The electrical capacity of cells is determined by the mass of reactive
materials present, and the processing of reactive materials is the
150
-------
major source of process wastewater for most cell types. It was not,
however, considered a viable production normalizing parameter for use
in this study because electrical capacity data were not obtained.
Because the degree of process automation at battery manufacturing
plants was observed to vary, the number of production employees was
not found to be generally suitable as a production normalizing
parameter. Although the number of employees would be a suitable basis
for limiting discharges from employee showers and hand washes, battery
weight was chosen instead to achieve uniformity with other ancillary
wastewater sources and to minimize the number of production
normalizing parameters to be applied.
Calcium Subcateqory
Batteries included in this subcategory use calcium as the reactive
anode material. At present, only thermal batteries, in which a fused
mixture of potassium chloride and lithium chloride serves as the
electrolyte and calcium chromate as the cathode depolarizer, are
produced in this subcategory. While many different configurations of
these batteries are manufactured, most production can be accomplished
.without the use of process water. Significant elements in this
subcategory include anode manufacture (vapor-deposited or fabricated
calcium), cathode production (calcium chromate), and two ancillary
elements. One for the manufacture of reactive material used to heat
the cell to its operating temperature upon activation (heating
component production), and one to test the cells manufactured for
leaks.
The production normalizing parameter selected for the thermal cell
activator is the combined weight of reactive materials used in
production of the heating component (usually barium chromate and
zirconium). The selection of a production normalizing parameter
specific to heating component production is necessary because the
amount of activator material contained in thermal cells is highly
variable; hence total battery production weight is not meaningfully
related to wastewater generation and discharge. The production
normalizing parameter selected for the anode manufacture is weight of
calcium used, for cathode manufacture, it is the weight of reactive
cathode material in the cells, and for cell testing is the weight of
cells produced.
Lead Subcateqory
Two basic electrochemical systems are included in this subcategory:
lead acid reserve or lead; and lead-acid storage or lead-lead
peroxide. As discussed in Section V, lead electroplated on a steel
carrier is produced in the manufacture of lead acid reserve cells.
This is not considered part of battery manufacturing. Lead acid
151
-------
storage batteries all use the lead-lead peroxide electrolytic couple,
but differences in battery type and manufacturing processes require
careful examination of production normalizing factors. Some of the
significant variations include:
Full line manufacture (plates produced on-site)
Assembly using green plates (formation on-site)
Assembly using formed plates
Leady Oxide Production
Purchased oxide
On site production
Ball Mill process
Barton process
Plate Grids
Antimonial alloy (cast)
Pure lead (cast, punched, or rolled)
Calcium alloy (cast, punched, or rolled)
Plate Curing
With steam
Without steam
Plate Formation (Charging)
Closed Formation (electrodes assembled in battery case)
Single fill-single charge
Double fill - double charge
Double fill - single charge
Acid dumped after charge - no refill (damp batteries)
Open Formation
i
Electrodes formed, rinsed, and dried prior to assembly
(dehydrated batteries)
Plates formed prior to assembly into batteries
Electrolyte
Immobilized
Liquid
152
-------
Case
Sealed
Vented
Battery Wash
None
With water only
With detergent
Configuration
Cylindrical
Rectangular
Separators
Rubber
Paper-Phenolic
Vinyl
Among these variations, the distinction between full line manufacture
and assembly, and variations in plate curing and formation, and
battery wash operations were observed to have a significant effect on
the volume and treatability of process wastewater. To adequately
reflect the combinations of these variables observed within the
industry, the subcategory was subdivided on the basis of specific
process operations.
The total lead weight (including the weight of alloying elements in
lead grid alloys) used in the manufacture of batteries produced was
chosen as the production normalizing parameter for all process
elements for which discharge allowances are provided in this
subcategory. As discussed for the cadmium subcategory, total battery
weight, electrode surface area, total electrode weights, electrical
capacity of the battery, and number of employees were considered as
alternatives to the selected production normalizing parameter. The
weight of lead consumed in battery manufacture was chosen in
preference to total battery weight because total battery weight is
subject to variations resulting from differences in the ratio of case
weight to the weight of active material. Case weight is not directly
related to wastewater generation. Further, battery weight is not
applicable where plates are shipped for use at other locations. Total
electrode weights were not generally reported by plants in this
subcategory and, further, are subject to variation due to the degree
of hydration and state of charge of the electrode. Therefore, the
weight of lead was found to provide a more available and consistent
basis for effluent limitations and standards. Factors which led to
153
-------
the rejection of electrode surface area, battery electrical capacity,
and number of employees as production normalizing parameters for the
lead subcategory are the same as those discussed for the cadmium
subcategory.
Leclanche Subcateqory
The Leclanche dry cell uses an amalgamated zinc anode, a carbon
cathode with manganese dioxide depolarizer, and ammonium chloride and
zinc chloride electrolyte. Batteries manufactured in this subcategory
use zinc anodes and acid chloride electrolytes. Most also use
manganese dioxide as the cell depolarizer although cells using
atmospheric oxygen and silver chloride depolarizers are also included
in this subcategory. All of these cells are produced in manufacturing
processes in which water use is limited, and the volume of process
wastewater produced is small.
Significant product and process variations within the subcategory
include:
Anode Structure
Sheet Zinc - stamped
Sheet zinc formed as cell container
Sheet Zinc - fabricated
Powdered zinc deposited on substrate
Cathode Material
Manganese-dioxide and carbon
Silver chloride
Cell Separator
Paste
Cooked
Uncooked
Pasted Paper
With Mercury
Without Mercury
Amalgamation
Mercury in electrolyte
Mercury in separator
The most significant elements in this subcategory are the separator
processes. Pasted paper can be manufactured at the battery plant or
purchased. Paper which contains mercury in the paste is included
under battery manufacturing. The production normalizing parameter for
this operation is the weight of dry paste material, which can easily
be related to this process. For cooked paste and uncooked paste
separators, the weight of cells produced is the selected production
154
-------
normalizing parameter which can be related to these processes.
Information on cell weight was supplied by most plants. Weight of
cells produced can also be related to all other process operations in
this subcategory such as zinc powder production, cathode production,
and equipment and area cleanup operations. The production of stamped,
drawn, or fabricated zinc anodes is not considered under battery
manufacturing.
Alternative production normalizing parameters including electrode
surface area, separator paper consumption, and electrode raw materials
were also considered. Electrode surface areas could be readily
determined for those anodes prepared from sheet zinc, but do not
correspond to the production activities which might result in battery
manufacturing process wastewater. As discussed for other
subcategories, surface areas cannot be readily determined for cell
cathodes and for anodes prepared using powdered zinc. In addition,
there is little relationship between process water use and electrode
surface area in this subcategory. The consumption of separator paper
is a conceivable basis for the limitation of discharges from pasted
paper separator production, or from the manufacture of cells
containing pasted paper separators. It is subject to variability,
however, due to the varying amounts of paste applied, and does not
apply to batteries manufactured with other separators. Electrode
materials are frequently used as structural parts of Leclanche cells
and the weight of zinc used is not necessarily stoichiometrically
related to the other battery reactants or to water use in process
steps.
Lithium Subcategory
This subcategory encompasses the manufacture of several battery types
in which lithium is the anode reactant. Depolarizers used in these
batteries include iodine, lead iodide, sulfur dioxide, thionyl
chloride, iron disulfide, titanium disulfide, and lithium perchlorate.
Electrolytes used within this subcategory include liquid organic
compounds such as acetonitrile and methyl formate, solid organic
compounds such as poly-2-vinyl pyridine, solid inorganic salts, and
fused inorganic salts (in thermal batteries). None of the cells
reported to be currently manufactured use an aqueous electrolyte. The
manufacture of thermal batteries with lithium anodes include heat
generation component production which was discussed under the calcium
subcategory.
Anode production for this subcategory includes formed and stamped
lithium metal. This operation is considered unique to battery
manufacturing. Process wastewater might result from air scrubbers
where lithium is formed. Therefore the weight of lithium is selected
as the production normalizing parameter. For those processes
associated with cathode production operations (including addition of
155
-------
the depolarizer to the cell electrolyte), the weight of the cathode
reactant in the cells has been chosen as the production normalizing
parameter. This information was available from plants manufacturing
these batteries and is directly related to the production activities
for which limitations and standards can be developed. For ancillary
operations, two distinct production normalizing parameters are chosen.
As discussed for calcium anode battery manufacture, the production
normalizing parameter for discharges from heating component
manufacture is the total weight of heating component reactive
materials. For all other ancillary operations, the production
normalizing parameter is the weight of cells produced. These
operations are either directly involved with the complete cell
assembly (testing and cell wash), with all production areas (air
scrubbers), or with a process by product (lithium scrap disposal).
For those operations related to the total cell assembly, the total
weight of batteries produced is a sound basis for predicting water use
and discharge.
Magnesium Subcateqory
This subcategory which addresses cells with magnesium anodes, includes
magnesium-carbon batteries in which the depolarizer is manganese
dioxide, magnesium anode thermal batteries in which the depolarizer is
vanadium pentoxide, magnesium reserve cells using copper chloride,
silver chloride, or lead chloride depolarizers, and ammonia activated
cells in which meta-dinitrobenzene serves as the depolarizer. Cell
electrolytes include aqueous solutions of magnesium perchlorate, or
magnesium bromide, sea water (added to reserve cells at the time of
activation), fused mixtures of potassium chloride and lithium
chloride, and ammonium thiocyanate (dissolved in ammonia to activate
ammonia activated cells). Magnesium anodes for many of these cells
are protected from corrosion during storage by chromate coatings which
may be on the magnesium when it is obtained by the battery plant or
which may be applied at the battery manufacturing site.
Production normalizing parameters were selected on the same general
basis as discussed for other subcategories. Magnesium anode
production which includes sheet magnesium that is stamped, formed, or
fabricated and magnesium powder related processes are not included
under battery manufacturing. Depolarizer weight is the production
normalizing parameter for depolarizer production. Heating component
production is limited on the basis of the weight of reactants as
discussed previously for the calcium anode subcategory. The weight of
batteries produced is selected as the production normalizing parameter
for cell testing and cell separator processing operations, floor and
equipment area maintenance, and assembly area air scrubbers.
156
-------
Nuclear Subcateqory
Commercial nuclear batteries were produced primarily for use in heart
pacemakers. Production of these batteries has ceased with the
increase in production of lithium batteries. Although wastewater was
generated by the manufacture of nuclear batteries, the subcategory
will not be further defined, and production normalizing parameters
will not be examined until production resumes.
Zinc Subcateqory
Batteries produced in this subcategory have an amalgamated zinc anode
and a sodium or potassium hydroxide electrolyte. Cells using ten
different depolarizer combinations are presently produced within the
subcategory in a wide variety of cell configurations and sizes. Zinc
anodes for these cells are produced in seven distinct processes, but
anodes produced by each process are typically combined with several
different types of cathodes, and anodes produced by two or more
different processes are commonly used with a given depolarizer.
The weight of reactive material contained in the electrode was found
to be the best production normalizing parameter for anode and cathode
manufacturing processes. For most ancillary operations, which are
usually associated with cell assemblies or with general plant pro-
duction activity, the production normalizing parameter is the total
weight of batteries produced. For one ancillary operation where the
etching of silver foil is used as a substrate for zinc anodes, the
weight of silver foil used for etching is chosen as the production
normalizing parameter. The use of this parameter rather than total
battery weight is necessary because not all batteries at any given
plant'are produced using etched foil. The volume of wastewater from
this operation will therefore not be directly related to the total
product weight. For silver powder production, the weight of silver
powder produced is used as the production normalizing parameter, and
for silver peroxide powder production, the weight of silver powder
used is the production normalizing parameter.
Alternatives to the selected production normalizing parameters which
were considered include the use of total battery weight for all
operations, electrode surface area, total electrode weight, battery
electrical capacity, and the number of production employees. These
were evaluated and rejected in favor of the selected parameters on the
basis of factors very similar to those discussed for the cadmium anode
subcategory. Electrode manufacturing processes are common to multiple
battery types at several plants in this subcategory, with the fraction
of total cell weight containing active material in each electrode
unique to each cell type. Further, electrode production (or active
material processing) may not be scheduled concurrently with cell
assembly for all products, and may be performed at one plant for cells
157
-------
assembled at another site. As a result, it is necessary that
discharges from electrode production be limited on the basis of a
parameter unique to the electrode itself. Total product weight is not
a useful discharge limiting factor for these operations. Electrode
surface area was not chosen as the production normalizing parameter
because, as discussed previously, it is not available and cannot be
readily determined. Because some electrodes include non-reactive
materials for support and current collection and others (with the same
reactants) do not, total electrode weights do not correspond as well
to water used in processing active materials as do the weights of
active materials themselves. As discussed previously, total
electrical capacity has potential as a production normalizing
parameter, but supporting data are not presently available. The
number of employees does not correlate well with process water use and
discharge.
OPERATIONS COVERED UNDER OTHER CATEGORIES
Many battery plants perform processes on-site which are not unique to
battery manufacturing and which are addressed in effluent limitations
and standards for other industrial categories. These have been
identified in Table IV-2 (Page 163). Below, they are discussed in
ference to the lead subcategory and generally discussed in reference
to the other subcategories. Specific operations are discussed in Sec-
tion V.
Lead Subcateqory
Plants producing batteries within the lead subcategory perform a
number of processes included in other industrial categories. Most
plants produce electrode grids on-site. These are most often cast
from lead (and lead alloys), a metal casting operation, but may also
be rolled or stamped from pure or alloy lead in metal forming
operations. Some lead anode battery plants also produce rubber or
plastic battery cases on-site.
The production of lead oxide at battery plants is a unique operation
yielding a "leady oxide" distinct from lead oxide produced in
inorganic chemical production. It is included under the battery
manufacturing category for the purpose of effluent limitations and
standards.
Other Subcategories
Battery manufacturing plants in other subcategories have been observed
to employ a number of manufacturing processes including: metal forming
and shaping, metallurgical plant operations, metal plating, paper
158
-------
pasting processes (without mercury) and inorganic chemicals
preparation.
These manufacturing operations are not considered as battery
manufacturing operations. Metal forming and shaping operations,
including deburring and cleaning are involved in the production of
anodes (which may also serve as the cell container) and various cell
contacts, covers and jackets. Several battery plants report the
preparation of metal alloys or the operation of secondary metals
recovery operations. A number of battery manufacturing processes
involve plating or chromating metals on battery parts or assembled
battery cases. Some plants paste paper with flour and starch without
using mercury. Inorganic chemicals not specific to battery
manufacturing are often purchased, but may be produced on-site. None
of these operations is addressed in the development of battery
manufacturing effluent limitations and standards.
159
-------
SUBCATEGORY
REGULATION
ANODE MANUFACTURE
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
j
n r
11
11_
11
11
* I t__
CATHODE MANUFACTURE
"II 1
ANCILLARY OPERATIONS I
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
11
n
11
n
n
n
11
ELEMENT
ELEMENT
MANUFACTURING PROCESS
OPERATIONS
DETERMINATION OF
FLOWS AND POLLUTANT
CHARACTERISTICS
INDIVIDUAL PROCESS WASTEWATER STREAMS (SUBELEMENTS)
GENERATION OF
WASTEWATER
POLLUTANTS
FIGURE IV-1 SUMMARY OF CATEGORY ANALYSIS
-------
TABLE IV 1 SUBCATEGORY ELEMENTS AND PRODUCTION NORMALIZING PARAMETERS (PNP)
SUBCATEGORY
Cadmium Anodes
Cathodes
Ancillary
Calcium Anodes
Cathodes
Ancillary
ELEMENT PNP
Pasted and Pressed Powder Weight of Cadmium
Eteetrodeposfted in Anode
Impregnated
Silver Powder Pressed Weight of Silver
in Cathode
Mercuric Oxide Powder Weight of Mercury
Pressed in Cathode
Nickel Pressed Powder Weight of Nickel
Nickel Electrodeposited Applied
Nickel Impregnated
CeN Wash Weight of Cells
Electrolyte Preparation Produced
Floor and Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production Weight of Cadmium
Powder Produced
Silver Powder Production Weight of Silver
Powder Produced
Cadmium Hydroxide Production Weight of Cadmium
Used
Nickel Hydroxide Production Weight of Nickel
Used
Vapor Deposited Weight of Calcium
Fabricated Used
Calcium Chromate Weight of Reactive
Tungstic Oxide Material
Potassium Dichromate
Heating Component Production Total Weight of
Heat Paper Reactants
Heat Pellet
Cell Testing Weight of Cells
Produced
Plating NA
SUBCATEGORY
Lead Anodes
and
Cathodes
Ancillary
Lectanche Anodes
Cathodes
Ancillary
ELEMENT PNP
Electroplated Lead NA
Leady Oxide Production Weight of Lead Used
Paste Preparation and
Application
Curing
Closed Formation
(In Case)
Single Fill
Double Fill
Fill and Dump
Open Formation (Out of
Case)
Dehydrated
Wet
Battery Wash Weight of Lead Used
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
Zinc Powder Weight of Cells
Produced
Sheet zinc
stamped NA
drawn
fabricated
Manganese Dioxide-Pressed Weight of Cells
electrolyte without Produced
mercury
-electrolyte with
mercury
-gelled electrolyte
with mercury
Pasted Manganese Dioxide
Carbon (Porous)
Silver Chloride
Separator Weight of Cells
Cooked Paste Produced
Separator
Uncooked Paste
Separator Weight of Dry
Pasted Paper with mercury Pasted Material
Separator NA
Pasted Paper w/o mercury
Equipment and Weight of Cells
Area Cleanup Produced
-------
TABLE IV 1 SUBCATEGORY ELEMENTS AND PRODUCTION NORMALIZING PARAMETERS (PNP)
SUBCATEGORY
Lithium Anodes
Cathodes
Ancilbry
Magnesium Anodes
Cathodes
Ancillary
NA - Not Applicable to Battery Mi
ELEMENT PNP
Formed and Stamped Weight of Lithium
Sulfur Dioxide Weight of Reactive
Iodine Material
Iron Disuffide
Lithium PercRmnte
Titanium Drsuffide
Thwnyl Chloride
Lead Iodide
Heating Component Production Weight of Reactants
Heat Paper
Heat Pellets
Lithium Scrap Disposal Weight of Cells
Cell Testing Produced
Cell Wash
Floor and Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
formed
fabricated
MAfnmmn Powder WciQlit of MftfiMsmtn
Used
Silver Chloride - Weight of Depolarizer
ChMifevtly ROQVCM MvtwMi
Slnw CMofiM
Electrolytic
Copper Chloride
Copper Iodide
Load CMoride
SaVVfT CbwrMM
Vanadium Pentexide
Carbon
M-DmrtrobtnzeM
Heating Component Production Weight of Reactants
Heat Paper
HeatPeRets
CeN Testing Weight of Cells
Separator Processing Produced
Floor and Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
imrfacturmg Category
SUBCATEGORY
Zinc Anodes
Cathodes
Ancillary
ELEMENT PNP
Cast or Fabricated Weight of Zinc
Wet Amalgamated
Zinc Powder -
Gelled Amalgam
Zinc Powder -
Dry Amalgamated
Zinc Oxide Powder -
Pasted or Pressed
Zinc Oxide Powder -
Pasted or Pressed. Reduced
Zinc Electrodeposited Weight of Zinc
Deposited
Porous Carbon Weight of Carbon
Manganese Dioxide - Weight of Manganese
Carbon Dioxide
Mercuric Oxide (and Weight of Mercury
mercuric oxide -
manganese dioxide carbon)
Mercuric Oxide - Weight of Mercury
Cadmium Oxide and Cadmium
Silver Powder Pressed Weight of Silver
Silver Powder Pressed Applied
and Etectrolytically
Oxidized (Formed)
Silver Oxide
Powder - Thermally
Reduced or Sintered,
Ebctrolytkalry Formed
Silver Oxide Powder
Silver Peroxide Powder
Niche) Impregnated and Weight of Nickel
Formed Applied
Cell Wash Weight of Cells
Electrolyte Preparation Produced
Mandatory Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor and Equipment Wash
Silver Etch Weight of Silver
Processed
Silver Peroxide Production Weight of Silver in
Silver Peroxide
Produced
Silver Powder Production Weight of Silver
Powder Produced
-------
TABLE IV-2
OPERATIONS AT BATTERY PLANTS INCLUDED
IN OTHER INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES
(Partial Listing)
Lead Alloy Grid Casting and Forming
Plastic and Rubber Battery Case Manufacture
Forming Cell Containers and Components (Including Zinc and
Magnesium Can Anodes)
Cleaning and Deburring Formed Cell Components
Retorting, Smelting and Alloying Metals
Metal Plating (Includes Chromating of Zinc and Magnesium Cans)
Inorganic Chemical Production (Not Specific to Battery Manufacturing)
Pasted Paper Manufacture (Without Mercury)
163
-------
-------
SECTION V
WATER USE AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION
This section describes the collection, analysis, and characterization
of data that form the basis for effluent limitations and standards for
the battery manufacturing category, and presents the results of these
efforts. Data were collected from a number of sources including
published literature, previous studies of battery manufacturing, data
collection portfolios (dcp's) mailed to all known battery
manufacturers, and on-site data collection and sampling at selected
facilities. Data analysis began with an investigation of the
manufacturing processes practiced, the raw materials used, the process
water used and the wastewater generated in the battery category. This
analysis was the basis for subcategorization and selection of
production normalizing parameters (pnp's) discussed in detail in
Section IV. Further analysis included collecting wastewater samples
and characterizing wastewater streams within each subcategory.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The sources of data used in this study have been discussed in detail
in Section III. Published literature and previous studies of the
category provided a basis for initial data collection efforts and
general background for the evaluation of data from specific plants.
The dcp's sent to all known battery manufacturing companies provided
the most complete and detailed description of the category which could
be obtained. Dcp's were used to develop category and subcategory data
summaries and were the primary basis for the selection of plants for
on-site sampling and data collection. Data from plant visits was used
to characterize raw and treated wastewater streams within the category
and provide an in-depth evaluation of the impact of product and
process variations on wastewater characteristics and treatability.
Data analysis proceeded concurrently with data collection and provided
guidance for the data collection effort. Initially, a review and
evaluation of the available information from published literature and
previous studies was used as the basis for developing the dcp format
which structured the preliminary data base for category analysis.
This initial effort included the definition of preliminary
subcategories within the battery manufacturing category. These
subcategories were expected to differ significantly in manufacturing
processes and wastewater discharge characteristics. Consequently on-
site data collection and wastewater sampling were performed for each
subcategory. Specific sites for sampling were selected on the basis
of data obtained from completed dcp's. For each subcategory,
screening samples were collected and analyzed for all priority
pollutants and other selected parameters. The results of these
165
-------
screening analyses, plus the dcp data, were evaluated to select
significant pollutant parameters within each subcategory for
verification sampling and analysis.
Data Collection Portfolio
The data collection portfolio (dcp) was used to obtain information
about production, manufacturing processes, raw materials, water use,
wastewater discharge and treatment, effluent quality, and presence or
absence of priority pollutants in wastewaters from battery
manufacturers. Because many battery manufacturing plants,
particularly lead acid battery manufacturers, operate on-site casting
facilities, a dcp addressing casting operations was included with the
battery manufacturing dcp. After collection of the data, the
determination was made that process wastewater discharges from casting
would be regulated as part of the Metal Molding and Casting Category.
The dcp requested data for the year 1976, the last full year for which
production information was expected to be available. Some plants
provided information for 1977 and 1978 rather than 1976 as requested
in the dcp. All data received were used to characterize the industry.
For data gathering purposes, a list of companies known to manufacture
batteries was compiled from Dun and Bradstreet Inc. SIC code
listings, battery industry trade association membership lists,
listings in the Thomas Register, and lists of battery manufacturers
compiled during previous EPA studies. These sources included battery
distributors, wholesalers, corporate headquarters and individual
plants. The lists were screened to identify corporate headquarters
for companies manufacturing batteries and to eliminate distributors
and wholesalers. As a result, 226 dcp's were mailed to each corporate
headquarters, and a separate response was requested for each battery
manufacturing plant operated by the corporation. Following dcp
distribution, responses were received confirming battery manufacture
by 133 companies operating at 235 manufacturing sites. Because of the
dynamic nature of battery manufacturing these numbers vary since some
sites have consolidated operations, and some have closed.
Specific information requested in the dcp's was determined on the
basis of an analysis of data available from published literature and
previous EPA studies of this category, and consideration of data
requirements for the promulgation of effluent limitations and
standards.
This analysis indicated that wastewater volumes and characteristics
varied significantly among different battery types according to the
chemical reactants and electrolyte used, and that raw materials
constituted potential sources of significant pollutants. In addition,
batteries of a given type are commonly produced in a variety of sizes,
166
-------
shapes, and electrical capacities. Available data also indicated that
processes could vary significantly in wastewater discharge
characterisitcs.
As a result of these considerations, the dcp was developed so that
specific battery types manufactured, manufacturing processes
practiced, and the raw materials used for each type could be
identified. Production information was requested in terms of both
total annual production (Ibs/yr) and production rate (Ibs/hr). Water
discharge information was requested in terms of gallons per hour. The
dcp also requested a complete description of the manufacturing process
for each battery type, including flow diagrams designating points and
flow rates of water use and discharge, and type and quantity of raw
materials used. Chemical characteristics of each process wastewater
stream were also requested.
Basic information requested included the name and address of the plant
and corporate headquarters, and the names and telephone numbers of
contacts for further information. Additionally, the dcp included a
request for a description of wastewater treatment practices, water
source and use, wastewater discharge destination, and type of
discharge regulations to which each plant was subject. Since the
wastewaters at each plant had not been analyzed for the priority
pollutants, the dcp asked whether each priority pollutant was known or
believed to be present in, or absent from, process wastewater from the
plant.
Of the 235 confirmed battery manufacturing sites, all but 10 returned
either a completed dcp or a letter with relevant available information
submitted in lieu of the dcp. This level of response was achieved
through follow-up telephone and written contacts after mailing of the
original data requests. Follow-up contacts indicated that six of the
10 plants which did not provide a written response had less than five
employees and with the other four comprised a negligible fraction of
the industry.
The quality of the responses obtained varied significantly. Although
most plants could provide most of the information requested a few
indicated that available information was limited to the plant name and
location, product, and number of employees. These plants were
generally small and usually reported that they discharged no process
wastewater. Also, process descriptions varied considerably. Plants
were asked to describe all process operations, not just those that
generated process wastewater. As a result over 50 percent of the lead
subcategory plants and approximately 40 percent of the other plants
submitting dcp's indicated that certain process operations did not
generate wastewater. In some dcp's specific process flow rates
conflicted with water use and discharge rates reported elsewhere in
the dcp. Specific process flow information provided in the dcp's was
167
-------
sufficient to characterize flow rates for most process elements for
each subcategory. These data were augmented by data from plant visits
and, where appropriate, by information gained in follow-up telephone
and written contacts with selected plants. Raw waste chemical
analysis was almost universally absent from the dcp's and had to be
developed almost entirely from sampling at visited plants and data
from previous EPA studies.
Upon receipt, each dcp was reviewed to determine plant products,
manufacturing processes, wastewater treatment and control practices,
and effluent quality (if available). Subsequently, selected data
contained in each portfolio were entered into a computer data base to
provide identification of plants with specific characteristics (e.g.
specific products, process operations, or waste treatment processes),
and to retrieve basic data for these plants. The dcp data base
provided quantitative flow and production data for each plant. This
information was used to calculate production normalized flow values as
well as wastewater flow rates for each manufacturing process element
in each subcategory. The data base was also used to identify and
evaluate wastewater treatment technologies and in-process control
techniques used.
Plant Visits and Sampling
Forty-eight battery manufacturing plants were visited as part of the
data collection effort. At each plant, information was obtained about
the manufacturing processes, raw materials, process wastewater sources
(if any), and wastewater treatment and control practices. Wastewater
samples were collected at 19 plants.
The collection of data on priority, conventional and nonconventional
pollutants in waste streams generated by this category was
accomplished using a two-phase sampling program. The first phase,
screening, was designed to provide samples of influent water, raw
wastewtaer and treated effluent from a representative plant in each
subcategory. Samples from the screening phase were analyzed and the
results evaluated to determine the presence of pollutants in a waste
stream and their potential environmental significance. Those
pollutants found to be potentially significant in a subcategory were
selected for further study under the second, or verification, phase of
the program. This screening-verification approach allowed both
investigation of a large number of pollutants and in-depth
characterization of individual process wastetwater streams without
incurring prohibitive costs.
Sampling and Analysis Procedures
Sampling procedures were applied for screening and verification
sampling programs. For screening, plants identified as being
168
-------
representative of the subcategory in terms of manufacturing processes,
raw materials, products, and wastewater generation were selected for
sampling. Where possible, plants with multiple products or processes
were chosen for screening. The screening program was designed to
cover battery types under the initial subcategorization.
Screening samples were obtained to characterize the total process
wastewater before and after treatment. All screening was performed
according to EPA protocol as documented in Sampling and Analysis
Procedures for Screening of Industrial Effluents for Priority
Pollutants, April 1977. Only the combined raw waste stream and total
process effluent were sampled. At plants that had no single combined
raw waste or treated effluent, samples were taken from discrete waste
sources and a flow-proportioned composite was used to represent the
total waste stream for screening.
Asbestos data were collected from selected plants as part of a
separate screening effort using self-sampling kits supplied to each
selected plant. The sampling protocol for asbestos was developed
after the initial screening efforts had been completed. Consequently,
asbestos data on plant influent, raw wastewater, and effluent for each
subcategory was not necessarily collected from the same plants
involved in the initial screening.
Plants were selected for verification sampling on the basis of the
screening results. Those plants within a subcategory that
demonstrated effective pollutant reductions were specifically
identified for sampling in order to evaluate wastewater treatment and
control practices within the industry. For the subcategories
containing a relatively small number of plants and relatively few
types of wastewater treatment and control practices, the selection of
plants for sampling was based primarily on production, manufacturing
processes, and wastewater generation.
Initially, each potential sampling site was contacted by telephone to
confirm and expand the dcp information and to ascertain the degree of
cooperation which the plant would provide. The dcp for the plant was
then reviewed to identify (a) specific process wastewater samples
needed to characterize process raw waste streams and wastewater
treatment performance and (b) any additional data required. Each
plant was then visited for one day to determine specific sampling
locations and collect additional information. In some cases, it was
determined during this preliminary visit that existing wastewater
plumbing at the plant would not permit meaningful characterization of
battery manufacturing process wastewater. In these cases, plans for
sampling the site were discontinued. For plants chosen for sampling,
a detailed sampling plan was developed on the basis of the preliminary
plant visit identifying sampling locations, flow measurement
169
-------
techniques, sampling schedules, and additional data to be collected
during the sampling visit.
Sample points were selected at each plant to characterize a process
wastewater from each distinct process operation, the total process
waste stream, and the effluent from wastewater treatment. Multiple
wastewater streams from a single process operation or unit, such as
the individual stages of a series rinse, were not sampled separately
but combined as a flow-proportioned composite sample. In some cases,
wastewater flow patterns at specific plants did not allow separate
sampling of certain process waste streams, and only samples of
combined wastewaters from two or more process operations were taken.
Where possible, chemical characteristics of these individual waste
streams were determined by mass balance calculations from the analyses
of samples of other contributing waste streams and of combined
streams. In general, process wastewater samples were obtained before
any treatment, such as settling in sumps, dilution, or mixing that
would change its characteristics. When samples could not be taken
before treatment, sampling conditions were carefully documented and
considered in the evaluation of the sampling results.
As a result of the sampling visits 257 raw waste samples were obtained
characterizing 75 distinct wastewater sources associated with 37
different battery manufacturing process operations. In addition, 22
samples were obtained from plant water supplies. Samples were also
taken for analysis which either characterized wastewater streams from
sources other than battery manufacturing that were combined for
treatment with battery manufacturing wastes or characterized
wastewater at intermediate points in treatment systems that used
several operations.
Samples for verification were collected at each site on three
successive days. Except if precluded by production or wastewater
discharge patterns, 24-hour flow proportioned composite samples were
obtained. Composite samples were prepared either by using
continuously operating automatic samplers or by compositing grab
samples obtained manually at a rate of one per hour. For batch
operations composites were prepared by combining grab samples from
each batch. Wastewater flow rates, pH, and temperature were measured
at each sampling point hourly for continuous operations. For batch
operations, these parameters were measured at the time the sample was
taken. At the end of each sampling day, composite samples were
divided into aliquots and taken for analysis of organic priority
pollutants, metals, TSS, cyanide, ammonia, and oil and grease.
Separate grab samples were taken for analysis of volatile organic
compounds and for total phenols because these parameters would not
remain stable during compositing. Composite samples were kept on ice
at 4ฐC during handling and shipment. Analysis for metals was by
plasma arc spectrograph for screening and by atomic absorption for
170
-------
verification. Analysis for organic priority pollutants was performed
by gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer for screening. For
verification analysis, gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer (GCMS) and
gas chromatograph were used for organic priority pollutant analysis as
required by EPA protocol. All sample analyses were performed in
accordance with the EPA protocol listed in Table V-l (page 297).
The sampling data provided wastewater chemical characteristics as well
as flow information for the manufacturing process elements within each
subcategory. Long-term flow and production values from the dcp data
base or average flow and production values obtained during sampling
were used as a basis for calculating a production normalized flow for
each process element. A single value for each plant that most
accurately represented existing plant operations was used to avoid
excessively weighting visited plants (usually three days of values) in
statistical treatment of the data.
Mean and median statistical methods were used to characterize each
process element production normalized flow and wastewater
characteristics. The mean value is the average of a set of values,
and the median of a set of values is the value below which half of the
values in the set lie.
All data was used to determine total process element and subcategory
wastewater discharge flow rates. For plants that did not supply
process wastewater discharge flow rates, but did provide production
data, the mean of the individual production normalized flow values was
used.
Screening Analysis Results
The results of screening analysis for each subcategory are presented
in Tables V-2 through V-8 (Pages 303 - 329). Pollutants reported in
the dcp's as known or believed to be present in process wastewater
from plants in the subcategory are also indicated on these tables. In
the tables, ND indicates that the pollutant was not detected and NA
indicates that the pollutant was not analyzed. For organic pollutants
other than pesticides, the symbol * is used to indicate detection at
less than or equal to 0.01 mg/1, the quantifiable limit of detection.
For pesticides (pollutants 89-105), the symbol ** indicates detection
less than or equal to the quantifiable limit of 0.005 mg/1. For
metals, the use of < indicates that the pollutant was not detected by
analysis with a detection limit as shown. The analytical methods used
for screening analysis could not separate concentrations of certain
pollutant parameter pairs, specifically polllutants numbered 72 and
76, 78 and 81, and 74 and 75. These pollutant pairs will have the
same reported concentrations. Alkyl epoxides, and xylenes were not
analyzed in any samples because established analytical procedures and
standards were not available at the time of analysis. 2,3,7,8-
171
-------
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) was not analyzed because of the
hazard in laboratory analysis associated with handling TCDD standards.
In the screening analysis tables dioxin is listed as not detected
because analysis could not be done for this pollutant. Analysis of
asbestos was accomplished using microscopy. Results of asbestos
analysis are reported as fibers being present or absent from a sample.
The symbol + is used to indicate the presence of chrysotile fibers.
Non-volatile organic pollutants were not analyzed for one zinc
subcategory screening sample due to loss of the sample in shipment.
Two sets of screening data are presented for the zinc subcategory.
Two plants in this subcategory were screened because screening was
initially performed on the basis of the initial product type
subcategories.
Selection Of Verification Parameters
Verification parameters for each subcategory were selected based on
screening analysis results, presence of the pollutants in process
waste streams as reported in dcp's, and a technical evaluation of
manufacturing processes and raw materials used within each
subcategory. Criteria for selection of priority and conventional
pollutants included:
1. Occurrence of the pollutant in process wastewater from the
subcategory may be anticipated because the pollutant is
present in, or used as, a raw material or process chemical.
Also the dcp priority pollutant segment indicated that the
pollutant was known or believed to be present in process
wastewaters.
2. The pollutant was found to be present in the process
wastewater at quantifiable limits based on the results of
screening analysis. If the presence of the pollutant was at
or below the quantifiable limit, the other criteria were
used to determine if selection of the parameter was
justified.
3. The detected concentrations were considered significant
following an analysis of the ambient water quality criteria
concentrations and an evaluation of concentrations detected
in blank, plant influent, and effluent samples.
The criteria was used for the final selection of all verification
parameters, which included both toxic and conventional pollutant
parameters. An examination was made of all nonconventional pollutants
detected at screening and several were also selected as verification
parameters. Specific discussion of the selection of verification
parameters for each subcategory is presented in the following
paragraphs. Table V-9 (page 334) is a summary of the verification
parameters selected for all the subcategories.
172
-------
Cadmium Subcateqory. The following 16 pollutant parameters were
selected for further analysis in this subcategory:
44 methylene chloride 126 silver (for silver cathodes only)
87 trichloroethylene 128 zinc
118 cadmium ammonia
119 chromium cobalt
121 cyanide phenols (4AAP)
122 lead oil and grease
123 mercury TSS
124 nickel pH
The organic pollutants dichlorobromomethane and bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate were all detected in screening raw waste samples
at concentrations below the quantifiable limit and were not selected
for verification because there was no clear relationship between these
pollutants and manufacturing processes in this subcategory.
Chloroform was detected in screening but was not selected for
verification sampling because the presence of chloroform was
attributed to the influent water. Toluene was detected at 0.025 mg/1
in the effluent but was not chosen for verification because this
pollutant was not related to any manufacturing process. All other
organic priority pollutants detected in screening analysis for this
subcategory were included in verification analysis.
Of the metal priority pollutants, beryllium was reported at its
quantifiable limit of detection in all samples, was not known to be
used as a raw material and was therefore not selected. Copper was
detected at a concentration above the limit of detection in only the
influent sample. Because copper was not associated with any
manufacturing process in the subcategory, it was not selected for
verification. Although silver was not detected in screening, it was
selected as a verification parameter for process wastewaters
associated with silver cathode production because silver was used as a
raw material. All other metal priority pollutants detected in
screening analysis for this subcategory were selected for
verification. Cyanide was also selected for verification because it
was detectedปin screening and it was reported as a pollutant known to
be present in battery wastewaters in the dcp data.
A number of nonconventional pollutants were also detected in screening
analyses of cadmium subcategory process wastewater. Of these,
fluoride, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorous, sodium, and tin
were detected, but not selected for verification analysis. Ammonia
and total phenols were detected in screening and were selected as
verification parameters. Cobalt was also selected for verification
analysis although it was not detected in screening because it is known
to be used as a process raw material at some sites in the subcategory
and was expected to occur as a wastewater pollutant at those sites.
173
-------
In addition, the conventional pollutants, TSS, oil and grease, and pH
were included for verification analysis.
Calcium Subcategory. The following 18 pollutant parameters were
selected for further analysis in this subcategory:
t4 1,1,2-trichloroethane 124 nickel
23 chloroform 126 silver
44 methylene chloride 128 zinc
66 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate cobalt
116 asbestos iron
118 cadmium manganese
119 chromium oil and grease
120 copper TSS
122 lead pH
Three organic priority pollutants, pentachlorophenol, di-n-butyl
phthalate, and toluene were detected in screening samples at
concentrations below the analytical quantification limit of 0.01 mg/1
and were not selected for verification because there was no reason why
these pollutants should be present as a result of the manufacturing
processes in this subcategory. All other organic priority pollutants
detected in screening analysis for this subcategory were selected for
verification.
The metal priority pollutants, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, mercury,
selenium, and thallium, were not quantifiable in screening analysis
and are not known to result from any manufacturing process in this
subcategory. Consequently, they were not selected for verification.
All other metal priority pollutants were detected in screening and
were selected for verification. In addition, asbestos, reported as a
raw material in this subcategory and detected in screening samples,
was included for verification.
A number of nonconventional pollutants were detected in screening, but
not included in verification analysis. Cobalt, iron, and manganese
were detected during screening and were included as verification
parameters. In addition, the conventional pollutants total suspended
solids, oil and grease, and pH were included in verification analysis.
Lead Subcateqory. The following 28 pollutant parameters were selected
for further analysis in this subcategory:
11 1,1,1-trichloroethane 118 cadmium
23 chloroform 119 chromium
44 methylene chloride 120 copper
55 naphthalene 122 lead
65 phenol 123 mercury
174
-------
66 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 124 nickel
67 butyl benzyl phthalate 126 silver
68 di-n-butyl phthalate 128 zinc
69 di-n-octyl phthalate iron
78 anthracene phenols (4AAP)
81 phenanthrene strontium
84 pyrene oil and grease
114 antimony TSS
115 arsenic pH
Eighteen organic priority pollutants were detected in screening at
concentrations at or below the quantification level. These
pollutants, acenaphthene, benzene, 2,4,6,trichlorophenol, 2-
chlorophenol, 1-3 dichlorobenzene, 2,4-dichlorophenol, ethylbenzene,
fluoranthene, dichlorobromomethane, chlorodibrompmethane, 1,2-
benzanthracene, 3,4-benzopyrene, 3,4-benzofluoranthene,
11,12-benzofluoranthene, chrysene, fluorene, trichloroethylene, and
heptachlor epoxide were neither known to be used in manufacturing
within the subcategory nor reported as present in process wastewater
by any manufacturer. They were therefore not selected for
verification. Five additional organic priority pollutants were
reported as believed to be present in process wastewater by at least
one plant in the subcategory but were not detected in screening
analysis. On the basis of screening results and the other criteria,
1,2-dichloroethane, dichlorodifluoromethane, PCB-1242, PCB-1254, and
PCB-1260, were not selected as verification parameters for the lead
subcategory. Toluene was also indicated as believed to be present in
one dcp, but was detected in screening analysis at less than the
quantifiable limit. Therefore, it was not selected for verification.
Two organic pollutants, methylene chloride, and naphthalene, were
included in verification analysis, though detected only at the
quantifiable limit, because they were reported to be present in
process wastewater in dcp's from lead subcategory plants. Pyrene and
phenol were selected as verification parameters because they were
identified as potential pollutants resulting from oils and bituminous
battery case sealants. All other organic priority pollutants found to
be present in screening analysis for this subcategory were included in
verification.
Of the metal priority pollutant parameters, beryllium was reported at
the limit of detection. Because beryllium was not known to be related
to battery manufacture, it was not selected for verification.
Antimony, although detected at the limit of detection, was selected
for verification because of dcp responses. All metal pollutant
parameters detected in screening above the limits of detection were
selected for verification. Arsenic was selected as a verification
parameter because it was reported to be present in process wastewater
by battery manufacturers and was known to be used in the manufacturing
process. Another metal pollutant, mercury, was also selected for
175
-------
verification because it was not analyzed in screening and was reported
as believed to be present in process wastewaters by some battery
manufacturers. Cyanide was not selected for verification since it was
reported in all samples at the limit of detection and was not known to
be present in battery process wastewaters.
A number of nonconventional pollutants were also detected in
screening, but not included in verification analysis. Iron and total
phenols were detected in screening and were consequently included in
verification analyses. Iron is present in process wastewater as a
result of corrosion of process equipment, and total phenols may derive
from oil and grease, and bituminous materials used in manufacturing.
Strontium was included in verification analysis although it was not
analyzed in screening because it is used as a raw material in
manufacturing some batteries in this subcategory. In addition, the
conventional pollutants, oil and grease, TSS, and pH were included in
verification analysis.
Leclanche Subcateqory. The following 16 pollutant parameters were
selected for further analysis in this subcategory:
x 70 diethyl phthalate 124 nickel
114 antimony 125 selenium
115 arsenic 128 zinc
118 cadmium manganese
119 chromium phenols (4AAP)
120 copper oil and grease
122 lead TSS
123 mercury pH
Twelve . organic priority pollutants were detected at concentrations
less than the quantification levels in screening samples for this
subcategory. Nine of these pollutants, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, dichlorobromomethane, chlorodibromomethane,
phenol, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, butyl benzyl
phthalate, and dimethyl phthalate, were neither reported to be present
in process wastewater by plants in this subcategory nor known to be
used in the manufacturing process. The remaining three pollutants,
methylene chloride, di-n- octyl phthalate, and toluene, were reported
as known or believed to be present in process wastewater in the dcp
data. Methylene chloride was reported as known to be present and was
used in the manufacturing process by one plant. This plant also
reported, however, that use of this material had been discontinued.
Di-n-octyl phthalate was reported as believed to be present in process
wastewater by one plant. Toluene was reported as believed to be
present in process wastewater by two plants. Their presence cannot be
traced to any use in battery manufacturing processes, and is believed
to be due to on-site plastics processing and vapor degreasing
operations which are not regulated as part of the battery
176
-------
manufacturing category. On the basis of these considerations, none of
these 12 pollutants were included in verification analyses.
Chloroform was detected in screening at the quantifiable limit in the
raw waste but was not selected for verification because the influent
sample concentration of this pollutant was greater than the raw waste
concentration. Diethyl phthalate was the only organic priority
pollutants detected in screening which was selected for verification
analysis.
For metal priority pollutants beryllium and silver were not selected
because they were reported at the limits of detection and were not
known to be a part of any manufacturing process in this subcategory.
Arsenic was selected as a verification parameter, although not found
in screening samples because arsenic was reported as believed to be
present in process wastewater by four plants in this subcategory, is a
highly toxic pollutant, and is known to be a potential contaminant of
zinc which is a major raw material. Selenium was reported to be
present in process wastewater by one manufacturer, and was therefore
included in verification analyses. All other metal priority
pollutants which were detected in screening were selected for
verification.
A number of nonconventional pollutants were detected in screening but
not selected as verification parameters. Manganese and total phenols
were measured at significant levels in screening and were consequently
included in verification analyses. In addition, the conventional
pollutants oil and grease, TSS, and pH were selected for verification
analysis.
Lithium Subcateqory. The following 18 pollutant parameters were
selected for further analysis in this subcategory:
14 1,1,2-trichloroethane
23 chloroform
44 methylene chloride
66 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
116 asbestos
118 cadmium
119 chromium
120 copper
122 lead
nickel
silver
zinc
cobalt
iron
manganese
oil and grease
TSS
PH
Screening analysis for this subcategory encompassed waste streams
resulting from the manufacture of cathodes and heating elements for
thermal batteries. The selection of verification parameters for this
subcategory is based on the screening results as well as a review of
raw materials and dcp information for all process elements.
177
-------
Wet scrubbers used in sulfur dioxide and thionyl chloride cathode
manufacture serve to control emissions of vapors of these materials.
The resultant wastewater consequently will contain sulfurous and
hydrochloric acids, but no priority pollutants. Neutralization and
recycle of the scrubber wastes will result in the presence of sodium
sulfite and sodium chloride as well as sodium sulfate resulting from
oxidation of the sulfite. Lithium scrap disposal is expected to
produce a waste containing lithium and iron, but no significant
concentrations of priority pollutants. On the basis of these
considerations, screening results for this subcategory are believed to
identify all of the priority pollutants appropriate for verification
sampling and control in this subcategory.
Three organic priority pollutants, toluene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane and
butyl benzyl phthalate were detected in screening samples at
concentrations less than the quantifiable limit of 0.01 mg/1 and were
not selected for verification analysis. All other organic priority
pollutants detected in screening analysis for this subcategory were
selected for verification analysis.
The metal priority pollutants, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, mercury,
selenium, and thallium were not quantifiable in screening analysis and
are not known to result from any manufacturing process in this
subcategory. Consequently, they were not selected for verification.
All other metal priority pollutants were detected in screening and
were selected for verification. In addition, asbestos is reported as
a raw material and was detected in screening samples. It was
therefore selected for verification.
A number of nonconventional pollutants were detected in screening but
were not selected for verification analysis. Cobalt, iron, and
manganese were detected at significant concentrations and were
selected for verification. In addition, the conventional pollutants,
oil and grease, total suspended solids and pH were selected for
verification analysis.
Magnesium Subcateqory. The magnesium subcategory is unique in the
sense that manufacturing process elements and types of pollutants
generated vary from plant to plant. Consequently, one set of
parameters cannot be used to represent total screening for the
subcategory. All manufacturing processes, production quantities and
raw materials used, as well as priority pollutant segments of dcp's
from all plants in this subcategory were examined. On this basis,
three process elements were selected for wastewater screening
analysis. For the heat paper production process element, eighteen
pollutant parameters were selected for verification as discussed under
calcium subcategory (page 174). Each of the silver chloride cathode
processes was sampled separately. Screening analysis results will be
178
-------
used for verification
element is limited.
because at present, production in this process
Zinc Subcateqory. The following 33 pollutant parameters were selected
for further analysis for this subcategory:
11 1/1/1-trichloroethane
13 1,1-dichloroethane*
29 1,1-dichloroethylene*
30 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene*
38 ethylbenzene*
44 methylene chloride
55 naphthalene*
64 pentachlorophenol*
66 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate*
70 diethyl phthalate*
85 tetrachloroethylene*
86 toluene*
87 trichloroethylene
114 antimony
115 arsenic
118 cadmium
119 chromium
120 copper
121 cyanide
122 lead
123 mercury
124 nickel
125 selenium*
126 silver
128 zinc
aluminum
ammonia*
iron
manganese
phenols (total)
oil and grease
TSS
PH
*These parameters were verification parameters for only
types within the subcategory.
some battery
Screening for this subcategory was performed at two sites producing
different battery types/ all of which are within the zinc subcategory.
Twenty-two organic priority pollutants, ten priority pollutant metals,
cyanide, and twenty other pollutants were detected in screening
samples from one or both of these sites. Because screening and veri-
fication parameter selection was initially performed on the basis of
battery types, two different lists of verification parameters were
defined for plants in the zinc subcategory. A number of priority
pollutants, mostly organics, were consequently analyzed in only some
of the zinc subcategory wastewater samples. These parameters are
marked with a * in the listing of verification parameters selected.
Eight of the organic priority pollutants, benzene, 1,1,2-
trichloroethane, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 2-chlorophenol, butyl benzyl
phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, anthracene, and phenanthrene, were
detected at concentrations below the quantifiable level. None of
these pollutants was reported to be present in process wastewater by
plants in the subcategory, and none was selected for verification.
All other organic priority pollutants observed in screening samples
were included in verification analysis.
179
-------
All of the metal priority pollutants detected in screening were
selected for verification with the exception of beryllium which was
reported at its quantifiable limit. In addition, arsenic which was
not detected in screening analysis was selected as a verification
parameter because it is a highly toxic potential contaminant of zinc
which was reported to be present in process wastewater by one
manufacturer in the subcategory. Cyanide was also detected at less
than 0.01 mg/1 but was selected as a verification parameter on the
basis of its toxicity and potential use in cell cleaning formulations.
Many nonconventional pollutants were also detected in screening. They
were not included in verifications analyses. Aluminum, ammonia, iron,
manganese, and total phenols were measured at appreciable levels in
screening samples and were included in verification analyses.
Ammonia, however, was analyzed and selected as a verification
parameter based on screening at one plant only and was consequently
analyzed in only some verification samples. In addition, the
conventional pollutants, oil and grease, TSS and pH were selected as
verification parameters.
Verification Data. Under the discussions and analysis for each
subcategory, verification parameter analytical results are discussed
and tabulated. Pollutant concentration (mg/1) and mass loading
(mg/kg) tables are shown for each sampled process. In the tables 0.00
indicates no detection for all organic pollutants except cyanide. For
organic pollutants other than pesticides, the symbol * is used to
indicate detection at less than or equal to 0.01 mg/1, the
quantifiable limit of detection. For pesticides (pollutants 89-105),
the symbol ** indicates detection less than or equal to the
quantifiable limit of 0.005 mg/1. For the metals and cyanide, total
phenols, and oil and grease, 0.000 indicates the pollutant was not
detected above the quantifiable limit. When samples were flow
proportionally combined for a process, the values shown are
calculated, and 0.0000 indicates that the pollutant was detected in at
least one sample of the combined process wastewater stream. For
chemical analysis, the *'s are calculated as positive values which
cannot be quantified, but for statistical analysis are counted as
zeroes.
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
This subcategory includes the manufacture of all batteries employing a
cadmium anode. Three battery types, mercury-cadmium, silver-cadmium,
and nickel-cadmium batteries, are included. Nickel-cadmium batteries,
however, account for over 99 percent of the total mass of cadmium
anode batteries produced. Manufacturing plants in the subcategory vary
significantly in production volume and in raw materials, production
180
-------
technology, wastewater generation, and in wastewater treatment
practices and effluent quality.
There are 13 plants in the data base for the subcategory. Three of
the 13 plants have closed, but moved the production to existing
plants. Nine of the remaining ten plants manufacture cells based on
the nickel-cadmium electrolytic couple. One of these nine plants also
produces silver-cadmium batteries. The tenth plant manufactures
mercury-cadmium cells, although production at that plant is reported
to be sporadic and quite small in volume.
Annual production reported in the subcategory totaled 4800 metric tons
of batteries in 1976. Using the latest available data at the first
writing of this document (1976-1979), estimated annual production for
each battery type was:
Battery Type Estimated Annual Production
kkq
nickel-cadmium 5242
silver-cadmium 8.6
mercury-cadmium 0.045
Production of nickel-cadmium batteries may be further divided among
cells of the pasted or pressed powder varieties and cells containing
sintered plates with impregnated or electrodeposited active material.
Of the total nickel cadmium batteries reported in 1976, 18 percent or
890 kkg (980 tons) contained pasted or pressed powder electrodes. The
remainder of the nickel cadmium batteries produced contained sintered
electrodes. Plant production rates range from less than 10 to greater
than 1000 kkg of batteries annually.
Plants producing batteries in this subcategory are frequently active
in other battery manufacturing subcategories as well. Six of the ten
producers of cadmium subcategory batteries also manufactured products
in at least one other subcategory at the same location. Other
subcategories reported at these sites include the lead, Leclanche,
lithium, magnesium, and zinc subcategories. Process operations are
common to multiple subcategories at only one of these plants, however.
Production in other subcategories produces process wastewater at only
two other cadmium subcategory plants, and wastewater streams are
combined for treatment and discharge at only one of these.
Consequently multi-subcategory production has little if any impact on
cadmium subcategory wastewater treatment and effluent quality.
Geographically, plants in the cadmium anode subcategory are dispersed
throughout the United States. There are two active plants in each of
EPA Regions I, IV, and V and one each in Regions II, VI, VIII, and IX.
These plants do not vary greatly in age. The oldest manufacturing
plant is reported to be only 15 years old.
181
-------
Although there were some variations in raw materials with
manufacturing process and product variations, many of the raw
materials used in producing cadmium anode batteries were common to all
plants, and nickel was reported as a raw material by eleven of
thirteen plants supplying data in the subcategory. Of the remaining
two plants, one produced only mercury-cadmium batteries and the other
produced nickel-cadmium batteries, but obtain processed electrode
material from another site. Cadmium and cadmium oxide are used in the
preparation of pasted and pressed powder anodes and may also be used
in producing solutions for impregnation and electrodeposition.
Cadmium oxide is sometimes added to nickel cathodes as an aqueous
solution in impregnation operations as is nickel nitrate. Nickel
hydroxide is used in producing pressed powder cathodes. Nickel is
used in the form of wire as a support and current collector for
electrodes and as a powder for the production of sintered stock into
which active material may be introduced by impregnation or
electrodeposition.
Other raw materials which are reported include nylon, potassium
hydroxide, lithium hydroxide, steel, polypropylene, nitric acid,
silver nitrate, silver, mercuric oxide, cobalt nitrate and sulfate,
sodium hypochlorite, methanol, polyethylene, and neoprene. Nylon is a
popular separator material and may also find applications in a variety
of cell components such as vent covers. Potassium hydroxide and
lithium hydroxide are used as the electrolyte in almost all cells
produced in this subcategory although sodium hydroxide is used in
electrolytic process operations (e.g., formation) and may be used as
the electrolyte in a few cells. Steel is widely used in cell cases
and may also be used with a nickel plating as the support grid in some
battery types. Polypropylene, polyethylene, and neoprene may all be
used in. separator manufacture or in cell cases or cell case com-
ponents. Nitric acid is used in preparing the metal nitrate solutions
used in impregnation, and cobalt nitrate or sulfate is introduced into
some nickel electrodes to yield desirable voltage characteristics.
Silver and silver nitrate are used in producing silver oxide cathodes
for silver-cadmium batteries, and mercuric oxide.
Manufacturing processes differ widely within the subcategory. This
results in corresponding differences in process water use and
wastewater discharge. A total of 16 distinct manufacturing process
operations or process elements were identified. These operations are
combined in various ways by manufacturers in this subcategory and they
provide a rational basis for effluent limitations. Following a
discussion of manufacturing processes used in the subcategory each of
these process elements is discussed in detail to establish wastewater
sources, flow rates, and chemical characteristics.
Manufacturing Processes
182
-------
As shown in the generalized process flow diagram of Figure V-l, (page
261), the manufacture of batteries in this subcategory comprises the
preparation and formation of the anode and cathode, assembly of these
components into cells and batteries, and ancillary operations
performed in support of these basic manufacturing steps. Three
distinct process elements for the production of anodes, five for the
manufacture of cathodes, and eight different wastewater generating
ancillary operations are practiced within the subcategory. They are
combined in a variety of ways in existing plants to produce batteries
exhibiting a range of physical and electrical characteristics.
Additional combinations are possible in future manufacturing.
'The observed variations in anode and cathode manufacture, and the
combinations of these processes at existing plants are shown in Table
V-10 (page 336). This table also lists the eight ancillary operations
that have been observed to involve water use and wastewater discharge.
The X's entered in the table under each anode type and after each
cathode type and ancillary operation identify reported use of the
designated manufacturing operations. Data from these operations are
used in detailed discussions of each of these process elements.
The process operations and functions shown in Table V-10 provided the
framework for analysis of wastewater generation and control in this
subcategory. Several operations involve two or more distinct process
wastewater sources which must be considered in evaluating wastewater
characteristics. The relationship between the process elements and
discrete wastewater sources observed at cadmium subcategory plants is
illustrated in Figure V-2 (page 262).
Anode Operations
Except for one plant, which obtains electrodes produced at another
plant, all manufacturers use cadmium or cadmium salts to produce
anodes. Three general methods for producing these anodes are
currently used, and they may be differentiated on the basis of the
technique used to apply the active cadmium to the supporting
structure. In the manufacture of pasted and pressed powder anodes,
physical application of solids is employed. Electrodeposited anodes
are produced by means of electrochemical precipitation of cadmium
hydroxide from a cadmium salt solution. Impregnated anodes are
manufactured by impregnation of cadmium solutions into porous
structures and subsequent precipitation of cadmium hydroxide in place.
Pasted and Pressed Powder - To make cadmium pasted and pressed anodes,
cadmium hydroxide is physically applied to the perforated surface of a
supporting grid (usually nickel-plated steel) in either a powdered
form or compressed powder form. Other anodes included in this
grouping are those in which cadmium oxide is blended with appropriate
additives prior to either (a) pressing to form a button or pellet, or
183
-------
(b) pasting on a supporting grid. The charged state for these anodes
is achieved in present practice by formation after cell assembly.
One plant reports the manufacture of cadmium hydroxide on-site for use
in battery manufacture. Because the grade of cadmium hydroxide
produced is unique to battery manufacture, this process is included as
an ancillary operation for regulation under this subcategory. Another
plant produces cadmium powder which is then blended and used for the
manufacture of pasted cadmium anodes. Production of the cadmium
powder is considered to be a separate ancillary operation.
Formation of these anodes outside the battery case is not presently
practiced in the United States but is anticipated in the near future
by one manufacturer.
Electrodeposited - Electrodeposited anodes are produced by
electrochemically precipitating cadmium hydroxide from nitrate
solution onto the support material. (Neither in this discussion nor
subsequent discussion of electrodeposited nickel cathodes does the
term "electrodeposit" mean deposition of metal as the term is used in
electroplating practice. "Electrodeposited" as used in the
application of active material to anode or cathode supports actually
means "electrochemically precipitated." The material deposited is a
hydroxide.) When the appropriate weight of cadmium hydroxide has been
deposited, the deposited material is subjected to charge and discharge
cycles while submerged in caustic solution and subsequently rinsed.
After drying, the formed material is cut to size for assembly into
cells.
The cadmium nitrate solutions used in electrodeposition may be
partially derived from excess cadmium hydroxide washed off anodes
during processing and recovered from the process rinse water.
Dissolution of this material in nitric acid generates acid fumes which
must be controlled with a scrubber. Figure V-3 (page 264) is a
process flow diagram of anode production by cadmium electrodeposition.
Impregnated - A third method of cadmium anode manufacture involves
submerging porous sintered nickel stock in an aqueous solution of
cadmium salts and precipitating cadmium hydroxide on the sintered
material by chemical, electrochemical, or thermal processing.
Generally the impregnated material is immersed in a caustic bath to
precipitate cadmium as the hydroxide and is then rinsed. The entire
impregnation cycle is repeated several times to achieve the desired
active material (cadmium) weight gain. After cleaning the anode
material by brushing or washing to remove excess deposited material,
the anode material is submerged in a caustic solution and an electric
current is applied to repeatedly charge and discharge the anode
material. Formation is generally followed by rinsing. Figure V-4
184
-------
(page 265) is a process flow diagram of anode production by cadmium
impregnation.
Cathode Operations
Three of the five cathode manufacturing process elements are for
producing nickel cathodes. The other two are for producing silver
cathodes and mercury cathodes.
Nickel Pressed Powder Cathodes - Pressed powder cathodes, including
cathodes commonly described as "pocket plates" in the literature, are
made by blending solid powdered materials and physically applying the
resultant mixture to a conductive supporting grid. Subsequently, the
electrode may be formed by cycling it through several charge-discharge
sequences to develop maximum electrical capacity. The materials used
in pocket plate grids generally include nickel hydroxide which is the
primary active material in the cathode, cobalt hydroxide added to
modify the battery's voltage characteristics and increase electrical
capacity, graphite which provides conductivity from the grid through
the bulk of the active material, and binders added to provide
mechanical strength. These cathodes in the unformed (divalent) state,
are assembled into batteries with unformed anodes.
Nickel Electrodeposited - Sintered nickel grids prepared by either the
slurry or dry methods are used as the substrate upon which nickel
hydroxide is electrodeposited. (See discussion of the use of
"electrodeposited" under Anode Operations.) Nickel powder in either a
slurry or dry form is layered on nickel-plated steel which passes
through a furnace for sintering. Afterwards, the sintered material is
positioned in the electrodeposition tank and the tank is filled with a
nitric acid solution of dissolved nickel and cobalt salts. An
electrical current is applied to the tank causing nickel and cobalt
hydroxides to precipitate on the sintered material. The presence of
cobalt in the nickel active material aids in the charge efficiency.
After deposition of the desired amount of nickel hydroxide, the
material is submerged in potassium hydroxide and electrochemically
formed. After formation is completed, the cathodes are removed from
the tank for subsequent rinsing and the spent formation caustic is
dumped. Figure V-5, (page 266) is a process flow diagram of cathode
production by electrodeposition.
Nickel Impregnated - The remaining method of nickel cathode
manufacture requires submerging porous sintered stock in an aqueous
solution of nickel salts. The product is next immersed in a caustic
solution to precipitate the nickel as nickel hydroxide. The material
is subsequently rinsed to remove caustic, excess nitrate, and poorly
adherent particles. The entire impregnation cycle is repeated several
times until the appropriate weight gain of active materials is
achieved. During impregnation and precipitation, an electric
185
-------
potential may be applied to the sintered stock to enhance nickel
deposition and reduce residual nitrate levels in the impregnated
product. In addition to nickel nitrate, impregnation solutions may
contain cobalt nitrate to modify electrode voltage characteristics and
increase electrical capacity. In some cases, impregnation with nickel
salt is accompanied by impregnation with a smaller quantity of cadmium
nitrate to introduce an anti-polar mass (see Section III) into
electrodes intended for use in sealed cells.
After impregnation the cathode material is cleaned to remove excess
deposited material. The electrodes are then formed, or they are
assembled into cells for subsequent formation in the battery case.
Electrodes formed prior to assembly are typically subjected to several
charge-discharge cycles to develop the desired physical structure and
electrical characteristics and to remove impurities. These electrodes
are customarily rinsed after the formation process. Formation may be
accomplished either by application of electric current to the
electrodes in a caustic solution or by chemical oxidation and
reduction.
Preparation of the sintered stock required for impregnation using
nickel powder is also considered part of this process function.
Figure V-6 (page 267) is a flow diagram of the process for producing
impregnated nickel cathodes. Nickel hydroxide washed off the
impregnated stock during process rinses and in post impregnation
cleaning may be recovered and redissolved in nitric acid to produce
some of the nickel nitrate solution used in impregnation.
Silver Powder Pressed - The production of silver cathodes begins with
preparing a silver powder which is then sintered. The metallic silver
cathodes which result are assembled into cells and batteries with
unformed cadmium anodes. The resulting batteries are shipped in the
unformed state.
Mercury Oxide Powder Pressed - Mercury cathodes are produced by
physical compaction of mercuric oxide.
Assembly
Specific assembly techniques differ for different cell types
manufactured in this subcategory. For example, anodes and cathodes
for large rectangular cells are interleaved with separators which may
be plastic or hard rubber rods, while for sealed cylindrical cells,
the anodes and cathodes are spirally wound with flexible sheet
separators. Assembly of all cells, however, involves the assembly of
one or more anodes with cathodes and separators to produce an active
cell element. One or more of these elements is then inserted in a
battery case, electrical connections made, (as required), and
186
-------
electrolyte added, after which the case is covered and (if
appropriate) sealed.
Separators are a key component in these cells, particularly in
sintered electrode cells (electrodeposited or impregnated) which are
designed to operate at high current drains per unit of electrode
surface area. In these cells, minimum separator thickness is desired
to minimize internal resistance of the cells and maximize gas
diffusion and recombination in sealed cells. The resistance of the
separator material to chemical attack and perforation limits the cell
performance which may be achieved. Separators in open, pasted and
pressed powder (pocket plate) cells are frequently narrow plastic or
hard rubber rods but may be corrugated, perforated plastic sheets. In
cells using sintered electrodes, a variety of separator materials are
used including woven or non-woven synthetic fabrics, sheet resin, and
cellophane. A three layer separator comprising a layer of cellophane
between two nylon layers is frequently used. In sealed cells,
separators are often made of felted nylon.
The electrolyte used in these cells is usually potassium hydroxide in
solutions ranging between 20 and 30 percent in concentration. Lithium
hydroxide is often added to the electrolyte to improve cell
performance. Cell cases may be either steel or plastic. Cases or
covers used in manufacturing batteries in this subcategory include
some provision for venting gases generated in cell charging or on
overcharge. Open or vented cells normally generate some hydrogen and
have vents which release gas during normal operation. In sealed
cells, design factors minimize gas generation and provide for
recombination before pressures rise excessively. Vents in these cells
are normally sealed and they open only when abnormal conditions cause
pressures to rise above normal limits.
Ancillary Operations - In addition to the basic electrode manufacture
and assembly steps, a number of wastewater generating process
operations or supporting functions are required for the production of
cadmium subcategory batteries. These wastewater generating ancillary
operations discussed under "Process Water Use" includes: (1) washing
assembled cells; (2) preparing electrolyte solutions; (3) cleaning
process floor areas and equipment; (4) employee hand washing to remove
process chemicals; (5) the production of cadmium powder; (6) the
production of silver powder; (7) the production of nickel hydroxide;
and (8) the production of cadmium hydroxide. Ancillary operations
such as welding and drilling or punching which do not generate
wastewater are not discussed in this section.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics, and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
187
-------
Process water is used in many of the operations performed in the
manufacture of batteries in this subcategory. Flow rates are
sometimes high. Process wastewater is discharged from most plants and
usually it results from several different manufacturing processes.
Because of the large number of different wastewater producing
operations in the subcategory and the variety of operations that are
combined at an individual plant, plant wastewater discharges are
observed to vary widely in flow rate and in chemical characteristics.
Wastewater treatment practices and effluent quality also vary
significantly within the subcategory. However, the flow rates and
chemical characteristics of wastewater from specific process
operations performed at different sites are generally similar.
Observed differences can usually be accounted for by variations in
plant water conservation practices.
Mean and median normalized discharge flows from both dcp ancT visit
data for each of the wastewater producing process elements included in
this subcategory are summarized in Table V-l1 (page 337 ). This table
also presents the production normalizing parameters upon which the
reported flows are based and which were discussed in Section IV, and
the annual raw waste volume for each process. The water use and
wastewater discharge from these process operations varies from 1 liter
per kilogram of cadmium used for the manufacture of cadmium hydroxide
production to 1640 liters per kg of impregnated nickel for sintered
impregnated electrodes.
Process Wastewater Characteristics
Anode Operations - Cadmium Pasted and Pressed Powder Anodes
Preparation of the solid active materials is not included in this
process group.
Only limited discharge of process water is associated with production
of pasted and pressed cadmium powder anodes. The only wastewater
discharge from anode production is process area maintenance. Two
plants (A and B) use water to clean floors and equipment. The
wastewater was sampled at Plant A. The analyses are presented in
Table V-12 (page 338). Table V-13 (page 339) shows the pollutant mass
loadings in the clean-up wastewater stream on three successive days.
Formation of anodes in this group does not presently produce a process
wastewater discharge at any plant in the U.S. However, anticipated
production changes by at least one manufacturer to include formation
of anodes outside the cell could introduce an additional wastewater
source for this process element.
Cadmium Electrodeposited Anode - The wastewater resulting from cadmium
anode electrodeposition was sampled at one plant allowing pollutant
characterization and confirmation of the information provided in
188
-------
dcp's. Three sources of wastewater discharge are associated with
cadmium electrodeposition: (1) electrodeposition rinses, (2) scrubber
bleed-off, and (3) caustic removal. The first two wastewater
discharges cited above were sampled separately, and wastewater flow
rates were measured for each source. Formation caustic was contractor
removed and was not characterized by sampling.
Characteristics of the total electrodeposition process wastewater
discharge were determined by combining analysis results of the
wastewater streams discussed above. Table V-14 and V-15 (pages 340
and 341) show the pollutant concentrations and mass loadings for this
process sequence.
Cadmium Impregnated Anode - There are seven points of wastewater
discharge in the process sequence including (1) sintered stock
preparation clean-up; (2) cadmium impregnation rinses; (3)
impregnation caustic removal; (4) electrode cleaning waste discharge;
(5) soak water discharge; (6) formation caustic removal; and (7) post-
formation rinse.
Analytical results from the second and third sampling days are
presented in Tablev-16 (page 342) to characterize the raw wastewater
from the cadmium impregnation process. Sampling results from the
first day are excluded because the impregnation process did not
operate on that day. All wastewater streams were sampled except
sintered stock preparation clean-up and the formation caustic dump on
the third day. The spent formation caustic wastewater stream is not
included in the combined stream analysis for that day; however, the
spent caustic would not contribute significantly to the pollutant
concentrations since the flow is 0.5 percent of the total flow.
Wastewaters from anode cleaning, which are included in the analyses
shown, were not observed at all sites producing impregnated cadmium
anodes. In evaluating the data in Table V-16 it should be noted that
the wastewater characteristics for the impregnation rinse on day 3 are
not considered representative of the normal process discharge. The
data for day 2 (columns 1 and 3) are considered to provide the best
available characterization of -the total raw waste from this process
operation.
Cathode Operations - Nickel Pressed Powder Cathodes - No wastewater
discharge was reported from manufacturing cathodes in this group
except for effluent from the production of nickel hydroxide by
chemical precipitation at one plant. The precipitation process is
addressed as a separate ancillary operation in this subcategory.
Nickel Electrodeposited Cathodes - Wastewater streams resulting from
this process are: (1) spent formation caustic removal; and (2) post-
formation rinse discharge. Wastewater from this operation was
characterized by sampling. Table V-17 (page 343) presents the
189
-------
verification analysis results of the post-formation rinse discharge
(on a daily basis). Table V-18 (page 344) presents the daily
pollutant mass loadings based on the weight of active nickel applied
to produce the cathode.
Nickel Impregnated Cathode - A total of eleven different sources of
process wastewater are associated with this variation of nickel
cathode manufacture. These wastewater sources include: (1) nickel
paste clean-up; (2) spent impregnation caustic; (3) impregnation
rinses; (4) impregnation scrubbers (used for nitric acid fume
control); (5) impregnated stock brushing; (6) preformation soak water;
(7) spent formation caustic; (8) postformation rinses; (9)
impregnation equipment wash; (10) nickel recovery filter wash; and
(11) nickel recovery scrubber. Any wastewater generated as a result
of nickel hydroxide recovery is also attributable to this process
element.
Seven plants reported the manufacture of impregnated nickel cathodes.
One of these subsequently moved their production. Of the remaining
six plants, four plants, A, B, C, and D, were visited for on-site data
collection and wastewater sampling. These plants collectively
produced all of the wastewater streams identified. Total wastewater
discharges from nickel cathode production were characterized for each
day of sampling at each plant by summing the discrete wastewater
streams characterized above. This approach was required because
wastewater streams from individual process steps are frequently
treated separately (and directed to different destinations) or
combined with wastewater from other process functions. As a result, a
single total process raw wastewater stream was not generally available
for sampling. The calculated total wastewater characteristics for the
production of impregnated nickel cathodes are presented in Table V-19
(page 345). Table V-20 (page 345) presents corresponding pollutant
mass loadings. Statistical analyses of these data are presented in
Table V-21 and V-22 (pages 347 and 343).
Silver Powder Pressed Cathode - No process wastewater is generated in
producing silver powder pressed cathodes. Wastewater does result from
the production of silver powder used in these electrodes. This
discharge source is discussed separately as an ancillary operation
under the zinc subcategory.
Mercuric Oxide Cathode - No process wastewater discharge is reported
from production of mercuric oxide -cathodes in the cadmium subcategory.
Ancillary Wastewater Generating Operations - Cell Wash - This process
operation addresses washing either assembled cells or batteries
following electrolyte addition. The caustic electrolyte consisting
primarily of potassium hydroxide may be spilled on the cell case
during filling. The cells are washed to remove the excess electrolyte
190
-------
and other contaminants. Three plants (A, B, and C) in the subcategory
reported cell wash operations. Other plants produce comparable
products without the need for cell washing. The quantity of water
used to wash cells ranges from 3,032 to 15,746 liters per day (7521
I/day mean). The normalized discharge flows based on the weight of
finished cells range from 1.24 to 10.3 liters per kilogram (4.93 I/kg
mean). The discharge flow rate reported by plant B, however, reflects
the combined wastewater from cell washing and floor area clean-up.
The cell wash wastewater at these plants was not sampled and no
historical sampling data specifically representing wastewater from the
wash operations was provided. However, no materials were reported to
be used in the cell wash operation and the electrolyte addition to the
cells prior to washing is not expected to contribute pollutants to the
wastewater stream which are not present in process wastewater streams
previously sampled.
Characteristics of cell wash wastewater streams resulting from the
manufacture of alkaline electrolyte batteries are expected to vary
little among different battery types. Sampling data from cell wash
operations in the zinc subcategory, Tables V-116 and V-117 (pages 456
and 457 ), are considered indicative of cadmium subcategory cell wash
effluent characteristics. Cadmium subcategory cell wash discharges,
however, are expected to contain nickel and cadmium rather than
mercury, manganese, and zinc.
Electrolyte Preparation - Electrolyte addition to assembled cells
requires pumps and other equipment which are intermittently cleaned.
Two plants reported wastewater discharge from electrolyte preparation.
The flows based on weight of finished cells are 0.13 and 0.02 I/kg,
respectively. The clean-up wastewater was not sampled, and no
historical sampling data was provided specifically representing the
wastewater stream. The only raw materials involved are potassium
hydroxide and lithium hydroxide which are not expected to contribute
any priority pollutants to the wastewater stream. The volume and
pollutant loads contributed by this wastewater source are minimal.
Floor and Equipment Wash - Some plants use water for floor and
equipment maintenance in process and assembly areas. Three plants in
the data base reported using water for this purpose in the cadmium
subcategory. The discharge flow from this source ranges from 0.25 to
33.4 liters per kilogram of finished cells.
The floor wash water for maintaining both impregnation and
electrodeposition process areas as well as the assembly area was
sampled at one plant. The analysis results in units of mg/1 are
presented in Table V-23 (page 349). In addition, Table V-24 (page
350) shows the pollutant mass loadings in units of mg/kg of cells
produced. Pollutants in the floor wash discharge include nickel,
191
-------
cobalt, cadmium, and zinc. Both nickel and cobalt are present due to
cleaning the nickel cathode process floor areas. Floor maintenance in
the vicinity of the cadmium anode production is the primary
contributor of cadmium in the wastewater. The source of zinc is not
readily determined.
Employee Wash - For purposes of health and safety, some plants require
employees to wash hands prior to lunch and at the end of the work
shift to remove process chemicals. Hand-wash water was sampled at one
plant. These samples primarily reflect wash water that was used to
clean the hands of employees assembling nickel-cadmium batteries as
opposed to wash water used by process operators who handle the active
material. The analysis results presented in Table V-25 (page 351)
show that the wastewater contains primarily oil and grease and TSS
which are present due to the nature of the assembly operations. On
the first sampling day, all pollutant levels are low since the sample
was taken during the second shift when there were only a few employees
assembling batteries. The other two samples were taken during the
first shift when the number of employees washing their hands was
approximately fifteen times greater. Table V-26 (page 352) presents
the pollutant mass loadings based on weight of finished cells produced
for each sample day.
Cadmium Powder Production - Cadmium powder production involves
chemical precipitation of cadmium. The cadmium may be returned to the
initial mixing step when the powder does not meet specifications.
Wastewater discharge from cadmium powder production results from
product rinsing and from air scrubbers used to control fumes from
process solutions. Wastewater from product rinsing was characterized
by sampling. The resulting concentrations together with corresponding
pollutant mass loadings based on the total discharge flow are shown in
Table V-27 (page 353).
Silver Powder Production - Silver powder used specifically for battery
cathodes is produced primarily for silver oxide-zinc batteries, but
also for silver-cadmium batteries. Discussion of this operation is
under ancillary operations in the zinc subcategory, on page 258
Results of analysis of wastewater samples collected on three
successive days are presented in Table V-136 (page 476 ) . Production
normalized discharge volumes and corresponding pollutant mass loading
for each sampling day are shown in Table V-137 (page 477).
Nickel Hydroxide Production - Nickel hydroxide for use in battery
manufacture is produced by preparation of a solution containing nickel
and cobalt sulfates, precipitation of hydroxides from the solution,
and washing and drying the precipitate. In addition, graphite may be
added to the precipitated hydroxides. Wastewater discharge from this
process results from washing the precipitate.
192
-------
This operation was observed during data collection for this study, but
the resultant wastewater discharge was not characterized by sampling.
However, characteristics of the resultant effluent as supplied by the
plant are presented in Table V-33 (page 359). Pollutant wastewater
characteristics from this process are similar to nickel impregnated
cathodes.
Cadmium Hydroxide Production - Cadmium hydroxide for battery
manufacture is produced by thermal oxidation of cadmium to cadmium
oxide, addition of nickel sulfate, hydration of cadmium oxide to the
hydroxide, and drying of the product. Process wastewater results only
from the contamination of seal cooling.
As discussed for nickel hydroxide production, this operation was
observed but its wastewater was not characterized by sampling.
Wastewater from cadmium hydroxide production is combined with other
process wastewater streams prior to treatment. Reported
characteristics of the resultant effluent are presented in Table V-33
(page 359). Pollutant wastewater characteristics from this process
are similar to impregnated anodes.
Total Process Wastewater Discharge and Characteristics
Water use and wastewater discharge are observed to vary widely among
cadmium subcategory plants with process wastewater flow rates ranging
from 0 to 450,000 I/day. Individual plant effluent flow rates are
shown in Table V-28 (page 354). Most of the observed wastewater flow
variation may be understood on the basis of manufacturing process
variations. Plants with different process sequences produce different
volumes of process wastewater. In some cases, however, large
differences in process water use and discharge are observed among
different plants using the same process operations. As discussed
later in this section, on-site observations and data collection at a
number of plants in the subcategory revealed differences in plant
operating practices which result in the observed flow variations. In
general, these differences are observed to result primarily from
differing degrees of awareness of water conservation.
Total process wastewater flow and characteristics were determined for
four plants in the cadmium subcategory which were sampled. These
characteristics, reflecting the combined raw wastewater streams from
all cadmium subcategory process operations at each site on each of
three days of sampling, are summarized statistically in Table V-29
(page 355). Prevailing discharge and treatment patterns in this
subcategory generally preclude directly sampling a total raw
wastewater stream because wastewaters from individual process
operations are often treated or discharged separately. In other
cases, individual process wastewaters are mixed with other wastewater
streams such as non-contact cooling wastewater and electroplating
193
-------
wastewater prior to combination with other cadmium subcategory
wastewater streams. Consequently, the total process wastewater
characteristics shown in Table V-29 were determined for each plant by
mass balance calculations from analyses of wastewater samples from
individual process operations.
As Table V-29 shows, concentrations of some pollutants were observed
to vary over a wide range. These variations may generally be related
to variations in manufacturing processes discussed in the preceding
pages. Despite the observed variations, it may be seen that the most
significant pollutants are generally consistent from plant to plant
and that waste treatment requirements of all of the sampled plants are
quite similar.
Wastewater Treatment and Effluent Data Analysis
Reported treatment applied to cadmium subcategory process wastewater
(Table V-30, page 356) shows that all but one of the plants which
produce process wastewater provide settling for the removal of
suspended solids and metal precipitates. Filtration for further
pollutant removal was provided at four sites. Despite this apparently
high level of treatment, on-site observations at visited plants
revealed that the treatment nominally employed was often marginal in
its design and operation. An analysis of the treatment in-place was
done for both active and inactive plants which submitted process
information. Some of these plants were visited and sampled, others
provided effluent data, and others just reported what treatment was in
place.
At one plant which was visited, "settling" was found to occur in sumps
in process areas which were observed to provide only limited retention
time at average flow rates. The effectiveness of these sumps was
further reduced by the fact that they were subject to very high surge
flows during which essentially no settling occurred. Finally, several
of these sumps were almost completely filled with accumulated solids
so that essentially no further settling out could occur. The results
of sampling and analysis at this site (Table V-2, page 303) confirmed
the extremely high (41 and 46 mg/1) effluent concentrations of cadmium
and nickel shown in this plant's dcp (Table V-33, page 359).
At another plant which was visited for sampling and on-site data
collection, segregated cadmium subcategory process wastewater streams
were treated in batch systems providing pH adjustment, settling, and
filtration. Although the obvious deficiencies in treatment at the
first plant were not noted at this site, the general level of control
maintained over treatment system operation was inadequate as shown by
the highly variable effluent performance observed by sampling.
Analysis results shown for this plant in Table V-31, Treatment System
I and II (page 357), indicate a number of irregularities
194
-------
characteristic of inadequate treatment plant performance. For
example, effluent metals sometimes exceeded raw wastewater values even
though TSS values were low. This indicates that the metals were not
precipitated. Similarly, finding treated TSS levels above raw TSS
levels may indicate poor treatment operation.
A third cadmium subcategory plant was visited for sampling treated
process wastewater in a settling lagoon after separate treatment of
some wastewater streams in settling tanks. At this plant, however,
neither pH adjustment nor the use of settling aids (coagulants or
flocculants) was practiced. As the analysis of data from this plant
(Table V-32, page 358) shows, the effluent pH was consistently outside
the optimum range for treatment of these wastes.
Effluent concentration data provided in dcp's from cadmium subcategory
plants which are presented in Table V-33 (page 359) were evaluated in
the light of the on-site observations and sampling results discussed
above. Plants D and A (Table V-33) were visited for sampling, and are
discussed. Plants E and F (no longer active), and H (Table V-33) did
not provide sufficient information to allow a definitive evaluation of
treatment system operating parameters. Plants E and H used the
equivalent of chemical precipitation and settling technology. Plant F
used precipitation and settling followed by ion exchange.
Plant B (Table V-33) which was visited, but not sampled, practices
combined treatment of cadmium subcategory process wastewater and of
other similar wastewaters. The treatment provided included pH
adjustment, settling in a lagoon, sand filtration and final pH
adjustment. At this site a large volume of non-contact cooling water
from cadmium subcategory processes was also discharged to treatment,
increasing the mass of pollutants in the effluent attributable to
cadmium anode battery manufacture by a factor of nearly two. This
plant has recently upgraded its wastewater treatment and control
plants to provide additional treatment and complete recycle of all
process wastewater. As a result, this plant is presently achieving
zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
Plant C ( Table V-33 ) has chemical precipitation, settling and filter
technology in place; however, from the data submitted, proper pH
control was not maintained.
The two remaining active cadmium subcategory plants and one inactive
plant achieved zero discharge of process wastewater by in-process
control techniques or process variations which eliminated the
generation of process wastewater.
After evaluating all dcp and plant visit effluent data, the conclusion
is made that although plants which discharge have treatment equipment
195
-------
in-place, the operation and maintenance of these systems are generally
inadequate for treating cadmium subcategory pollutants.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
This subcategory covers the manufacture of calcium anode thermal
batteries for military applications. These batteries are designed for
long term inactive storage followed by rapid activation and delivery
of relatively high currents for short periods of time. These
characteristics are achieved by the use of solid electrolytes which at
the moment of use are heated to above their melting point to activate
the cell. Heat is supplied by chemical reactants incorporated as a
pyrotechnic device in the cell. Because calcium, the cell anode
material, reacts vigorously with water, water use is avoided as much
as possible in manufacturing these batteries. Production volumes are
generally small and manufacturing specifications depend upon military
specifications for particular batteries. The most significant
pollutants found in the limited volumes of wastewater generated in
this subcategory are asbestos and chromium.
Calcium anode batteries are produced at three plants. All production
is governed by military specifications, and products from different
plants are not, in general, interchangeable.
Specific raw materials used in manufacturing these batteries differ
somewhat from plant to plant although the use of calcium, iron,
lithium and potassium chlorides, calcium chromate, zirconium, barium
chromate, and asbestos is common to all manufacturers of these
batteries. Other raw materials used are: silica, kaolin, glass fiber,
and potassium dichromate. Present trends are to eliminate the use of
calcium chromate and barium chromate in new designs by substituting
alternative depolarizers and heat sources. Military specifications
for existing designs, however, make it unlikely that use of these
materials in manufacturing will be discontinued altogether.
Manufacturing Processes
To manufacture calcium anode thermal batteries cell anodes,
depolarizers, electrolytes, and the cell activators (heating elements)
are prepared. These elements are assembled with current collectors,
insulators, initiators, and containers into cells and multicell
batteries. A generalized process flow diagram is shown in Figure V-7
(page 268 ). The relationship between the process elements and
discrete wastewater sources reported at battery plants is illustrated
in Figure V-8 (page 269).
Anode Operations
196
-------
Calcium anode material is generally produced by vapor deposition of
calcium on a substrate of metal such as nickel or iron which serves
both as a current collector and support for the calcium during cell
operation.
Cathode Operations
Cathodic depolarizers for calcium anode cells include calcium
chromate, tungstic oxide, and potassium dichromate. They are
incorporated into the cells in one of several ways including
impregnation of fibrous media, pelletization of powders, and glazing.
Electrolyte is incorporated into cells similarly - some cell designs
even combine the depolarizer and electrolyte. Almost all cells in
production at the time of the survey used a lithium chloride-potassium
chloride eutectic mixture as the electrolyte.
One form of cell uses a fibrous medium to immobilize the electrolyte.
The fibrous medium, such as glass tape, is impregnated by dipping it
in a fused bath of electrolyte, depolarizer, or a mixture of
electrolyte and depolarizer. The impregnated material is allowed to
cool and then is cut to shape for the specific cell design.
Alternatively, the depolarizer or electrolyte may be ground to powder,
mixed with a binder such as kaolin or silica, and pressed to form a
pellet of suitable size and shape. In general, pellets containing the
depolarizer contain electrolyte as well to ensure adequate
conductivity, and multi-layer pellets containing both depolarizer and
electrolyte layers are produced. Pellets are also produced which are
a homogeneous mixture of electrolyte and depolarizer throughout.
Ancillary Operations
Heating Component Operations. The heating component containing highly
reactive materials is an essential part of a thermal cell. Two basic
types of heating components are reported to be in use: heat paper
containing zirconium powder and barium chromate; and heat pellets
containing iron powder and potassium perchlorate. To produce heat
paper, zirconium powder, barium chromate (which is only sparingly
soluble), and asbestos or other inorganic fibers are mixed as an
aqueous slurry. The slurry is passed through a filter screen to
produce a damp paper containing the zirconium and barium chromate as
well as the asbestos fiber. The filtrate is generally treated by
settling and then is discharged. Heat pellets are prepared by mixing
potassium perchlorate and iron powders and pressing the mixture to
form a pellet. Heat paper is non-conductive during cell operation and
must be used in cells designed to accommodate this insulating layer.
Heat pellets become conductive during operation and may be used as
part of the cathode current collector as well as the source of heat to
activate the cell.
197
-------
Battery Assembly - Assembly of batteries from these components
frequently involves the creation of stacked multi-cell structures to
provide voltages considerably above the single cell output (generally
2.5-3 volts). Assembly is under rigid quality control specifications
and is accomplished primarily by hand with frequent intermediate tests
and inspections.
Cell Testing - After assembly the cells are hermetically sealed, and
may be immersed in a water bath to test for leakage.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics, and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
The manufacturing of calcium anode batteries produces little
wastewater since most of the production processes involved are dry.
As mentioned earlier, the limited use of water is due to the vigorous
reaction of calcium with water and the safety problems inherent to
this reaction.
Mean and median normalized discharge flows from both dcp and visit
data for each of the wastewater producing process elements included in
this subcategory are shown in Table V-34 (page 360). This table also
presents the production normalizing parameters upon which the reported
flows are based, and the annual raw waste volume for each process.
Heat paper production in the calcium subcategory as well as the
lithium and magnesium subcategory is similar. For this reason data
for developing the normalized flow was combined. Annual raw waste
volumes from heat paper production are separate for each subcategory.
Process Wastewater Characteristics
Anode and Cathode Operations - No process wastewater discharge is
reported from the production of anodes and cathodes in the calcium
subcategory.
Ancillary Operations - Heating Component Production - (Heat Pellet
Production) No process wastewater discharge is reported from the
production of heat pellets. (Heat Paper Production) This process is
the major wastewater generating operation in this subcategory. The
production normalizing parameter for this process is the weight of
reactants used (barium chromate and zirconium). Sampling data from
plants A and B characterizing this wastewater stream are presented in
Table V-35 (page 361). As shown in the table, the major pollutants
are chromium (from the barium chromate) and total suspended solids.
The pollutants mass loadings for this waste stream are shown in Table
V-36 (page 362). The two plants have similar wastewaters, but plant B
has much higher concentrations of the pollutants as well as a
substantially higher production normalized wastewater discharge. The
198
-------
latter fact indicates less efficient deposition of the reactants on
the heat paper filter substrate at plant B than at plant A.
Cell Testing - At plant A, cell testing produces about 50 gallons of
wastewater per year and water use for washing containers is equally
small. These operations are considered to contribute no significant
amounts of priority pollutants to the wastewater discharge and were
not specifically sampled.
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
Present treatment practice at calcium subcategory plants is limited to
settling as is shown in Table V-37 (page 363). Process wastewater is
either contract removed or discharged to a POTW. One plant reports no
process wastewater from the manufacture of calcium subcategory
batteries.
Effluent characteristics reported by one plant in this subcategory are
presented in Table V-38 (page 364 ). Data reported by this plant are
specifically for the effluent from heat paper production.
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
Batteries manufactured in this subcategory use lead anodes, lead
peroxide cathodes, and acid electrolytes. Lead subcategory cells and
batteries, however, differ significantly in physical configuration,
size, and performance characteristics. They include small cells with
immobilized electrolyte for use in portable devices, batteries for
automotive starting, lighting, and ignition (SLI) applications, a
variety of batteries designed for industrial applications, and special
reserve batteries for military use. Lead reserve batteries are
produced from lead electroplated on steel and an acid electrolyte.
The SLI and industrial batteries are manufactured and shipped as
"dry-charged" and "wet-charged" units. Dry-charged batteries are
shipped without acid electrolyte and may be either "damp" or
"dehydrated plate" batteries as described in Section III. Wet-charged
batteries are shipped with acid electrolyte. Significant differences
in manufacturing processes correspond to these product variations.
Lead subcategory battery production reported in dcp's totaled over 1.3
million kkg (1.43 million tons) per year. Of this total, 72.3 percent
were shipped as wet batteries, 9.3 percent were damp, and 18.4 percent
were produced as dehydrated plate batteries. Less than 1 percent of
the subcategory total production is for lead reserve batteries.
Reported annual production of batteries at individual plants in this
subcategory ranged from 10.5 kkg (11.5 tons) to over 40,000 kkg
(44,000 tons). Median annual production at lead subcategory plants
was approximately 6,000 kkg (6,600 tons). No correlation between
199
-------
plant size and battery type, i.e, wet, damp, or dehydrated batteries,
was observed.
Geographically, lead acid battery plants are distributed throughout
the U.S. and are located in every EPA region. The highest
concentrations of plants in this subcategory are in EPA Regions IV, V,
and IX. Region IX in particular contains large numbers of small
manufacturers many of whom purchase battery plates from outside
suppliers.
Process water use and wastewater discharge vary widely among lead
subcategory plants because of differences in control of water use,
wastewater management practices, and manufacturing process variations.
The manufacturing process variations which most significantly
influence wastewater discharge are in electrode formation techniques,
but these variations are frequently overshadowed by variations in
plant water management practices. Wastewater treatment practices also
were observed to differ widely, leading to significant variability in
effluent quality. Most plants in the subcategory discharge process
wastewater to POTW, and many provide little or no pretreatment. Lead
reserve battery production does not generate wastewater in the battery
category. The only "wet" operation is plating of lead onto steel
sheet.
Manufacturing Process
The manufacture of lead batteries is illustrated in the generalized
process flow diagram presented in Figure V-9 (page 270). As shown in
the figure, processes presently used in commercial manufacture
generally involve the following steps: (1) grid or plate support
structure manufacture; (2) leady oxide production; (3) paste
preparation and application to provide a plate with a highly porous
surface; (4) curing to ensure adequate paste strength and adhesion to
the plate; (5) assembly of plates into groups or elements (semi-
assembly); (6) electrolyte addition as appropriate; (7) formation
(charging) which further binds the paste to the grid and renders the
plate electrochemically active; (8) final assembly; (9) testing and
repair if needed; (10) washing; and (11) final shipment. Each of
these process steps may be accomplished in a variety of ways. And
they may be combined in different overall process sequences depending
on intended use and desired characteristics of the batteries being
produced. These process steps, and their various combinations form
the basis for analysis of lead subcategory process wastewater
generation and control as shown in Figure V-10 (page 271). Each of
the steps is discussed below, with greater detail for those operations
generating wastewater.
200
-------
Grid Manufacture - A lead or lead-alloy grid is the mechanical
framework to support active material (lead or lead peroxide) for a
battery plate or electrode. Cast or perforated grids are designed to
provide mechanical strength, paste adhesion, and electrical
conductivity while minimizing the grid weight in relation to the
weight of active material in the paste. Alloys reported in dcp's
include lead-antimony and lead-calcium, sometimes with the addition of
tin. The literature also indicates that lead-strontium grids may be
used and that trace amounts of arsenic, cadmium, selenium, silver and
tellurium may be added to grids.
Impurities found in lead grids include copper, silver, zinc, bismuth,
and iron. Newly developed grid structures discussed in the literature
use ABS plastic grids coated with lead or polystyrene interwoven with
lead strands for the negative plate, but no plant reported commercial
manufacture of these grid types.
Leady Oxide Production - Active materials for the positive (Pb02) and
negative (Pb) plates are derived from lead oxides in combination with
finely divided lead. Lead oxide (PbO) used in battery plates and
known as litharge exists in two crystalline forms, the yellow
orthorhombic form (yellow lead) and the red tetrogonal form. Red lead
(Pb304) is sometimes used in making positive plates, but its use is
declining. The lead oxide mixture (PbO and Pb) called leady oxide,
which is most often used in producing electrodes, is usually produced
on-site at battery manufacturing plants by either the ball mill
process or the Barton process. Leady oxide generally contains 25-30
percent free lead with a typical value observed to be approximately 27
percent.
In the ball mill process, high purity lead pigs or balls tumble in a
ball mill while being subjected to a regulated flow of air. Heat
generated by friction and the exothermic oxidation reaction causes
oxidation of the eroding lead surface to form particles of red
litharge and unoxidized metallic lead. The rate of oxidation is
controlled by regulation of air flow and by non-contact cooling of the
ball mill.
In the Barton process, molten lead is fed into a pot and vigorously
agitated to break lead into fine droplets by aspiration. Oxidation in
the presence of an air stream forms a mixture of yellow lead, red
litharge, and unoxidized lead in a settling chamber.
High purity refined lead is required to produce oxide for use on
electrodes. Recycled lead recovered by remelting scrap is normally
used in casting grids, straps, and terminals.
Paste Preparation and Application - Lead oxides are pasted on the grid
to produce electrode plates with a porous, high area, reactive
201
-------
surface. The pores provide maximum contact of the electrolyte with
the electrode. Various mixtures of lead oxide powder are used for the
formulation of the negative and positive pastes, which usually are
mixed separately. The positive plate is formed from leady oxide,
granular lead, or red lead with binders such as acrylic fibers,
sulfuric acid, and water. The negative paste generally contains leady
oxide, lead, sulfuric acid, water, and expanders. Expanders are added
to the negative paste to minimize contraction and solidification of
the spongy lead. The most common expanders are lampblack, barium
sulfate, and organic materials such as lignosulfonic acid. Addition
of expanders amounting to an aggregate 1 or 2 percent of the paste can
increase the negative plate effective area by several hundred percent.
Hardeners have been added to pastes (e.g., glycerine and carbolic
acid), but prevailing practice is to control this property by proper
oxide processing. Other additives to the paste include ammonium
hydroxide, magnesium sulfate, lead carbonate, lead chloride, lead
sulfate, potash, and zinc chloride. Where a plate is to be placed in
a dehydrated battery, mineral oil may be added to the negative paste
to protect the plate from oxidation, from sulfation, and to reduce
hydrogen evolution (depending upon the grid alloy).
Water is added to the paste to produce proper consistency and increase
paste adhesion. During acid addition, considerable heat is evolved.
Temperature must be controlled to produce a paste with the proper
cementing action. Paste is applied to the grids by hand or machine.
Curing - The drying and curing operations must be carefully controlled
to provide electrodes with the porosity and mechanical strength
required for adequate battery performance and service life. The
purpose of curing is to ensure proper control of oxidation and
sulfation of the plates.
Where leady oxides are present, common practice is to flash dry the
plates by passing them through a tunnel drier and then either stacking
and covering them, or placing them in humidity controlled rooms for
several days to convert free lead particles in the plates to lead
oxide. The free lead is reduced from 24-30 percent to the desired
level (5 percent or less) during curing. Proper conditions of
temperature and humidity allow the formation of small crystals of
tribasic lead sulfate which convert easily to a very active lead
peroxide (positive plate) during formation. Too high a temperature
(57ฐ C) leads to the formation of coarse crystals of tetrabasic lead
which is difficult to convert to lead peroxide and may cause shedding
of active material during formation. Too little or too much moisture
in the plate retards the rate of oxidation. The rate of curing may be
increased by providing controlled humidity at higher temperatures,
i.e., steam curing.
202
-------
After curing, and prior to formation, the plates may be soaked in
sulfuric acid solution to enhance sulfation and improve mechanical
properties. This may be done in the battery case, a formation tank,
or in a separate vessel.
Semi-Assembly (Stacking, Grouping, Separator Addition) - Following
curing, plates are stacked or grouped in preparation for formation.
This semi-assembly process varies depending upon the specific
formation process which is to follow and the type of separator being
used.
Separators prevent short circuiting between the anode and cathode yet
permit electrolyte conduction between the electrodes. Separators also
may serve to provide physical support to the positive plate. The
configuration and the material of separators differ according to the
specific properties desired. Materials used for separators in lead
acid storage batteries include paper, plastic, rubber, and fiberglass.
Electrolyte Preparation and Addition - Sulfuric acid is purchased by
battery manufacturers as concentrated acid (typically 93 percent) and
must be diluted with water or "cut" to the desired concentrations)
prior to use in forming electrodes or filling batteries. Dilution
usually proceeds in two steps. The acid is first cut to an
intermediate concentration (about 45 percent acid) which may be used
in paste preparation. Final dilutions are made to concentrations
(generally 20-35 percent) used in battery formation and battery
filling. Often two or more different final acid concentrations are
produced for use in formation and for shipment in different battery
types.
For some battery applications, sodium silicate is added to the
electrolyte prior to addition to the battery. The resulting
thixotropic gel is poured into the battery and allowed to set,
yielding a product from which liquid loss and gas escape during
operation are minimal and which may be operated in any orientation.
Formation (Charging) - Although lead peroxide is the active material
of the finished positive plate, it is not a component of the paste
applied to the plate. The formation process converts lead oxide and
sulfate to lead peroxide for the positive plate and to lead for the
negative plate by means of an electric current. Formation starts in
the region where poorly conducting paste is in contact with the more
conductive grids and proceeds through the volume of the paste.
Completion of formation is indicated by (1) color of active materials
(plates have "cleared" and are uniform in color), (2) plates are
gassing normally, (3) a constant maximum voltage is indicated, and (4)
the desired electrolyte specific gravity is reached. Final
composition for the positive plate is 85-95 percent lead peroxide and
the negative plate is greater than 90 percent lead. Formation of
203
-------
battery plates may be accomplished either within the battery case
after assembly has been completed (closed formation) or open tanks
prior to battery assembly (open formation). Open formation is most
often practiced in the manufacture of dehydrated plate batteries.
Closed Formation. Closed formation is performed in several different
ways depending upon the desired charging rate and characteristics of
the final product. The major variations in this process may be
termed: single fill-single charge, double fill-single charge, double
fill-double charge, and fill and dump (for damp batteries). A major
factor influencing the choice of operating conditions for closed
formation is the relationship between charging rate, electrode
characteristics, and electrolyte concentration. As the electrolyte
concentration increases, the rate of formation of positive plates
decreases, but durability of the product improves. The rate of
formation of negative plates increases by increasing acid
concentration.
Single-Fill - In the single fill-single charge process, the battery is
filled with acid of a specific gravity such that, after formation, the
electrolyte will be suitable for shipment and operation of the
battery. The rate at which formation proceeds may vary appreciably
with formation periods ranging from about one to seven days.
Double-Fill - Double fill formation processes use a more dilute
formation electrolyte than is used for single-fill formation.
Formation of the battery is complete in about 24 hours. The formation
electrolyte is removed for reuse, and more concentrated fresh
electrolyte suitable for battery operation is added. Double fill-
double charge batteries are given a boost charge prior to shipment.
Fill and Dump - The fill and dump process is used to produce damp
batteries which are a part of the group of batteries commonly called
dry-charged by manufacturers. These differ from dehydrated plate
batteries (produced by open formation) in the degree of electrolyte
removal and dehydration. The presence of some electrolyte in the damp
batteries when they are shipped causes the degree of charge retention
during long-term storage to be less than that of the dehydrated plate
type. Damp batteries are produced by closed formation of assembled
batteries and subsequent removal of the electrolyte and draining of
the battery which is shipped without electrolyte. After the formation
electrolyte is removed from the battery, some manufacturers add
chemicals to the battery in a second acid solution which is also
dumped. These chemicals are intended to reduce the loss of battery
charge during storage. Other manufacturers centrifuge or "spin-dry"
the batteries before final assembly.
Open Formation. Open formation has the advantage of access to the
battery plates during and after formation. Visual inspection of the
204
-------
plates during formation allows closer control of formation conditions
than is possible during closed formation. More significantly,
however, after open formation plates can be rinsed thoroughly to
remove residual electrolyte and can then be thoroughly dried as is
required for the manufacture of dehydrated plate batteries.
Wet - Open case formation is used in the manufacture of some wet
batteries. Because problems of inhomogeneity in the plates are most
pronounced during formation of larger plate sizes, open case formation
for the manufacture of wet batteries is frequently used for the
manufacture of industrial batteries with large electrodes.
Dehydrated - Most open case formation is for the purpose of producing
dehydrated plates. Immediately after formation, the plates are rinsed
and dehydrated. These operations are particularly important for the
(lead) negative plates which oxidize rapidly if acid and moisture are
not eliminated. A variety of techniques including the use of
deionized water are used to rinse the formed plates. Multi-stage
rinses are frequently used to achieve the required degree of
electrolyte removal. Drying often requires both heat and vacuum to
achieve dehydration of the plates.
Battery Assembly - As discussed previously, assembly may be partially
accomplished prior to formation but is completed after formation.
Assembly after open formation includes interleaving positive and
negative plates and separators to create elements, and welding
connecting straps to the positive and negative lugs on the elements to
provide electrical continuity through the battery. The battery cover
is then installed and sealed in place by heat, epoxy resin, rubber
cement, or with a bituminous sealer; vents are installed; and the
battery posts are welded or "burned" in place. Partial assembly prior
to closed formation is the same as semi-assembly. Final sealing of
the case and installation of vent covers is accomplished after
formation.
Battery Wash - At most plants batteries are washed prior to shipment
to remove electrolyte spills occurring during filling and formation.
Other contaminants resulting from assembly operations are also
removed. Washing may be by hand or by battery wash machines and may
involve the use of detergents to achieve more complete removal of
dirt, oil and grease. Where detergents are used, the final battery
wash containing the detergent may be preceded by a water rinse to
remove lead and acid.
Battery Testing and Repair - Most finished batteries are tested prior
to shipment to assure correct voltage and current capacity. Selected
batteries may undergo more extensive tests including capacity, charge
rate acceptance, cycle life, over-charge, and accelerated life tests.
Batteries which are found to be faulty in testing may be repaired on
205
-------
site. These repair operations generally require disassembly of the
battery and replacement of some component(s).
Process Integration
The different methods of carrying out each of the basic process steps
discussed above may be combined to produce a large number of distinct
process flow diagrams. Each plant will combine these process elements
in a pattern suited to its age, type of product(s), degree of
automation, and production volume. Further, not all plants perform
all process operations on-site. A significant number of plants
purchase pasted battery plates from other plants. Conversely, some
battery manufacturing plants produce only battery plates and do not
assemble finished batteries.
When plates are formed by the plate manufacture, only assembly and
electrolyte addition are performed by the battery manufacturer.
Alternatively, the plates may be sold "green" (unformed) and subjected
to either open or closed formation by the battery manufacturer.
Examples of wet, damp and dehydrated battery manufacture and of
battery manufacture from purchased "green" and formed plates are shown
in the process flow diagrams of Figures V-ll through V-15 (pages 272-
276). In many cases, single sites produce multiple product types and
therefore have process flows combining operations of more than one of
these figures.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics/ and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
The production normalized parameter is weight of lead used for all
processes. Mean and median normalized discharge flows from all dcp
and visit data for the wastewater producing processes are summarized
in Table V-39 (page 365). This table also presents the number of
plants which provided data for each process. Normalized flow data is
also summarized in Figure V-16 (page 277). This figure shows the
distribution of production normalized flows for each process operation
at those plants which produce a wastewater discharge for the process
operation. Plants which report no process wastewater from the process
are not represented on the curves. The insert on the figure presents
for each process the median of the non-zero flows, the median of all
flow values, the total number of flow values, and the number of these
which are equal to zero. The median shown for the non-zero flows is
derived from a linear regression fit to the data and represents the
best available estimate of the median flow from all plants discharging
wastewater from each process operation. Because of the difficulty in
handling zero values in this statistical treatment, the median shown
206
-------
for all values is the classical median of the sample population
(plants supplying specific process flow data).
As the regression lines on the figure indicate, the dispersion in the
flow data (indicated by the slopes of the lines) showed no significant
differences among different process operations. The median flows
differed considerably. This reflects the fact that the variability in
wastewater flow from all process operations results primarily from the
same factors, i.e., plant-to-plant variations in the degree of water
conservation and flow control practiced. No significant technical
factors causing major wastewater flow differences were identified for
any of these process elements and none are suggested by these data.
Consequently the data indicate that any plant active in any of these
process operations can achieve wastewater flows demonstrated for that
process by other plants without any major process change.
As the insert on Figure V-16 shows, there are significant differences
between different process operations in the frequency with which zero
wastewater discharge results. Five of the eight processes shown are
reported to produce zero process wastewater by over half of the plants
supplying data. Zero process wastewater is reported by fewer than 20
percent of the plants supplying data for the other three process
operations. Water use and flows are discussed below for each process
in the lead subcategory.
Grid Manufacture - Water discharge from this step is not included in
the battery manufacturing category but process wastewater is rarely
produced as a result of grid casting operations.
Leady Oxide Production - Process water from leady oxide production
was reported by twelve plants, ten of which were operated by two
companies. Wastewater was reported to originate in leakage and "shell
cooling" on ball mills, contact cooling in oxide grinding, and wet
scrubbers used for air pollution control. Most plants perform these
processes using only non-contact cooling water and use dry bag-houses
for air pollution control and consequently produce no process
wastewater.
Paste Preparation and Application - Water is required to clean the
equipment and the area. The wastewater contains large concentrations
of lead as well as the various additives used in the paste and, where
discharged to treatment, greatly increases raw wastewater pollutant
loads. Process wastewater may also be generated by wet scrubbers in
the pasting areas. Fifty-one of seventy plants supplying data produce
no process wastewater discharge from electrode pasting operations by
practicing settling treatment and recycle.
Curing - Process wastewater discharge from curing operations was
reported by fewer than 10 percent of the plants supplying data (8 of
207
-------
89 plants) and resulted from steam curing processes. The predominant
industry practices of curing in covered stacks or in humidity
controlled rooms achieve results equivalent to steam curing and
produce no wastewater.
Semi-Assembly - Water use in the semi-assembly operation is limited to
non-contact cooling water associated with welding of elements and
groups. No process wastewater is produced.
Electrolyte Preparation and Addition - Acid cutting generates heat and
generally required non-contact cooling. Process wastewater is not
generally produced. Wet scrubbers are used at some sites to control
acid fumes and to generate process wastewater. Since water is
consumed in "cutting" acid, some plants use this process as a sink for
process wastewater contaminated with acid and lead, thereby reducing
or eliminating the volume requiring treatment and discharge.
The addition of electrolyte to batteries for formation and for
shipment is frequently a source of wastewater discharge in the form of
acid spillage. Electrolyte addition is accomplished by a wide variety
of techniques which result in widely varying amounts of spillage and
battery case contamination. While efficient producers employ filling
devices which sense the level of electrolyte in the batteries and add
only the proper amount with essentially no spillage or case
contamination, others continue to regulate the amount of acid in the
batteries by overfilling and subsequently removing acid to the desired
level. In some plants, batteries are filled by immersion in tanks of
acid. Overfilling or filling by immersion results in significant
contamination of the battery case with acid and necessitates rinsing
prior to further handling or shipment, generating significant volumes
of process wastewater.
Closed Formation - Single Fill - During closed formation heat is
generated in the batteries and must be dissipated. At the higher
charging rates this may be accomplished using contact cooling water on
the outside of the battery cases. This water is normally applied as a
fine spray and may be recirculated reducing the volume of the
resultant wastewater discharge. At lower charging rates, air cooling
is sufficient, and this process water use is eliminated. Since
hydrogen gas is often evolved during formation, wet scrubbers may be
used to control sulfuric acid fumes and mist carried out by the gas.
At lower charging rates, electrode over-voltage and consequently
hydrogen generation is reduced minimizing the need for wet scrubbers.
Double Fill - As for single fill formation, contact cooling water is
commonly used, and wet scrubbers may be required to control mist and
fumes. Both filling and emptying battery cases may result in
contamination of the case with acid necessitating subsequent rinsing.
208
-------
The extent of this contamination depends on the filling and emptying
techniques applied.
Closed formation of wet batteries (single and double fill) was
reported to produce a process wastewater discharge at 31 of 88 plants
supplying information. Data specific to these two formation processes
are summarized in Figure V-17 (page 278 ) As these data show, 90
percent of all plants reported zero discharge from single-fill
formation while over 75 percent reported wastewater discharge from
double-fill formation. The median flow at discharging plants,
however, was approximately equal for both processes. The more
frequent occurrence of discharge of process wastewater from double-
fill formation is attributable to more frequent use of contact cooling
water in formation as well as rinsing of batteries after dumping
formation electrolyte.
Fill and Dump - Water use and wastewater discharge in the production
of damp batteries do not differ significantly from that for double
fill wet batteries. Eleven plants supplied information on this
process. Two of the 11 reported zero discharge from the process.
Open Formation - Wet - Because these electrodes do not require rinsing
and drying, open case formation for wet batteries differs little from
closed formation in terms of wastewater generation. Wastewater
discharges occur from drips and spills and, in some instances, from
wet scrubbers used for fume control.
Five plants reported no formation process wastewater, while two showed
very high process discharges comparable to those from plate formation
and dehydration processes used in producing dehydrated batteries. An
examination of manufacturing process information at these two plants
revealed that they are in fact, producing formed dehydrated electrodes
prior to including them in wet-charged batteries. Thus, all plants
practicing open case formation without rinsing and dehydrating the
formed electrodes reported zero process wastewater discharge from this
operation.
Dehydrated - Wastewater discharges result from vacuum pump seals or
ejectors used in drying as well as from rinsing. Wastewater may also
result from wet scrubbers used to control acid mist and fumes from
charging tanks, but this source is generally small in comparison to
discharges from rinsing and drying. Thirty-five plants reported that
they were active in this process element. Two plants reported zero
discharge from this process.
Battery Assembly - No process water is used in assembly, and no
process wastewater discharge results.
209
-------
Battery Wash - Wastewater from battery rinses and from battery wash
operations in which detergents are not used are treated and reused, or
used in electrolyte preparation at some sites. Sixty plants provided
battery wash data of which three reported zero discharge.
Battery Repair - The conduction of tests and subsequent disassembly,
inspection and repair operations may yield a very small volume of
wastewater which is similar in character to discharges from formation
operations. This source is minor in relation to the total process
wastewater flow.
Wastewater Characteristics
Wastewater samples obtained at lead subcategory plants provided
characterization of wastewater from the specific process operations
addressed in the preceding discussion. Process wastewater was
characterized by sampling at five plants. These plants collectively
represent the production of both SLI and industrial batteries and
manufacturing processes including single- and double-fill closed
formation processes and the formation of damp and dehydrated plate
batteries. They also embody a variety of in-process control
techniques including recirculation, low rate formation, and
recirculation of treated process wastewater, and several different
wastewater treatment technologies. Sampling at these plants provides
the basis for characterizing wastewater resulting from specific
process operations and total battery manufacturing process wastewater.
Interpretation of sampling results was aided by reference to
additional information obtained from industry dcp's and by visits to
eleven additional lead acid battery manufacturing plants at which
wastewater samples were not obtained.
Characteristics of individual process wastewater streams from the
major wastewater sources are summarized in Table V-40 (page 366).
This table provides the range and median values of concentrations in
these individual wastewater streams, which are discussed below in more
detail.
Leady Oxide Production - Process contact wastewater from leady oxide
production results from inadequate maintenance or from air scrubbers.
This process wastewater stream was not specifically characterized by
sampling, however, contributions to total wastewater flow are minimal.
Pasting. Wastewater samples were collected at three plants. Analysis
results are shown in Table V-41 (page 36?) As indicated on the
table, wastewater samples at two plants were obtained from sumps or
holding tanks in which some settling of solids from the pasting
wastewater evidently occurred. A sample of the supernatant from an
in-line settling tank at Plant D was found to contain 10 mg/1 of
suspended solids and 37 mg/1 of lead indicating that significant
210
-------
reduction in suspended solids and lead is attained by settling. The
wastewater stream sampled at Plant A had minimum settling effects, and
is typical of raw wastewaters generated by this process. Pollutant
loads from pasting based on sampling results are shown in Table V-42
(page 368). This process is potentially a major contributor to total
raw wastewater loads but may be eliminated by recycle as presently
practiced at many sites.
Curing - Wastewater from curing pasted plates by steaming is reported
at a number of plants but was not observed at any plants visited for
wastewater sampling. This wastewater stream is, however, small in
volume and will have little effect on wastewater treatment design and
performance. It is anticipated that chemical characteristics of
wastewater from this source will be similar to those found in rinse
wastewater from dehydrated plate manufacturing.
Closed Formation of Wet Batteries - Wastewater samples were obtained
at Plant A and represent the post formation rinse of double-fill wet
batteries. Contact cooling water used in formation was included in
the total process wastewater at Plant C but was not separately
characterized. Production normalized wastewater flows associated with
formation of wet batteries at Plant A are comparable to the median
value for those plants reporting wastewater discharges in the dcp's.
Formation wastewater characteristics and pollutant loads observed in
sampling at this site are presented in Tables V-43 and V-44 (pages 369
and 370)/ respectively.
Closed Formation of Damp Batteries - Wastewater samples were also
obtained at Plant A. This process replaced a conventional dehydrated
plate system in which it was necessary to remove the cells and run
them through a high-water-use, three-stage washer. The discharge is
associated with a spray rinse similar to that used for wet formation.
Loadings are somewhat higher than those for wet formation, apparently
as a result of case contamination in dumping electrolyte from the
batteries.
Damp batteries are also produced at Plant C, and wastewater from
formation of these units is included in the total raw wastewater
stream sampled at that plant. Formation wastewater at that site
results from contact cooling of batteries during a high rate formation
process.
Open Formation and Dehydration of Plates - Plant D uses countercurrent
rinsing of the open case formed electrodes and uses no ejector or pump
seal water in plate dehydration. Despite those practices, wastewater
discharge from plate formation and dehydration at this site is higher
than the median value from dcp's. This may be attributed to the low
volume of dehydrated plate production and inefficient control of water
used in the plate rinse. Concentrations observed in wastewater from
211
-------
this step {shown in Table V-45, page 371) are similar to those
observed in wastewater from other processes. Pollutant loads from
open formation and dehydration of electrodes are shown in Table V-46
(page 372). An indication of discharge characteristics from open
formation where water is used both in rinsing and dehydration may be
derived from the total process wastewater at Plant B which is
dominated by discharges from open formation processes.
Battery Wash - Battery wash wastewater sample results from Plants A
and D are presented in Table V-47 (page 373). Sampling at Plant D
included both a battery rinse and a final detergent wash. Samples
from Plant D also included small flow contributions from battery
testing and area washdown. Table V-48 (page 374) presents pollutant
loads observed in sampling at these sites.
Battery Repair and Floor Wash - Wastewater samples were obtained at
Plant A. Analysis results are shown in Table V-49 (page 375)/ and
corresponding wastewater loadings are shown in Table V-50 (page 376).
The samples represent wastewater from a floor washing machine and from
cleanup associated with a battery repair area. As the data show,
contributions of these wastewater sources to the total plant process
wastewater are minimal.
Total Process Wastewater Discharge and Characteristics
Flow - Total plant discharge flows range from 0 to nearly 62,000 1/hr
with a median value of 3,500 1/hr. Production normalized discharge
flovs range from 0 to 100 I/kg with a median of 2.8 I/kg. Discharge
flow from each plant in the subcategory is shown in Table V-51 (page
377 . Approximately 27 percent (51 plants) of all plants in the
subcategory reported zero process wastewater discharge. Most of these
zero discharge plants were plants which only purchased plates and
assembled batteries (17 plants) or plants which produced only wet
batteries and generally employed single-fill formation (18 plants).
Of the 51 plants, 26 plants indicated that no process wastewater was
generated. Six others indicated that wastewater was recycled and
reused. The remaining plants employ evaporation or holding ponds (5
plants), discharge to dry wells, sumps, septic tanks or cesspools (9
plants), contract removal of process wastewater (2 plants), disposal
of wastewater in a sanitary landfill (1 plant), or did not specify the
disposition of process wastes (2 plants). Among discharging plants,
only fifteen were direct dischargers. All other discharging plants
introduce process wastewater into POTW.
Raw Wastewater Characteristics - Total process wastewater
characteristics determined from the analysis of samples collected at
Plants A, B, C, D, and E are presented in Table V-52 (page 380).
Pollutant loads determined by sampling at each of these plants are
presented in Table V-53 (page 382). These data represent the process
212
-------
wastewater stream discharged to treatment at each plant. All process
wastewater sources flowing to treatment are included, but streams
which are totally recycled such as pasting wastewater are not included
in these data. Large differences in wastewater volume and in
pollutant concentrations and loadings among these plants are evident.
The differences may be understood by examining the manufacturing
processes and wastewater management practices at these sites.
Plant A manufactures wet and damp batteries and practices extensive
in-process control of wastewater. Pasting equipment and area washdown
at this plant is treated in a multistage settling system and is
totally reused. The clarifier supernatant from this system is reused
in equipment and area washing, and the settled lead oxide solids are
returned for use in pasting. Batteries are formed at this site using
the double-fill, double-charge technique, filling operations are
performed with equipment designed to avoid electrolyte spillage and
overfilling; and formation is accomplished without the use of contact
cooling water. Wastewater assocciated with formation is limited to a
spray rinse of the battery case after the final acid fill. Wet
charged batteries are boost charged one or more times before shipment
and given a final wash just before they are shipped. Damp batteries
at this site are initially formed in the same manner as wet batteries.
The second acid fill, however, is also dumped to reuse, and the
battery is sealed and spray rinsed. These damp batteries are given
the same final wash prior to shipment as the wet charged units. A
small volume of additional process wastewater at this site results
from cleanup operations in a battery repair area. The total
wastewater from this plant, which is represented in Tables V-52 and V-
53, includes wastewater flowing to wastewater treatment, the battery
rinses and wash water, and the repair area cleanup wastewater, but
does not include the pasting wastewater since this stream is
segregated and totally recycled. The low pollutant concentrations and
loadings shown in the table reflect the efficiency of the in-process
controls employed by this plant. Significantly, the wastewater
treatment system includes an evaporation pond allowing the achivement
of zero pollutant discharge from this plant.
Plant B manufactures a high percentage of dehydrated plate batteries
but also practices significant in-process water use control. Pasting
equipment and area wash water is recirculated using a system similar
to that described at Plant A. Wet batteries are produced in a single-
fill formation process, which is accomplished using low rate charging
to eliminate process contact cooling water, and filling techniques
which minimize battery case contamination. Only occasional discharges
result from the filling area and battery case washing. Open-case
formation and plate dehydration operations generate most of the
process wastewater. The wastewater sources are plate rinsing, fume
scrubbers, formation area washdown, and a vacuum ejector used in
dehydrating the formed, rinsed plates. Partially treated wastewater
213
-------
is recycled from the wastewater treatment system for use in the wet
scrubbers, area washdown, and rinsing of formed plates; but recycled
water is not used in the vacuum ejectors. As a result of the recycle
practiced, the volume of the final effluent from this plant is only 46
percent of the raw wastewater volume shown in the table or
approximately 4.0 I/kg.
The raw wastewater characterized in the table includes process
wastewater from open formation and plate dehydration, closed formation
processes, and contaminated wastewater resulting from a cooling jacket
leak on a ball mill used in producing leady oxide, but it does not
include pasting wastewater which is totally recycled. The effect of
plate rinsing operations in the open formation process is evident in
the elevated lead concentrations and loadings at this plant. The
relatively high production normalized flow arises to a great extent
from the use of large volumes of water in ejectors to aid vacuum
drying of the rinsed plates.
Plant C produces wet and damp SLI batteries and practices only limited
in-process water use control. Pasting area wash water is collected in
a sump and pumped to the central wastewater treatment plant at the
plant. Aside from limited settling in the sump, this wastewater
stream is neither recycled nor treated separately prior to combining
with other process wastewater streams. Wet and damp batteries both
undergo an initial high rate formation process in which contact
cooling water is sprayed on the battery cases and discharged to
wastewater treatment. The wet batteries are subsequently dumped (the
acid is reused) and refilled with stronger acid, boost charged, and
topped off to ensure the correct electrolyte level. Damp batteries
are dumped after formation and centrifuged to insure complete
electrolyte removal. Wastewater from the centrifuge, including some
formation electrolyte, also flows to wastewater treatment. Both the
wet charged and damp batteries are washed, labeled, and tested prior
to shipment. Wastewater from battery washing also flows to treatment.
The combined raw wastewater at this plant was sampled as it entered
wastewater treatment and includes all sources discussed above. The
pasting wastewater is included in total process wastewater for this
plant. This, together with differences in water conservation
practices, appears to account for the differences observed in
pollutant concentrations and pollutant loads between this plant and
Plant A. Lead loadings, for example, are significantly higher at
Plant C as a result of the introduction of pasting wastewater and
wastewater from battery centrifuges into wastewater treatment, but raw
wastewater concentrations are low due to the dilution afforded by the
much higher wastewater volume at this plant (approximately 8 times
greater production normalized flow).
214
-------
Plant D manufactures both SLI and industrial batteries and employs
closed and open formation processes. Several in-process water use
control techniques at this plant resulted in the generation of a
relatively low volume of process wastewater. Pasting area and
equipment wash water is not recycled at this plant, but is separately
treated by settling before introduction into the wastewater treatment
system. Closed formation of SLI batteries is accomplished in a
double-fill process without the use of contact cooling water. The
final acid fill after formation is followed by a battery rinse
yielding a process wastewater discharge. No industrial batteries
(open formation process) were formed during sampling at this plant.
Open formation is followed by a two-stage countercurrent rinse of the
formed plates. They are dried in an oven without the use of ejector
or vacuum pump seal water. Finished batteries are given a final wash
prior to packaging and shipment. Additional sources of process
wastewater at this site include assembly area washdown, battery repair
operations, and wastewater from an on-site laboratory.
Plant E manufactures only wet industrial batteries. In-process water
use control techniques at this site reduce the ultimate discharge
volume nearly to zero. Formation is accomplished in a single fill
process using low rate charging. No contact cooling water is used and
batteries are not washed. Process wastewater at this plant results
only from washing the pasting equipment and floor areas. This
wastewater is treated and recycled for use in washing the pasting area
floors. Equipment is washed with deionized water. This practice
results in a gradual accumulation of wastewater in the recycle system
and necessitates occasional contract removal of some wastewater. The
total process wastewater characterized in Tables V-52 and V-53
includes the wastewater from pasting equipment and area washdown. The
sample used to characterize this wastewater was obtained from a
wastewater collection pit in which settling of paste particles
occurred. Therefore lowered lead and TSS concentrations were found.
The total process wastewater characteristics presented in Tables V-52
and V-53 were calculated from analyses of all of the individual
wastewater streams described above, including the pasting wastewater
before settling.
A statistical summary of the total raw wastewater characteristics
observed at these plants is presented in Table V-54 (page 384). This
table shows the range, mean, and median concentrations observed for
each pollutant included in verification analyses. Corresponding
pollutant loading data are presented in Table V-55 (page 385),
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
Pep Data - Plants in the lead subcategory employ a variety of end-of-
pipe treatment technologies and in-process control techniques shown in
Table V-56 (page 386) and achieve widely varying effluent quality.
215
-------
End-of-pipe treatment practices employed include pH adjustment,
chemical precipitation, settling in a variety of devices, filtration,
flotation, and reverse osmosis. In-process water use control
techniques include segregation and treatment or recycle of specific
wastewater streams and process modifications to eliminate points of
water use and discharge. Most plants in the subcategory, which
produce a process wastewater discharge, discharge to POTW. Dcp
response showed some significant differences between plants
discharging to POTW and direct dischargers both in terms of treatment
practices and effluent performance achieved. Direct dischargers
generally provide more extensive wastewater treatment and control
plants than plants discharging to POTW. Where similar treatment
equipment is in place, direct dischargers generally operate it more
effectively and achieve better effluent quality.
The most frequently reported end-of-pipe treatment systems in this
subcategory provided pH adjustment and removal of solids. Fifty-one
plants reported the use of pH adjustment and settling or pH adjustment
and filtration for solids removal. Reported filtration units
generally serve as primary solids removal they do not function as
polishing filters following settling which are usually designed to
achieve very low effluent pollutant concentrations.
Effluent quality data provided in dcp's for plants practicing pH
adjustment and settling are presented in Table V-57 (page 394). While
the dcp's did not in general provide sufficient data to allow
meaningful evaluation of treatment system design and operation
parameters, some characteristics of the effluent data themselves
provide indications of the quality of treatment provided and of the
probable sources of the variability shown. First, the limited
effluent pH data provided in the dcp's indicate that few discharges
are at the values (pH 8.8-9.3) appropriate for efficient removal of
lead by precipitation. In the data from those plants reporting both
lead and pH values for the effluent, it may be observed that those
plants reporting higher pH values achieved lower effluent lead
concentrations. Second, effluent TSS values shown in Table V-57
clearly indicate that the sedimentation systems employed by some
plants are inadequate in design or operation. Finally, plants which
introduce their wastewater into POTW produced effluents ranging from
0.5 mg/1 to 7.5 mg/1 in lead concentration with an average of 2.1
mg/1. Plants discharging to surface waters and also practicing pH
adjustment and settling produced effluents ranging from 0.187 to 0.4
mg/1 with an average of 0.28 mg/1. The great difference in effluent
performance between direct and indirect dischargers corresponds to
differences in the severity of regulations presently applied to these
two groups of plants. This difference indicates that the variations
in the data reflect variations in treatment design and operating
practice rather than difference in attainable levels of pollutant
reduction at plants in this subcategory.
216
-------
Table V-58 (page 395) presents effluent quality data from dcp's for
plants practicing pH adjustment and filtration. In general, the
indicated effluent pollutant concentrations are lower than those shown
from pH adjustment and settling, and the variability in the data is
less marked. The effluent data from these systems also show lower
lead concentrations achieved by plants practicing direct discharge.
Twenty-two plants reported the introduction of process wastewater into
POTW after pH adjustment without the removal of suspended solids.
Effluent quality data were provided by eleven of these plants as shown
in Table V-59 (page 396). This table also shows effluent data from
one plant which reported process wastewater discharge to a POTW
without treatment.
Several plants provided data in dcp's indicating the use of wastewater
treatment systems other than those discussed above. These included
sulfide precipitation, flotation separation, and reverse osmosis. One
plant practicing chemical precipitation and flotation separation of
the precipitate reported an effluent lead concentration of 0.1 mg/1.
While most plants specified end-of-pipe treatment in their dcp
responses, the in-process controls were often not clearly shown. In
many dcps in-process controls were deduced from process line
descriptions and the presence of wastewater sources similar to those
of plants which were visited for on-site data collection. As a
result, the extent to which techniques such as low-rate charging
without contact cooling water are used, cannot be defined from the
dcp's. One in-process control technique which could be identified in
many dcp's was segregation of process wastewater from pasting area and
equipment washdown and subsequent settling and reuse of this
wastewater stream. Approximately 30 percent of the plants reporting
wastewater discharges indicated this practice. Those plants using
this in-process technique are identified in Tables V-57, V-58 and V-
59. The data in Tables V-57 and V-58 do not show significantly lower
effluent lead concentration from plants recycling pasting wastewater
although raw wastewater concentrations and pollutant loads are
significantly reduced by this practice as demonstrated by the data in
Table V-59. This further substantiates the observation that effluent
quality at existing lead subcategory plants is primarily determined by
process flow practices, treatment system design, and operating
parameters.
Additional in-process control techniques which are indicated in the
dcp's include: recirculation of wet scrubber discharge streams; use
of multistage or countercurrent rinses after open formation; reduction
or elimination of electrolyte spillage during battery fill operations
or dry cleanup of spilled electrolyte; low-rate charging of assembled
batteries without the use of contact cooling water; and elimination or
recirculation of vacuum pump seal water or vacuum ejector streams in
217
-------
plate drying operations. Recirculation of wet scrubber discharge
streams is specifically reported in some dcp's and is presumed to
exist at other plants since many plants report no scrubber discharges
although acid mist and fume problems are common to most manufacturers.
Multistage or countercurrent plate rinses are identified by
approximately 30 percent of those plants which practiced dehydrated
plate manufacture and supplied process diagrams in their dcp's. The
production normalized flows resulting from these rinses are usually
not significantly lower than those resulting from single stage or
unspecified rinses. Since the spillage of electrolyte on battery
cases necessitates removal of the spilled acid prior to shipment to
allow safe handling of the battery, it may be concluded that where wet
batteries are shipped and battery wash discharges are not reported,
spillage has been eliminated, or that any spillage which has occurred
has been neutralized and cleaned up by dry techniques. Both of these
conditions have been observed, and a small but significant number of
battery manufacturers reported shipment of wet batteries and provided
complete process diagrams which did not show battery wash wastewater
production. The use of low-rate charging is indicated at a number of
battery manufacturing plants which did not indicate contact cooling
wastewater from wet-charge formation processes. Finally,
approximately 50 percent of the plants which supplied complete process
diagrams describing open case formation and subsequent rinsing of the
formed plates prior to assembly into dehydrated plate batteries showed
no wastewater from pump seals or vacuum ejectors on plate drying and
no other process wastewater sources associated with plate drying. It
is concluded that these plants either achieve satisfactory plate
drying without the use of seal or ejector water or recirculate water
used for these purposes.
Visited and Sampled Plants - The characteristics of treated effluent
discharges at three visjjted battery manufacturing plants are presented
in Table V-60 (page 397). These plants all use wastewater treatment
systems based on chemical precipitation and solids removal but have
implemented three different solids removal techniques.
Plant B uses a tubular cloth filter from which solids are continuously
removed by the flow of the wastewater which becomes progressively more
concentrated as clarified water permeates through the filter. This
system was reported to be highly effective as indicated by dcp data
from this plant. During sampling, however, excessive solids levels
had been allowed to build up in the system and solids were carried
through the filter during surge flows. As a result, effluent
characteristics determined in sampling do not reflect effective
treatment.
Plant C employs a clarifier followed by a polishing lagoon for
wastewater treatment. As the data show, this system was operating
218
-------
normally during sampling and produced the lowest lead levels observed
in sampling.
At Plant D, wastewater is treated by pH adjustment and subsequent
filtration through a diatomaceous earth pre-coat filter press. During
the plant visit, company personnel acknowledged that the plant
production and wastewater flow rates had increased and that the system
was therefore overloaded. This condition is reflected in observed
effluent performance which was considerably worse than that exhibited
in historical data from the plant.
Data from these plants illustrate the importance of pH as an operating
parameter for the removal of lead by chemical precipitation. Both
plants B and D were observed to provide treatment at pH values
considerably lower than in desirable for lead precipitation, a
condition reflected in the poor effluent performance observed by
sampling. This effect is particularly evident on day 1 at Plant D
when the effluent pH was observed to be as low as 6, and a comparison
of effluent lead and TSS values shows clearly that the effluent
contained considerable concentrations of dissolved lead.
After evaluating all dcp and plant visit effluent data the conclusion
is made that although plants which discharge have treatment equipment
in-place, the operation and maintenance of these systems is inadequate
for treating lead subcategory pollutants.
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
This subcategory covers the manufacture of all batteries employing
both a zinc anode and a zinc chloride or zinc chloride-ammonium
chloride electrolyte. Presently, there are 19 active plants in the
subcategory, 17 of which manufacture cells with zinc anode,
carbon-manganese dioxide (Mn02) cathode, and zinc chloride or zinc
chloride-ammonium chloride electrolyte. The remaining two plants use
a silver cathode. Cells with silver chloride cathodes, however,
comprise less than 0.01 percent of the total production in the
subcategory.
There are several distinct variations both in form and in
manufacturing process for the Leclanche cell, with corresponding
differences in process water use and wastewater discharge. Most of
the production is in the form of standard, round "dry cells," but
other shapes are produced for special purposes, flat cell batteries,
foliar film pack batteries, and air-depolarized batteries.
Wastewater discharge results only from separator production and from
cleanup of miscellaneous equipment. After a discussion of the
manufacturing processes employed in the subcategory, the process
elements that produce wastewater are discussed in greater detail. The
219
-------
available data regarding specific wastewater sources, flow rates, and
chemical characteristics is presented followed by a discussion of
treatment in place and effluent characteristics.
Annual production reported in the subcategory totaled 96,260 kkg
(106,108 tons). This total includes all except two plants (making
carbon cathode and silver cathode cells, respectively) for which
production is judged to be far below average for the subcategory. The
total production also includes one high production plant which has
discontinued operation (the production is believed to have been
shifted to another plant owned by the company). Reported production
is based on 1976 annual production rates, except for one plant which
was not in production until 1977. Annual production at individual
plants in the subcategory ranges from 1.4 kkg (1.5 tons) to 24,000 kkg
(26,000 tons) with a median value of 2,700 kkg (3,000 tons).
Geographically, plants in the Leclanche subcategory are in the eastern
United States, with the single exception of a plant in Texas. There
are eight active plants in EPA Region V, three each in Regions I and
III, two each in Regions II and IV, and one in Region VI. The age of
these plants ranges from three years to many decades.
Manufacturing Processes
As shown in the generalized process flow diagram of Figure V-18 (page
279), the manufacture of batteries in this subcategory comprises the
preparation of the anode and cathode, the preparation or application
of the separator, assembly of these components into cells and
batteries, and ancillary operations performed in support of these
basic manufacturing steps.
The observed variations in anode, cathode and separator manufacture
and the combinations of these processes carried out at existing plants
together with ancillary operations that were observed to generate
wastewater are shown in Table V-61 (page 399). These variations
provide the framework for analysis of process wastewater generation in
the Leclanche subcategory as indicated in Figure V-19 (page 280). Of
twelve identified process elements in this subcategory, only four
generate process wastewater. Three of these were characterized by
wastewater sampling at two plants in the subcategory. Wastewater
discharge from the fourth element is believed to be similar in
character, and is eliminated by recycle in present practices.
Raw materials common to many of the plants in the Leclanche
subcategory are zinc for anodes, Mn02 and carbon for the cathode mix,
carbon for the cathode current carrier, ammonium chloride and zinc
chloride for the electrolyte, paper for the separator and paperboard
washers, mercuric chloride for anode amalgamation, and asphalt for
sealing. Other reported raw materials are zinc oxide, titanium,
220
-------
ammonium hydroxide, phenolics, manganese, adhesives, ammonia,
polystyrene, steel, brass, ethyl cellulose, polyvinyl chloride,
toluene, polycyclopentadiene, monochlorobenzene, cyclohexanone,
silica, starch, solder, wax, grease, magnesium perchlorate, barium
chromate, lithium chromate, latex, vinyl film, aluminum, magnesium
oxide, and others.
Anode Operations
The Leclanche anode is produced either from zinc sheet or powdered
zinc. The zinc sheet is most often formed into a can, which contains
the other components of the cell. This can is either purchased, or
formed at the battery plant. The other form of zinc sheet metal anode
is a flat zinc plate.
Preparation of powdered zinc anodes for foliar cells includes
formulation of an anode paste of zinc dust, carbon, and binders. The
paste is applied to specific areas on a conductive vinyl film.
Cathode Operations
Four distinct types of cathodes are produced in the Leclanche
subcategory; cathodes molded from mixed manganese dioxide and carbon
with several variations in electrolyte form; porous carbon cathodes
(which also contain manganese dioxide); silver chloride cathodes; and
cathodes in which manganese dioxide is pasted on a conductive
substrate. These cathode types are combined with zinc anodes and
electrolyte to make cells with a variety of configurations and
performance characteristics.
Manganese Dioxide - Powdered Mn02 cathodes are produced by blending
manganese dioxide with other powdered materials consisting primarily
of carbon. The resulting mixture is then combined with electrolyte
solution before insertion into the cell. Manufacture of this type of
cathode is reported by 14 plants. One of these plants discontinued
operations during 1979, leaving 13 active plants. Based on survey and
visit data, the raw materials added to the manganese dioxide ore to
make a cathode may include acetylene black, carbon black, graphite,
magnesium oxide, mercury, and ammonium chloride. Typically, ammonium
chloride is added directly to the depolarizer material. After
preparation of the depolarizer material, the electrolyte solution,
which may or may not contain mercury, is added. (In Leclanche cells,
mercury is added to either the electrolyte, cathode mix, or the
separator). Five out of the thirteen plants reported adding mercuric
chloride to the electrolyte solution. Nine plants reported combining
the depolarizer material with an electrolyte solution which does not
contain mercury. One plant is counted in both groups because both
manufacturing systems are used in the plant.
221
-------
Porous Carbon - Porous carbon cathode manufacture consists of:
blending carbon, manganese dioxide, and water; molding the mixture
around a porous carbon rod; wrapping in a nylon net separator; and
drying in an oven. This agglomerate electrode is sometimes called an
"agglo".
Silver Chloride - The silver chloride cathode is prepared by molding
silver chloride around a silver wire to form a bobbin. After
wrapping, the cathode bobbin is ready for insertion into the zinc
anode can. Two plants reported the manufacture of silver chloride
cathodes.
Pasted Manganese Dioxide - For the pasted Mn02 cathode a paste
consisting of manganese dioxide, carbon, and latex is applied to a
conducting film. The steps used to prepare this film are similar to
the steps described above for the zinc powder anode. The cathode
paste material is applied on the film in rectangular spots, directly
opposite the anode spots.
Ancillary Operations
Separator Operations - Separators are used to isolate the cathode from
the anode, while providing an ionically conductive path between them.
Separators consist of gelled paste, treated paper, or plastic sheet.
Cooked Paste Separator. In cells using cooked paste, the temperature
is elevated to set the paste. The raw materials for producing the
paste include starch, zinc chloride, mercuric chloride, and ammonium
chloride and water. After the paste and cathode are inserted into the
zinc can, the can is passed through a hot water bath with the water
level approximately one inch above the bottom of the can, heating the
can and causing the paste to gel. After the paste is set, the can is
removed from the hot water bath and final assembly operations are
conducted. One plant reported producing "cooked" paste separator
cells.
Uncooked Paste Separator, some paste formulations are used which set
at room temperature. The paste formulation includes zinc chloride,
ammonium chloride, mercuric chloride, cornstarch, and flour. The
paste is held in cold storage until it is injected into the zinc anode
cans. After the insertion of the compressed cathode, the paste is
allowed to set. Then final assembly operations are performed to
prepare the cells for shipping.
One plant manufactures carbon-zinc cells with an uncooked paste
separator. Two plants produce uncooked paste separator material for
use in silver chloride-zinc cells. Flour, zinc chloride and ammonium
chloride are used in formulating the separator paste.
222
-------
Pasted Paper (With Mercury) Separator. Pasted paper separators are
made by blending a paste-like material; applying it to paper; and oven
drying the resultant pasted paper. The raw materials used to form the
paste consist of starch, methanol, mercuric chloride, methocel,
silica, and water.
The manufacture of pasted paper separator material containing mercury
is specific to battery manufacturing and is included under battery
manufacturing. When pre-pasted paper is purchased by the cell
assembler, the separator material is inserted, as purchased, directly
into the zinc can, followed by cathode mix.
Pasted Paper (Without Mercury) Separator - Some of the Leclanche cell
manufacturers use pre-pasted paper separator material which does not
contain mercury. Manufacture of the paper separator material which
does not contain mercury is not specific to the battery industry
because the product has other industrial uses in addition to Leclanche
cell manufacturing.
Cell Assembly - Cell assembly processes differ for paper separator
cells, paste cells, flat cells, carbon cathode cells, silver chloride
cathode cells, and pasted cathode cells. To make paper separator
ceils, a pre-coated paper separator is first inserted into the zinc
can. The depolarizer mix and carbon rod (current collector) are put
in the paper-lined can. Additional electrolyte and paper washers are
added before the cell is sealed. A cap and paper collar are attached
to the cell, and the cell is tested and aged. Cells are then either
sold separately or combined and assembled into batteries, tested
again, and packed for shipment.
In paste cell production, the paste mixture is poured into a zinc can.
The depolarizer-electrolyte mix, molded around a central carbon rod,
is pushed into the paste. After the paste sets into a gel, the cell
is sealed. The cell then goes through testing, finishing, aging, and
retesting before being packed and shipped.
Flat cell production includes the manufacture of the duplex electrodes
and depolarizer-electrolyte mix cake, cell assembly, and battery
assembly. The duplex electrode is made by coating one side of a zinc
sheet with conductive carbon. Manganese dioxide, carbon, ammonium
chloride, zinc chloride, and water are mixed and pressed into a cake
which serves as a depolarizer and electrolyte.
Duplex electrodes and depolarizer-electrolyte cakes are stacked with a
paper separator in between and a plastic sleeve around the four sides
and overlapping the top and bottom of the cell. The cells undergo a
quality control inspection and are assembled into stacks with a final
flat zinc electrode and tin-plated steel end boards. The stacks are
223
-------
inspected, dipped in wax, aged, and inspected again for quality
assurance. Stacks are then assembled into finished batteries.
To assemble porous carbon cathode cells, the porous carbon "agglo"
cathode is inserted into the zinc anode container. An electrolyte-
separator paste is then added, and the cells are sealed and
interconnected to form batteries.
In the silver chloride cathode cell, the wrapped cathode bobbin is
inserted into a zinc can containing the electrolyte-separator paste.
The cell is then sealed.
The pasted Mn02 cathode foliar cell is assembled by interleafing
separator sheets between duplex electrodes and adding electrolyte
before sealing the cells into a stack. The sealed stack of cells is
tested and wrapped to form a finished battery.
Equipment and Area Cleanup - In the Leclanche subcategory, some
equipment cleanup practices cannot be associated with production of
only one of the major cell components, anode, cathode, or separator
operations. They include the clean-up of equipment used in assembling
cells as well as the preparation and delivery of electrolyte.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics, and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
Process water use and wastewater discharge among Leclanche subcategory
plants were generally observed to be very low or zero, with a maximum
reported process water discharge rate of 2,158 1/hr. The only
discrete cell component with which wastewater could be associated was
with the separator. At several Leclanche plants, water is used for
cleaning utensils or equipment used in the production of cell
components rather than for cleaning the components themselves.
Mean and median normalized discharge flows from both dcp and visit
data for each of the wastewater producing elements included in this
subcategory are summarized in Table V-62 (page 400). This table also
presents the production normalizing parameters upon which the reported
flows are based and which were discussed in Section IV, and the annual
raw waste volume for each process.
Process Wastewater Characteristics
Anode and Cathode Operations - There is no process wastewater
associated specifically with Leclanche anode or cathode manufacture.
Ancillary Operations - Cooked Paste Separator - The source of direct
process wastewater discharge from making cooked paste separators is
224
-------
the hot bath used for setting the separator paste which becomes
contaminated from contact with the outside of the can, from an
occasional spill of one or more cans into the bath, and waste from the
operating machinery. Wastewater from the paste separator manufacture
was sampled at the only plant reporting the use of this process. The
only source of direct process discharge is from the hot bath paste
setting. At this plant, no wastewater was discharged from either the
paste preparation or paste clean-up operations, due to in-process
controls. The paste preparation water supply tank held water
previously used for cleaning. The sources of water reused in mixing
the paste included floor wash water from the paste preparation room,
paste pipeline system wash water, and paste cleanup water used during
mechanical difficulties. An example of mechanical difficulties is
cathode insertion failure which results in the paste being washed out
of the cans for the purpose of recovering the cans for reuse. All of
the water that contacted the paste was collected for reuse in paste
formulation, and this closed system limits mercury contamination of
the wastewater.
Total discharge rates measured during the sampling visit ranged from
0.03 to 0.05 liters per kilogram of finished cells, with a mean value
of 0.04 and a median value of 0.05 I/kg. Composite samples were taken
which included wastewater from each of the three discharge sources.
The analytical results are presented in Table V-63 (page 401). Table
V-64 (page 402) presents the pollutant mass loadings based on the
weight of finished cells for each of the three sample days.
Pollutants found in this flow-proportioned combined stream are
mercury, manganese and zinc, TSS and oil and grease.
Uncooked Paste Separator - The only source of wastewater discharge
from the preparation of uncooked paste is paste tool cleaning. The
wastewater stream from tool cleaning estimated at less than 5 liters
per day was not sampled. The paste does not contain mercury, and zinc
is the only pollutants expected to be found in the wastewater.
Pasted Paper With Mercury Separator - The only source of wastewater
discharge during manufacture of pasted paper (with mercury) is hand
washing and washing of equipment used to handle the paste.
Wastewater from the manufacture of paper separators with mercury was
sampled. The measured flows ranged from 0.11 to 0.17 I/kg of applied
dry paste material (0.14 I/kg mean). The analytical results for this
waste stream are presented in Table V-65 (page 403). Table V-66 (page
404) presents the daily pollutant mass loadings of the paste equipment
clean-up operation wastewater. Significant pollutants observed
include zinc, manganese, mercury, TSS, and oil and grease.
225
-------
Among these significant pollutants, zinc and manganese dioxide are not
raw materials in paste formulation. They are presumed to derive from
adjacent production areas.
The presence of TSS in significant concentrations results from washing
equipment surfaces to remove process material accumulations. Oil and
grease is also present in significant concentration due to the removal
of equipment lubricants during the wash operation. There was
considerable variability in pollutant concentrations during the three
sampling days because of the sporadic nature of the hand wash and
cleaning operations. One plant which manufactures and sells mercury-
containing pasted paper separators (but does not make batteries) was
visited. In-process controls and contract hauling are used to
eliminate process wastewater discharge.
Pasted Paper Without Mercury Separator - Because this product is not
unique to the manufacture of batteries, the wastewater generated is
not included in the battery category.
Cell Assembly - No wastewater discharge is attributed to cell
assembly. All wastewaters generated during cell assembly are
allocated to separator preparation or to equipment and area cleaning.
Equipment and Area Cleanup - Equipment and area cleanup (including
handwash) wastewater in the Leclanche subcategory is that which cannot
be associated solely with anode, cathode, or separator production.
The operations generating this wastewater are: electrolyte
preparation equipment wash, electrode preparation equipment wash,
cathode carrier wash, miscellaneous equipment wash, and hand washing.
Out of the nineteen active Leclanche plants, twelve reported no
discharge of process wastewaters. One of the nineteen did not report
data on flow or discharge. The six remaining plants reported both
water use and water discharge. All six reported wastewater discharge
from equipment and area cleanup. Plants A, E and F reported
wastewater from electrolyte preparation equipment wash; plant D
reported wastewater from electrode preparation equipment wash; plant
B reported wastewater from cathode carrier wash; and Plant C reported
wastewater from hand wash and miscellaneous equipment wash.
Table V-67 (page 405) indicates the best available information on
equipment and area cleanup wastewater discharges for the nineteen
active Leclanche plants. The flow is normalized in terms of weight of
finished product, and is expressed in liters discharged per kilogram
of finished product.
Equipment and area cleanup wastewater samples were taken at Plants B
and C. Pollutant concentrations from these sampled plants and also
plant supplied data are included in Table V-68 (page 406). Table V-69
(page 40?) presents pollutant mass loads expressed as milligrams
226
-------
discharge per kilogram of cells produced. Table V-70 presents
statistics based on the values in Table V-68, and Table V-71 (page
409) presents statistics based on the values in Table V-69.
Total Process Wastewater Characteristics
Total process wastewater flow and characteristics were determined for
two plants in the Leclanche subcategory which were sampled. These
characteristics, which reflect the combined raw wastewater stream at
each site on each of three days of sampling, are summarized
statistically. The statistical summary of total process wastewater
characteristics from Leclanche subcategory plants is presented in
Table V-72 (page 410).
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
Twelve plants do not discharge any wastewater. Five of the 19 active
plants in the Leclanche subcategory have wastewater treatment systems.
Two plants discharge without treatment. Table V-73 (page 411)
summarizes treatment in place for this subcategory. The most frequent
technique was filtration, which was reported at four plants. Three
plants reported pH adjustment, two reported coagulant addition, one
reported skimming, and one reported carbon adsorption.
Table V-74 (page 412) shows reported effluent quality at the
Leclanche plants. Comparing this table with the treatment system
information shows that treatment, as practiced, has not always been
very effective. Plant F, which reported high mercury and zinc
effluent concentrations as shown in this table, also reported one of
the more substantial treatment systems including amalgamation, pH
adjustment, coagulant addition, and filtration. The treatment
effectiveness at one plant was determined by sampling on three days.
The results of sampling presented in Table V-75 (page 413) show that
the skimming and filtration effectively lower oil and grease and TSS.
However, because the pH was not controlled at the optimum level (8.8-
9.3), zinc and manganese levels actually were higher after treatment
than before. This indicates improper operation of the system.
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
This subcategory encompasses the manufacture of batteries combining
lithium anodes with a variety of depolarizer materials. Because
lithium reacts vigorously with water, electrolytes used in these
batteries are generally organic liquids or solids or solid inorganic
salts which are fused during activation of thermal batteries. While
manufacturing processes vary considerably among the different battery
types included in this subcategory, they have in common limited use of
process water and relatively low volumes of process wastewater.
227
-------
Seven plants reported the manufacture of a total of eight different
types of batteries within this subcategory. Because lithium battery
technologies are rapidly changing, production patterns are also
undergoing rapid change. Three of the seven identified producers were
not manufacturing in this subcategory during 1976 and submitted
production data for more recent years. Consequently, it is not
possible to compare plant production figures for any single year.
Based on the submitted figures, production ranges from less than 50 kg
per year (100 Ibs/yr) to 14 kkg/yr (15.5 tons/yr) and in employment
from 4 to 175. One plant accounts for more than half of the total
subcategory output. However, several plants reported only prototype,
sample, or startup production with larger scale operations anticipated
in the future. At present, lithium subcategory production is heavily
concentrated in the northeastern U.S. with one plant in EPA Region I,
two in Region III and three in Region II. The other producer was a
small operation in Region IX.
While plants differ significantly in products, manufacturing
processes, production volume, and employment, all report little or no
wastewater discharge and relatively few process wastewater sources.
Consequently, existing wastewater treatment and available effluent
monitoring data are limited.
Manufacturing Processes
The manufacture of batteries in this subcategory is illustrated in the
generalized process diagram shown in Figure V-20 (page 281). The
manufacture of lithium anodes generally involves only mechanical
forming of metallic lithium to the desired configuration.
Depolarizers used with the lithium anodes are frequently blended with
or dissolved in the cell electrolyte and include iodine, iron
disulfide, lead iodide-lead sulfide-lead (mixed), lithium perchlorate,
sulfur dioxide, thionyl chloride and titanium disulfide. Cell
assembly techniques differ with specific cell designs. Usually, cell
assembly is accomplished in special humidity controlled "dry" rooms.
Thermal batteries manufactured in this subcategory include a heating
component in addition to the anode, cathode depolarizer, and
electrolyte discussed above. The relationship between the process
elements and discrete wastewater sources reported at battery plants is
illustrated in Figure V-21 (page 282).
Anode Operations
All cells manufactured in this subcategory employ a metallic lithium
anode. The anode is generally prepared from purchased lithium sheet
or foil by mechanical forming operations only, although one plant
reported the preparation of a lithium alloy for use in high
temperature batteries. In some cases the anode may also include a
support structure of nonreactive metal such as aluminum screen. The
228
-------
use of pasted or powder anodes as observed in other subcategories is
not reported, apparently because the high reactivity of lithium and
relatively low current drains for which most (non-thermal) lithium
cells are designed do not necessitate maximized anode surface areas.
Cathode Operations
Iodine Cathodes - The depolarizer for lithium iodine batteries is
created by the mixture of iodine with an organic solid, poly-2-vinyl
pyridine. This mixture is added to the cells in a molten state and,
upon cooling, yields a conductive solid mass containing the reactive
iodine. The electrolyte in these cells is solid lithium iodide which
forms at the interface between the anode and depolarizer after
assembly of the cell.
Iron Bisulfide Cathodes - Iron disulfide is used as a depolarizer in
thermal batteries which use lithium anodes.
Lead Iodide Cathodes - This cathode is reported to be a mixture of
lead iodide, lead sulfide and lead. Fume scrubbers are used in the
production areas.
Lithium Perchlorate Cathodes - Manufacture of this type of cathode was
reported only on a small scale in sample quantities. Manufacturing
process details were not supplied.
Sulfur Dioxide Cathodes - The manufacture of cathodes for cells using
sulfur dioxide depolarizer begins with the preparation of a porous
carbon electrode structure. Binders such as teflon may be added to a
carbon paste which is applied to a metallic grid. The sulfur dioxide
is mixed with an organic solvent (generally acetonitrile) and one or
more inorganic salts such as lithium chloride or lithium bromide. The
resultant liquid organic electrolyte-depolarizer mixture is added to
the cells, and they are sealed.
Thionyl Chloride Cathodes - Production of cells using thionyl chloride
as the depolarizer is similar to that discussed above for sulfur
dioxide depolarized cathodes except that the organic electrolyte
acetonitrile is not used.
Titanium Disulfide Cathodes - Titanium disulfide cathodes are made by
blending the active material (as a powder) with a binder and inserting
the mixture in a metal can. Electrolyte, which is formed from
dioxolane and sodium tetraphenyl boron, is added separately after
insertion of the cell separator and anode.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics, and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
229
-------
As previously indicated, water use and process wastewater discharge in
this subcategory is quite limited. Three of seven plants in the
subcategory reported process wastewater discharges. These ranged from
3.9 1/hr to 150 1/hr. Mean and median normalized discharge flows from
both dcp and visit data for each of the wastewater producing elements
included in this subcategory are summarized in Table V-76 (page 414).
This table also presents the production normalizing parameters upon
which the reported flows are based and which were discussed in Section
IV, and the annual raw waste volume for each process.
Process Wastewater Characteristics
Anode Operations - There is no process wastewater associated
specifically with lithium anode manufacture.
Cathode Operations - There is no process wastewater associated with
the manufacture of the following cathodes: iodine, lithium
perchlorate, and titanium disulfide.
Lead Iodide Cathodes - The manufacture of lead iodide cathodes
generates process wastewater from equipment cleaning. This process is
separated from the ancillary floor and equipment wash because of the
presence of lead. This process was not specifically sampled, however
pollutant concentrations are expected to be similar to those in the
iron disulfide process.
Iron Disulfide Cathodes - The manufacture of iron disulfide cathodes
generates process wastewater. In the manufacture of iron disulfide
cathodes, process wastewater is generated. The chemical analysis data
for process wastewater from the manufacture of iron disulfide cathodes
at Plant A are presented in Table V-77 (page 415). The corresponding
mass loadings for this stream are shown in Table V-78 (page 416).
Sulfur Dioxide Cathodes - The manufacture of sulfur dioxide cathodes
does not generate wastewater in the actual production operations, but
wastewater results from air scrubbers used to control sulfur dioxide
emissions and are included under ancillary operations.
Thionyl Chloride Cathodes - The manufacture of thionyl chloride
cathodes is reported to generate two process wastewater streams
resulting from wet air pollution control scrubbers and from washdown
of spilled materials. Wastewater discharge from spills occurs only
when there are accidents and since none occurred this process stream
could not be sampled. Wastewater generated from air scrubbers is
included under ancillary operations.
Ancillary Operations - Heating Component Production - (Heat Paper
Production) - Wastewater is generated by the manufacture of heat paper
for use in thermal cells manufactured in this subcategory. The heat
230
-------
paper production process is identical to that previously discussed in
the calcium subcategory. .The sampling analysis data and the
corresponding mass loadings for the wastewater stream produced by heat
paper production are listed in Tables V-35 and V-36 which were
discussed in the calcium subcategory. (Heat Pellet Production) - No
process water use or discharge is generated from this process which is
used in the manufacture of thermal batteries. Heat pellet production
is identical to that discussed under the calcium subcategory
discussion.
Cell Washing - Following assembly lithium cells can be washed.
Wastewater is discharged from this process. Washing lithium cells was
reported to produce process wastewater at one plant. The total volume
of wastewater was about 55 gallons per week, and was periodically
discharged. The production normalized discharge volume is 0.929 I/kg
of cells produced. No priority pollutant chemical characteristics
were reported by the plant and the operation was not characterized by
sampling.
Cell Testing - After assembly, thermal cells may be immersed in a
water bath to test for leakage. The contents of this bath may be
discharged on an infrequent basis. Wastewater from testing of thermal
cells is identical to that for calcium anode thermal batteries which
was discussed on page 199.
Scrap Disposal - Lithium scrap is disposed of at some sites by
reacting it with water. Although no discharge of the resultant
solution is reported at present, this scrap disposal process is a
potential source of process wastewater. Plant A disposes of scrap
lithium off-site with a single aeration process in a settling tank.
The plant reported that the resulting wastewater will be contract
hauled, although no removal of material from the disposal tank had yet
occurred. A sample was taken from the tank to obtain representative
wastewater characteristics for a scrap disposal dump. The sample
analysis data are presented in Table V-79 {page 417).
Floor and Equipment Wash - A negligible amount of water is used for
floor and equipment wash.
Air Scrubbers - Wastewater is generated from air scrubbers located in
various process areas in this subcategory. One plant reports an air
scrubber discharge flow of 3.9 liters per hour, but completely
recycles the scrubber water and did not report wastewater discharge.
Another plant reported a discharge of 56.8 1/hr. Other plants also
produce scrubber wastewater but did not report the volume of this
wastewater stream. Scrubber discharges in this process element are
not characterized in dcp data or in sampling because they are not
believed to contribute any significant priority pollutants to the
total wastewater discharge. The wastewater discharges from sulfide
231
-------
dioxide cathode production area scrubbers will contain primarily
sulfurous acid and sodium sulfite (resulting from the addition of
sodium hydroxide to the scrubber water). The wastewater discharges
from thionyl chloride cathode production area scrubbers are expected
to contain hydrochloric and sulfurous acids and sodium chloride and
sodium sulfite derived from dissolution of thionyl chloride and
reaction with sodium hydroxide added to the scrubber solutions.
Exposure to and contamination by other pollutants will, in general, be
minimal. Elimination of discharge can be accomplished either by
elimination of the use of wet scrubbers or by treatment and recycle of
the scrubber wastewater.
Total Process Wastewater Discharge and Characteristics
Water use and wastewater discharge are observed to be variable
depending upon the particular processes used to manufacture different
types of batteries. Also the total wastewater discharged, about
350,000 1/yr is low when compared to other battery subcategories. For
the purposes of treatment the types of wastewater streams generated
need to be considered. The heat paper production wastewater stream,
as discussed under the calcium subcategory, contains hexavalent
chromium.
The wastewaters from cathode operations (iron disulfide and lead
iodide) contain metals, and the cell testing, lithium scrap disposal,
and floor and equipment wash will also contain metals. The scrubber
wastewaters contain limited amounts of pollutants. More detailed data
on process wastewater and effluent characteristics are limited in this
subcategory because of the present levels of production which are low.
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
Two plants reported zero discharge of wastewater and one plant
contract hauled wastewater from one wastewater stream. Wastewater
treatment practices within this subcategory are limited to pH
adjustment and settling as shown in Table V-80 (page 418). Two plants
reported pH adjustment of process wastewater while one plant reported
only settling. Effluent monitoring data were submitted by only one
plant. These data characterized the settled wastewater discharge
resulting from heat paper production. They have been presented in
Table V-38 (page 364) and discussed under the calcium subcategory.
Treated effluent data were obtained by sampling one additional
wastewater stream in the lithium subcategory. Wastewater resulting
from the manufacture of iron disulfide cathodes was sampled after
treatment in a settling tank which provided a short retention time for
the removal of suspended solids. Analysis results for this wastewater
stream are presented in Table V-81 (page 419). Several metals values
(0.9 mg/1 of lead and 43.5 mg/1 of iron) indicate that additional
treatment can be used for these wastewaters.
232
-------
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
The magnesium subcategory includes manufacturing operations used to
produce cells combining magnesium anodes with cathodes of different
materials. Many of the cell types produced are reserve cells which
are activated by electrolyte addition or by a chemical reaction which
raises the cell temperature to the operating level.
Total 1976 annual production of batteries in this subcategory as
reported in dcp's was 1220 kkg (1340 tons). Over 85 percent of this
total was produced as magnesium-carbon batteries. Thermal batteries
and ammonia-activated reserve batteries together accounted for less
than 1 percent of the total. The remainder was comprised of a variety
of magnesium reserve cells generally intended for seawater activation.
Eight plants reported production of batteries in this subcategory.
Two of the eight plants account for 84 percent of the total
production. These two plants manufacture magnesium-carbon batteries
as does the third largest plant. None of these magnesium-carbon
plants reported the generation of any battery manufacturing
wastewater.
Six of the eight plants manufacturing magnesium anode batteries report
production in other battery manufacturing subcategories as well.
Magnesium-carbon battery production is co-located with Leclanche
subcategory production at two of the three plants where magnesium-
carbon batteries are produced. This association is logical since
cathode materials and cell assembly techniques are quite similar for
these cell types. Other subcategories produced at the same site as
magnesium subcategory production include the cadmium subcategory, lead
subcategory, lithium subcategory, and zinc subcategory. In most
cases, magnesium subcategory production accounts for less than 30
percent of the total weight of batteries produced at the plant.
A number of different process operations in the subcategory are
observed to yield process wastewater. These wastewater streams differ
significantly in flow rates and chemical characteristics.
Because of the limited use of water and wastewater discharge
associated with magnesium subcategory operations, wastewater from
magnesium subcategory production is combined with wastewaters from
other subcategories at only one plant. Since no production operations
are common at that site, segregation of wastewaters at that plant is
feasible.
Geographically, producers in this subcategory are scattered. One
plant is located in each of the U.S. EPA Regions I, III, VI and VIII,
two in Region IV, and two in Region V. No two plants are located in
the same state.
233
-------
Manufacturing Process
The manufacture of magnesium anode batteries is illustrated in the
generalized process flow diagram of Figure V-22 (page 283). Anode
manufacture generally requires mechanical forming and cutting of
magnesium metal, and cleaning and chromating of the formed product.
Cathodes are prepared by a variety of techniques including blending
and pressing of powdered materials, as well as processes involving
chemical treatment operations. Heating components (heat paper) are
manufactured at one plant for assembly into magnesium anode thermal
batteries. One plant reported testing assembled cells with a
subsequent wastewater discharge. The relationship between the process
elements and discrete wastewater sources reported at battery plants is
illustrated in Figure V-23 (page 284).
Anode Operations
Anodes used in this subcategory are mechanically formed metallic
magnesium, except for thermal cells where the anode is magnesium
powder. In magnesium-carbon cells, the anode may be the can in which
the cell is assembled. In other cell types and in some magnesium-
carbon cells, the anode is cut from magnesium sheet or foil.
Magnesium anodes used in magnesium-carbon cells are generally cleaned
and chromated before assembly of the cells. The chromate conversion
coating on the magnesium anode serves to suppress parasitic chemical
reactions during storage, and to reduce self-discharge of these cells.
These operations as well as the metal forming operations to produce
magnesium cans may be performed on-site at the battery manufacturing
plant or by a separate supplier. As discussed in Section IV these
operations are not included in the battery manufacturing category.
Cathode Operations
Carbon Cathodes - The manufacture of cathodes for magnesium-carbon
cells involves the separate preparation of a carbon current collector
and of a depolarizer mix. The carbon current collector is formed by
blending carbon with binder materials to produce a solid cathode
structure. This may be in the form of a solid inserted in the center
of a formed magnesium can, or it may be a carbon cup within which the
cell is assembled.
The depolarizer for these cells, manganese dioxide, is blended with
carbon and other inorganic salts such as barium and lithium chromate
to enhance conductivity of the depolarizer mix. Magnesium perchlorate
electrolyte may also be added to this mixture before assembly into the
cell.
Copper Chloride Cathodes - The production of copper chloride cathodes
for use in reserve cells is reported to proceed by forming the
234
-------
powdered material into pellets which are subsequently inserted into
the cell assembly.
Copper Iodide Cathodes - The manufacture of this cathode type involves
mixing cuprous iodide, sulfur, and carbon and then sintering the
mixture. The sintered material is subsequently ground, and then
pressed on a supporting copper grid to form the cathode which is
dipped in an aqueous alcohol solution prior to insertion in the
battery.
Lead Chloride Cathodes - Lead chloride cathodes are reported to be
produced by pressing lead chloride on a copper screen.
m-Dinitrobenzene Cathodes - Cathodes in which this material serves as
the depolarizer are produced by mixing m-dinitrobenzene with carbon or
graphite, ammonium thiocyanate, and glass fiber. The mixture is
subsequently molded or pasted to produce a thin sheet which is in
contact with a flat stainless steel current collector in the assembled
cell.
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Three different processes are reported for
producing silver chloride cathodes for use in reserve cells: pellet
formation, silver reduction, and the electrolytic oxidation of silver.
Silver chloride cathodes are produced by one manufacturer by forming
silver chloride powder into pellets which are subsequently assembled
into reserve cells. The manufacturing process is reported to be
sililar to that for the production of copper chloride cathodes.
In another process, silver chloride is calendered into strips and
punched. The resultant material is then treated with photo developers
such as hydroquinone, sodium thiosulfate, or paramethylaminophenol
sulfate (ELON) to reduce the surface to metallic silver.
In the third method, silver is electrolytically oxidized in
hydrochloric acid to produce silver chloride. The product of this
operation is subsequently rinsed, dried, and used in assembling cells.
Vanadium Pentoxide Cathodes - Vanadium pentoxide, used as the
depolarizer in magnesium anode thermal batteries, is blended with
electrolyte {lithium chloride and potassium chloride) and kaolin as a
dry powder and pressed to form pellets which are used in cell
assembly.
Cell Assembly
Details of cell assembly processes vary significantly among the
different types of cells manufactured in this subcategory. For
magnesium carbon cells, the separator, depolarizer mix, and cathode
235
-------
are inserted in the magnesium anode can, electrolyte is added, and
assembly is completed by sealing and adding contacts and a steel outer
case. Alternatively, magnesium carbon cells are assembled by
insertion of the anode in the cylindrical carbon cathode cup and
placement of cathode mix in the annular space between anode and
cathode. After this, electrolyte is added, the cell is sealed, and
contacts and a steel outer case are added to complete assembly. The
electrolyte used is an aqueous solution of magnesium perchlorate.
In assembly of ammonia activated magnesium reserve cells, the ammonia
which forms the electrolyte is placed in a sealed reservoir within the
battery assembly. It is pumped into the cells at the time of
activation of the battery. In magnesium anode thermal batteries solid
electrolyte is incorporated into pellets containing the depolarizer.
In seawater activated cells, the saline seawater itself serves as the
electrolyte. No electrolyte is added during assembly of the cells.
Ancillary Operations
Six ancillary operations which produce wastewater were identified
within the magnesium subcategory. The operations are discussed below.
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristicsy and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
Process water use varies considerably among manufacturers in this
subcategory. As shown in the preceding manufacturing process
discussion, most process operations are accomplished without the use
of process water. In addition, many of the cell types produced use
non-aqueous electrolytes or they are shipped without electrolyte.
Mean and median normalized discharge flows from both dcp and visit
data for each of the wastewater producing elements included in this
subcategory are summarized in Table V-82 (page 420). This table also
presents the production normalizing parameters upon which the reported
flows are based and which were discussed in Section IV, and the annual
raw waste volume for each process.
Wastewater Characteristics
Anode Operations - The only wastewater generating processes involved
in anode manufacturing are the cleaning and chromating of magnesium
anodes. The wastewaters produced by these metal finishing processes
are not included in the battery manufacturing category.
Cathode Operations - As stated previously, there are seven different
cathodes which are used in the production of magnesium anode
batteries. The manufacture of six of these cathode types - carbon,
copper iodide, copper chloride, lead chloride, m-dinitrobenzene and
236
-------
vanadium pentoxide - produces no wastewater. The production of silver
chloride cathodes generates wastewater.
Silver Chloride Cathodes - Pellet - The formation of silver chloride
powder into pellets is a dry operation.
Silver Reduction - The rinsing step following reduction generates
wastewater, as do periodic dumps of spent developing solutions.
Following the first rinse, the cathodes are either dipped in acetic
acid and rinsed, or are just rinsed again, generating additional
wastewater. Pollutant concentrations found in the waste streams from
the silver chloride reduction process at Plant A are shown in
screening analysis, Table V-7 (page 324). As shown in the table,
silver is the only priority pollutant at significant concentration
levels. The total phenols concentration found is believed to not
represent the true level of phenolic materials present because of the
masking effect of the developer formulation and the analytical
procedure used. This judgment is made on the basis of the chemical
constituents in the develper solution.
Normalized wastewater flow from this process was 4915 I/kg. Rinse
water flow from this process was found to be excessive (not adequately
controlled) and exceeded the normalized flow previously confirmed by
the plant (3310 I/kg), for 1976 data. Since flow was not controlled
at the time of sampling, concentrations of pollutants in the total
process are substantially lower than separate samples from each
process step. Evidence of this is shown in the separate sample taken
of the developer solution displayed in Table V-83 (page 421).
Concentrations of pollutants, particularly metals and COD are
significantly reduced by dilution as a result of excess usage of
process water.
Electrolytic Oxidation - Process wastewater results from rinsing the
electrolytic silver chloride. The electrolytic oxidation of silver
foil to silver chloride in hydrochloric acid also produces wastewater.
Plant A uses this method to manufacture silver chloride cathodes.
Normalized wastewater flow from the rinsing operation and from the
dumps of spent hydrochloric acid was measured at 145 I/kg. Flow from
this process was adequately controlled and was appreciably lower than
the normalized flow previously confirmed by the plant (1637 I/kg) for
1976 data. Plant A did not report any wastewater characteristics for
the electrolytic forming stream, but it was characterized by sampling.
The screening sample in Table V-7 (page 324) presents the pollutant
characteristics of the waste stream from rinsing the product and of
the spent hydrochloric acid discharged. The only significant toxic
pollutant found was silver.
Cell Assembly - None of the cell assembly processes were reported to
generate process wastewater.
237
-------
Ancillary Operations - Several ancillary operations within this
subcategory produce wastewater. Among these operations are heating
element manufacture, glass bead separator processing, floor and
equipment washing, cell testing, and fume scrubbing.
Heating Component Production - (Heat Paper Production) - Magnesium
anode thermal batteries are activated by heat generated in a
chemically reactive element (heat paper) incorporated within the cell
structure. The production of heat paper for magnesium batteries is
identical to the production of heat paper for calcium batteries.
Barium chromate, zirconium, and fibers (such as asbestos) are the raw
materials used in the process. The production of the heating
component generates process wastewater as was described for the
calcium subcategory. The pollutant characteristics of the heat paper
manufacturing wastewater stream along with their corresponding
pollutant mass loadings are presented in the discussion of calcium
batteries and are displayed in Tables V-34 and V-35 (pages 360 and
361). At Plant A which produces heat paper within the magnesium
subcategory, the volume of process wastewater is 308.1 I/kg. (Heat
Pellet Production) - Although not reported in this subcategory, heat
pellets are manufactured for thermal batteries. No process wastewater
is generated from this process. Production is identical to that
discussed under the calcium subcategory.
Glass Bead Separators - One manufacturer of silver chloride magnesium
batteries uses glass beads as a separator material. These beads are
etched with ammonium bifluroide and hydrofluoric acid. The rinse
following this etch step is a source of wastewater. The plant
reported 9.1 1/hr of wastewater generated and gave the following
sampling data:
Pollutant
Aluminum
Ammonia-nitrogen
Since this process is not presently active, no further discussion of
waste characteristics is necessary.
Floor and Equipment Washing - The removal of contaminants from
production area floors and process equipment is frequently required
for hygiene and safety. This may be accomplished by dry techniques
such as sweeping and vacuuming but may also require the use of water
in some instances. Two plants in this subcategory reported floor
washing and indicated a resultant process wastewater discharge. At
one plant that reported washing floors intermittently, the washing
operation used about 38 I/day of water. The discharge was not
characterized in the dcp or in sampling because the operation is
sporadic, and also because the floor areas would be contaminated with
pollutants from another subcategory. As in other subcategories, this
238
-------
wastewater source may be eliminated by the use of dry floor clean-up
techniques.
Cell Testing - After assembly, quality control tests on magnesium
reserve cells may include activation to verify satisfactory
performance. Water used in this operation (destructive testing) was
reported to constitute a source of process wastewater by one
manufacturer of magnesium reserve cells. Plant A utilizes a cell
testing process in which a water solution of 5% sodium and magnesium
salts is used to activate lead chloride magnesium reserve cells. No
samples were taken and the plant did not report any data on the cell
testing stream. The only major constituents of the wastewater are
expected to be sodium, magnesium, chloride, and lead. This operation
has a flow of 52.6 liters per kilogram of batteries produced.
Fume Scrubbing - Wastewater is discharged from fume scrubbers on
dehumidifiers used to dry manufacturing areas. Process wastewater is
also reported from the use of scrubbers on vent gases from drying
blended electrolyte and depolarizer for use in magnesium anode thermal
batteries. The wet scrubbers serve to control emissions of potassium
chloride and lithium chloride electrolyte from the drying process, and
these salts are consequently present in the scrubber discharge. The
concentrations of these pollutants were not reported in dcp data and
were not determined in sampling. However, elimination of this
discharge by treatment and recycle is feasible as demonstrated in
other industrial categories. This has been partially accomplished at
Plant A, which reported this discharge, by replacement of the original
once-through scrubber which discharged 1652 I/kg with a recirculating
scrubber discharging 206.5 I/kg.
Total Process Wastewater Discharge and Characteristics
Process operations which result in battery manufacturing wastewater
are reported at four of the eight plants in the subcategory. Total
process wastewater flow rates are reported to range from 0 to 42,000
Ib/day. Wastewater discharges from plants in this subcategory are
equally split between direct and indirect discharge. Total process
wastewater discharge from magnesium subcategory processes at
individual plants is presented in Table V-84 (page 422).
Actual water use and wastewater discharge are observed to be variable
depending upon the particular processes used to manufacture different
types of batteries. About 1.5 million 1/yr is discharged by plants in
this subcategory. For the purposes of treatment the types of
wastewater streams generated need to be considered. The heat paper
production wastewater stream, as discussed under the calcium
subcategory, contains hexavalent chromium. The wastewaters from the
silver chloride cathode processes contain metals and COD, and the cell
testing and floor and equipment wastewaters also contain metals. The
239
-------
scrubber wastewaters contain limited amounts of pollutants. More
detailed data on process wastewater and effluent characteristics are
limited in this subcategory because of the present levels of
production which are low.
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
Present wastewater treatment practice within this subcategory is
limited. Treatment practices at most plants are limited to pH
adjustment and removal of suspended solids. One plant reported the
use of settling tanks followed by filtration for this purpose.
Treatment-in-place at magnesium subcategory plants is summarized in
Table V-85 (page 423). No effluent analyses specifically
characterizing treated wastewater from this subcategory were supplied
in the dcp.
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
Five battery product types: carbon-zinc-air, alkaline manganese,
mercury-zinc, silver oxide-zinc, and nickel-zinc are manufactured
within the zinc subcategory. Silver oxide-zinc cells are produced
using two different oxides of silver, silver oxide (monovalent) and
silver peroxide. Many produce more than one type of cell. Wastewater
treatment practices and effluent quality are highly variable.
There are 17 plants in the data base for this subcategory. One plant
has ceased production. During the years 1976-1979 when the data base
was established, annual production in the subcategory is estimated to
have been 22,300 kkg (24,500 tons), and is broken down among battery
types as shown below:
Battery Type
Alkaline Manganese
Carbon-zinc-air
Silver oxide-zinc
Mercury-zinc
Nickel-zinc
No. of
Producing
Plants
8
2
9
5
1
Estimated
Annual Production
kkg Tons
17800
2010
1240
1230
0.23
19600
2210
1360
1350
0.25
Geographically, active plants in the zinc subcategory are concentrated
primarily in the eastern and central EPA Regions. There are five
plants in EPA Region IV, four plants in Region V, two plants each in
Regions I, II, and VII, and one plant in Region VIII.
Although there were some variations in raw materials with
manufacturing process and product variations, many of the raw
materials used in producing zinc anode batteries were common to all
plants. Mercury is used to produce cathodes and for amalgamation.
240
-------
All batteries manufactured in this subcategory use an amalgamated zinc
anode. The zinc is amalgamated to reduce anode corrosion and self-
discharge of the cell. The electrolyte is an aqueous alkaline
solution - usually potassium or sodium hydroxide. The zinc anodes
differ considerably in physical configuration and in production
technique depending upon the desired operational characteristics of
the cells. This subcategory includes batteries manufactured for a
variety of applications requiring different performance
characteristics and physical dimensions. Six different cathode
depolarizers are used in zinc anode cells: porous carbon, manganese
dioxide, mercuric oxide, mercuric oxide and cadmium oxide, silver, and
silver oxide. Cathodes for using these depolarizers may require
several different production techniques.
Steel is used in cell cases, and paper and plastics are used in cell
separators and insulating componets other raw materials are discussed
under the processes they are used in.
Manufacturing processes differ widely within the subcategory. This
results in corresponding differences in process water use and
wastewater discharge. A total of 25 distinct manufacturing process
operations or process elements were identified. These operations are
combined in various ways by manufacturers in this subcategory and they
provide a rational basis for effluent limitations. Following a
discussion of manufacturing processes used in the subcategory, each of
the wastewater producing process elements is discussed in detail to
establish wastewater sources, flow rates, and chemical
characteristics.
Manufacturing Processes
The manufacture of zinc subcategory batteries is represented by the
generalized process flow diagram presented in Figure V-24 (page 285).
The anode and cathode variations observed in this subcategory and the
ancillary operations which generate process wastewater were the basis
for analysis of process wastewater generation as illustrated in Figure
V-25 (page 286). As shown in the figure, several distinct wastewater
streams frequently result from a single process operation or element.
Not all operations shown on this diagram are performed at each plant
in the subcategory. In some cases, the order in which they are
performed may be different, but in most cases the overall sequence of
process operations is similar. Few plants generate process wastewater
from all of the process operations indicated on the diagram. At most
plants some of these production steps are accomplished without
generating a wastewater stream. The specific operations performed by
these "dry" techniques differs from site to site and each of the
241
-------
indicated wastewater sources was observed at one or more plants in the
subcategory.
In this part, manufacturing operations for all anode and cathode
elements, wet or dry, are described. No ancillary operations are.
described. Under the "Process Water Use" part, ancillary operations
which generate process wastewater are described along with the
wastewater flows and characteristics.
Anode Operations
Zinc anodes used in these cells usually corrode by reactions with the
cell electrolyte and hydrogen gas is evolved. The rate of hydrogen
evolution on zinc in the cell is reduced by zinc anode amalgamation,
thus reducing anode corrosion. This reduction in the rate of anode
corrosion is essential to the achievement of acceptable battery life,
and anode amalgamation is universal in this subcategory. Because many
of the cells produced are designed for high discharge rates, powdered
zinc and porous structures are used in anodes to maximize electrode
surface area. Mercury requirements for amalgamation of powdered zinc
are thereby increased compared to the requirement for sheet zinc, and
mercury consumption in amalgamating anodes in this subcategory. is
typically 0.05 kg per kg of zinc as compared to 0.00035 kg per kg of
zinc in the Leclanche subcategory. This increase in mercury
requirements influences the choice of amalgamation techniques which
may be used as well as the severity of mercury pollutant discharge
problems encountered. Amalgamation is accomplished by one of six
different techniques. The choice of technique depends on the anode
configuration and the preference of the manufacturer. Amalgamation by
inclusion of mercury in the cell separator or electrolyte as observed
in the manufacture of Leclanche subcategory batteries is not practiced
by any manufacturer in the zinc subcategory.
Zinc Cast or Fabricated Anode - Anodes in this group are produced by
casting or by stamping or forming of sheet zinc. In producing cast
anodes, zinc and mercury are alloyed, and the mixture is cast to
produce amalgamated anodes for use in air-depolarized cells. Because
of their relatively low surface area per unit weight, these cast
anodes are not suitable for use in cells designed for high discharge
rates. Two plants in the data survey reported using cast anodes for
carbon-zinc-air cell manufacture.
Zinc Powder - Wet Amalgamated Anode - Wet amalgamation of zinc powder
is used by plants producing alkaline manganese cells and a variety of
button cells with mercury and silver cathodes. In this process, zinc
and mercury are mixed in an aqueous solution which generally contains
either ammonium chloride or acetic acid to enhance the efficiency of
amalgamation. Later, the solution is drained away and the amalgam
product is rinsed, usually in several batch stages. A final alcohol
242
-------
rinse is frequently used to promote drying of the product. Binders
such as carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) are commonly added to the dry
amalgamated zinc powder to aid in compaction of the anode in the
cells, when the dried amalgamated product is found to be unacceptable
for use in assembling batteries, it may be returned to the
amalgamation area for reprocessing and further rinsing. Figure V-26
is a schematic diagram of the zinc powder-wet amalgamation process.
Six plants in the data base reported using wet amalgamated powdered
zinc processes for anode formulation. Two plants have discontinued
these operations.
Zinc Powder - Gelled Amalgam Anode. The gelled amalgam process
results in a moist anode gel in a single operation. The production
of gelled amalgam, illustrated in Figure V-27 (page 289), begins with
the combination of zinc and mercury powder in the appropriate
proportions and the addition of potassium hydroxide solution to this
mixture. The gelling agent which is either carboxymethylcellulose or
carboxypolymethylene, is blended in the amalgam mixture to achieve the
appropriate gel characteristics. Three plants produce gelled amalgam.
Zinc Powder - Dry Amalgamated Anode - In the dry amalgamation process
zinc powder and metallic mercury are mixed for an extended period of
time to achieve amalgamation. To control mercury vapor exposure of
production workers, the mixing is commonly performed in an enclosed
vented area separate from the material preparation areas. Discussions
with industry personnel have indicated that this process is less
costly than wet amalgamation and has resulted in satisfactory anode
performance.
This process element also includes the production from zinc powder
amalgamated off-site. Two plants obtain amalgam produced off-site and
one produces dry, amalgamated powder.
Zinc Oxide Powder - Pasted or Pressed Anodes - Zinc oxide and mercuric
oxide are mixed in a slurry. The mixture is layered onto a grid. The
resultant product is allowed to dry, and finally the dried material is
compressed to eliminate irregularities such as jagged edges. The
anode plaques are assembled with cathode plaques to manufacture
batteries which are shipped unformed, to be later formed by the
customer. Only one plant reported manufacturing slurry pasted anodes
which are assembled with uncharged cathodes to produce cells to be
later charged by the customer. No plants reported manufacturing zinc
oxide anodes pressed from dry powder and shipped unformed. However,
similar operations were reported in the cadmium subcategory and by
analogy such an operation might be expected in the future with zinc
oxide and will fall into this process element.
Zinc Oxide Powder - Pasted or Pressed, Reduced Anodes - Anodes in this
group are produced by mixing zinc oxide and mercuric oxide in either a
243
-------
slurry or dry powder form and applying the mixture onto grids. The
pasted or pressed product is electrochemically formed in potassium
hydroxide solution to convert zinc oxide to metallic . zinc and to
reduce mercuric oxide to mercury which amalgamates with the active
zinc. After completion of formation, the anode material is rinsed to
remove residual caustic.
The pressed powder technique for zinc anode formulating, illustrated
in Figure V-28 (page 290)/ requires preparation of a dry powder
mixture of both zinc oxide and mercuric oxide. A binding agent such
as PVA is added to the mixture prior to application to the grids. The
grids are held in place by separate molds. The grids and the powder
mixture are compressed together and the resulting plaques are immersed
in potassium hydroxide solution. The plaques are electrochemically
formed and subsequently rinsed and dried.
The slurry paste processing method is illustrated in Figure V-29 (page
291). A slurry of zinc oxide and mercuric oxide, is prepared with
water or dilute potassium hydroxide. A binding agent such as CMC may
be added to the slurry. The slurry is layered onto a silver or copper
screen and the material is allowed to dry prior to formation. The
dried plates are immersed in a potassium hydroxide solution and formed
against either positive electrodes or nickel dummy electrodes. After
formation, the anodes are thoroughly rinsed to assure removal of
potassium hydroxide. The plaques are dried and later compressed to
eliminate irregularities such as jagged edges. Four plants reported
using the pressed powder or pasted slurry technique followed by
reduction for zinc anode manufacture.
Electrodepos i ted Zinc Anode - In this process zinc is electrodeposited
on a grid and rinsed prior to amalgamation by immersion in a solution
of mercuric salts. Afterwards, the plaques are either immediately
dried, or rinsed and then dried. (In this process the term
electrodeposition is used in the conventional sense - powdery zinc
metal deposits on the grid.) The most common grid materials used in
the electrodeposition process are silver and copper expanded sheets.
The grids are immersed in an aqueous solution of potassium hydroxide
and zinc, and an electrical current is applied causing the zinc to
deposit onto the grids. When the appropriate weight gain of active
material on the grids is achieved, the grids are removed from the
caustic solution and subsequently rinsed in a series of tanks. At an
intermediate point in the rinsing procedure, the moist material may be
compressed. After completion of the rinse operation, the prepared
plaques are dipped in an acidic solution containing mercuric chloride.
Mercury is reduced and deposited on the surface where it forms an
amalgam with the zinc. The amalgamated plaques are either rinsed and
subsequently dried or immediately dried following amalgamation.
Figure V-30 (page 292) is a schematic diagram of the entire
electrodeposition process.
244
-------
Cathode Operations
Depolarizers used in this subcategory are primarily metal oxides which
are purchased from manufacturers of inorganic chemicals. In some
cases depolarizer material is chemically prepared on-site because
special characteristics are required for battery manufacture.
Preparation of such special depolarizer materials is considered a
battery manufacturing operation. Commercially available depolarizer
materials may also be prepared on site at battery plants in processes
equivalent to those used in inorganic chemicals manufacturing
operations. Preparation of depolarizer materials which are
commercially available is not considered a battery manufacturing
operation. Ten distinct cathode manufacturing processes are observed
in this subcategory.
Porous Carbon Cathode - Porous carbon cathodes are used in air
depolarized cells. They are produced by blending carbon, manganese
dioxide and water, then pressing and drying the mixture to produce an
agglomerated cathode structure or "agglo." The agglo serves as a
current collector for the cathode reaction and as a porous medium to
carry atmospheric oxygen to the electrolyte. Control of the porosity
and surface characteristics of the agglo is essential since the
Cathode structure must permit free flow of oxygen through the pores,
but prevent flooding of the pores by electrolyte in which it is
immersed. Flooding of the agglo would reduce the surface area over
which reaction with oxygen could occur to such an extent that
practical cell operation could not occur. The agglos are assembled
with cast zinc anode plates to produce carbon-zinc air cells.
Manganese Dioxide-Carbon Cathode - Cathodes in this group are produced
by blending manganese dioxide with carbon black, graphite, Portland
cement, and for some special cells, mercuric oxide. Typically the
cathode mixture is inserted in steel cans along with separator
material, and electrolyte solution consisting of potassium hydroxide
is subsequently added to the partly assembly cells. At some plants,
electrolyte solution is blended with the cathode material, and the
resulting mixture is molded into cylindrical structures prior to
insertion in the steel cans. The separator material is placed into
the interior of each can, and additional electrolyte solution is then
applied. Nine plants reported producing manganese dioxide-carbon
cathodes for alkaline-manganese cell manufacture. Three of these
plants have since discontinued the production of alkaline-manganese
cells.
Mercuric Oxide (And Mercuric Oxide-Manganese Dioxide Carbon) Cathodes
- The manufacturing process for mercuric oxide cathodes is similar to
that described above for manganese dioxide cathodes. Mercuric oxide,
as a dry powder, is blended with graphite and sometimes with manganese
dioxide, pressed into shape, and inserted in steel cell containers.
245
-------
Four plants produce this cathode for mercury (Ruben) cells.
Production at one plant was stopped after submittal of dcps.
Mercuric Oxide-Cadmium Oxide Cathode - The mercuric oxide-cadmium
oxide cathode is closely related to the mercuric oxide cathode and is
manufactured by the same process except that cadmium oxide is included
in the depolarizer mix. The function of the cadmium oxide is to
provide continued cell operation at a reduced voltage for an interval
after the mercuric oxide in the cathode is depleted. This
characteristic is exploited in devices such as battery powdered smoke
detectors to provide a warning of impending battery failure.
Production of this type of cathode was reported by one plant in the
subcategory.
Silver Powder Pressed Cathode. The manufacture of pressed silver
powder cathodes begins with the production of silver powder which is
prepared on-site by electrodeposition. See Ancillary Operations
Producing Wastewater. The resultant powder is pressed on the surface
of a silver screen or other support and sintered to achieve mechanical
integrity. These electrodes may then be assembled with unformed
(oxidized) zinc anodes and the resultant batteries charged prior to
use.
Silver Powder Pressed and Electrolytically Oxidized Cathode - These
cathodes are made from silver powder which is either purchased or
produced on-site. Once the silver powder is prepared, the material is
pressed on the surface of a silver grid or other support material and
subsequently sintered. Next, the sintered plaques are immersed in
potassium hydroxide solution and subjected to an electrical charge-
discharge operation which converts the silver material to a silver
oxide state. After completing this process, the formed plaques are
rinsed to remove any residual caustic. Figure V-31 (page 293) *-s a
schematic diagram of this process.
Cathodes using silver oxide powder are prepared by blending solid
constituents and pressing them to produce cathode pellets for use in
silver oxide-zinc button cells. Depending upon desired cell
characteristics, manganese dioxide, magnesium oxide, and mercuric
oxide may be added to change the cell voltage and the shape of the
discharge curve. Manganese dioxide provides a period of gradual
voltage decline after exhaustion of the silver oxide allowing cells
used in devices such as hearing aids to "fail gracefully" and giving
the owner time to replace them. Graphite is added to provide
additional conductivity within the cathode while the silver is in the
charged (oxide) state, and binders are typically added to improve
mechanical integrity. Four plants reported manufacturing cathodes in
this element.
246
-------
Electrolytically Formed Cathode - Cathode formulation using this
process involves preparing a slurry paste of silver oxide powder and
deionized water and layering the mixture on silver metal grids. The
reinforced material is thermally reduced to silver by applying heat
sufficient for sintering. The resulting plaques are positioned in
tanks containing dilute potassium hydroxide solution, electrically
formed, rinsed and soaked until the engineering specifications are
met. Figure V-32 is a schematic diagram of this process. Two plants
reported using this process.
Silver Peroxide (AqO) Cathodes - The production of silver peroxide
cathodes begins with the oxidation of silver oxide to produce silver
peroxide. See Ancillary Operations Generating Wastewater. Two
preparation processes are in current practice for preparing cathodes
from the silver peroxide. Two plants use a chemical treatment
process, and one plant uses a slurry pasting process.
The chemical treatment process starts with pelletizing of the silver
peroxide powder. These cathode pellets are chemically treated in two-
phases; first in a concentrated potassium hydroxide solution; and then
in a concentrated potassium hydroxide-methanol mixture. After rinsing
and extended soaking in potassium hydroxide, the pellets are treated
with a solution of hydrazine and methanol to metallize the surface.
Figure V-33 (page 295) is a schematic diagram of the process involving
chemical treatment of silver peroxide pellets.
In another method currently used, silver peroxide cathodes are
produced by mixing a slurry of silver peroxide powder, deionized
water, and a binding agent such as carboxymethylcellulose. The slurry
paste is layered on the surface of a silver metal grid and
subsequently dried. Figure V-34 (page 296) is a schematic diagram of
this process.
Nickel Impregnated and Formed Cathodes - Nickel hydroxide cathodes
used in this subcategory are prepared by sintering, impregnation and
formation processes as described for the cadmium subcategory.
Process Integration - The different process operations discussed above
may in principle be combined in many ways for the manufacture of
batteries. Table V-86 (page 424) presents the combination of anode
and cathode manufacturing processes observed in the subcategory at the
present time. Of seventeen distinct process operations or functions
identified in the subcategory for anode and cathode manufacture, eight
are reported to result in process wastewater discharges. An
additional eight ancillary process operations which produce wastewater
are discussed later under Process Water Use. All sixteen of these
discharge sources were represented in sampling at zinc subcategory
plants.
247
-------
Water Use, Wastewater Characteristics, and Wastewater Discharge
Process Water Use
Mean and median normalized discharge flows from both dcp and visit
data for each of the wastewater producing process elements included in
this subcategory are summarized in Table V-87 (page 426). This table
also presents the production normalizing parameters upon which the
reported flows are based and which were discussed in Section IV, and
the annual raw waste volume for each process* The water use and
wastewater discharge from these process operations varies from less
than 1 I/kg of production normalizing parameter for several processes
to 3190 I/kg of deposited zinc for electrodeposited zinc anode
manufacture. Observed flow rates for process wastewater at each zinc
subcategory plant are displayed in Table V-88 (page 428)*
Wastewater Characteristics
Anode Operations - Zinc Cast or Fabricated Anode - No process
wastewater is generated in processing anodes by this procedure.
Zinc Powder - Wet Amalgamated Anode - There are four sources of
wastewater from the wet amalgamation process: (1) spent aqueous
solution discharge; (2) amalgam rinses; (3) reprocess amalgam rinses;
and (4) floor area and equipment wash discharge. The discharge from
amalgamation (total of above four streams) ranged from 1.4 to 10,900
liters per day at the seven plants which reported using the wet
amalgamation process (2890 I/day mean). The production normalized
discharge from both dcp and visit data ranges from 0.69 to 10.09 I/kg
(3.8 I/kg mean). The final alcohol rinse is generally retained and
reused until ultimately contractor removed.
The wastewaters from wet amalgamation processes at two plants were
sampled. The normalized discharge flow during sampling ranged from
1.88 to 6.82 I/kg (4.2 I/kg mean). The entire amalgamation process
wastewater was sampled at both plants. Wastewater from amalgam
preparation and equipment cleaning was combined. Another wastewater
stream at one plant resulted from reprocessing amalgamated material.
During the sampling visit amalgam that had been previously stored was
being reprocessed intermittently throughout the three sample days.
The mercury concentration in the wastewater from the "virgin" amalgam
process is substantially greater than that of the reprocessed amalgam
since no additional mercury is mixed into the latter material.
Table V-89 (page 429) presents the daily analysis results in units of
mg/1 for both sampled amalgamation processes. Higher zinc
concentrations observed in wastewater from one plant result from the
malfunctioning of the amalgam mixer. Each load of amalgam did not
completely empty out of the tank. The tank was manually scraped to
248
-------
remove the residue from the mix^r and the remaining material was
washed from the tank with a hose. This cleaning procedure increased
the volume of water used in the amalgamation process and contributed
to the zinc concentrations of the wastewater. Mercury was detected in
all the amalgamation samples, and was measured at relatively high
concentrations in samples at Plant B.
Table V-90 (page 430) presents the pollutant mass loading in the
amalgamation samples taken daily at both Plants B and A. The range,
mean, and medium values in units of mg/1 and mg/kg are presented in
Tables V-91 and V-92 (pages 431 and 432), respectively.
Zinc Powder, Gelled Amalgam Anode - No wastewater discharge results
directly from processing the gelled amalgam. However, both equipment
and floor area are washed to remove impurities resulting from the
amalgam processing. These maintenance procedures result in wastewater
discharges.
Wastewaters from two plants (B and A) were sampled. Table V-93 (page
433) presents the analysis results of these wastewater streams. The
discharge flows on a daily basis range from 0.21 to 1.67 I/kg (0.69
I/kg mean). The discharge flows measured at Plant B include the
combined wastewater from equipment and floor area wash operations,
whereas the flow measurements at Plant A involve wastewater from floor
washing only.
At Plant A, the water used to wash the amalgamation equipment is
recirculated and dumped only once every six months. As a result,
wastewater from this source amounts to approximately 0.001 I/kg, a
negligible contribution to the total discharge volume.
All of the wastewater streams from amalgamation at these sites were
sampled - including the recirculating blender wash water at Plant A
even though this water was scheduled for dumping one and a half months
after the sampling visit was completed. The significant pollutants in
these alkaline wastewater streams include TSS, mercury, and zinc which
result from the removal of residual amalgam in the cleaning of
utensils and equipment. In addition, spills resulting from the bulk
handling of raw materials for the amalgamation process are removed
during floor washing.
Zinc concentrations in amalgamation wastewater on the first sampling
day at Plant B could not be calculated. Pollutant concentrations in
this wastewater stream were not measured directly but were determined
by mass balance using two wastewater samples representing wastewater
resulting from scrap cell deactivation and the mixed scrap cell
deactivation and amalgamation wastewater. On the first day extremely
high zinc concentrations in the scrap cell deactivation wastewater
249
-------
prevented accurate determination of zinc concentrations in the
amalgamation waste stream.
Another parameter present in significant concentrations in the anode
room floor wash samples taken at Plant A was arsenic. The source of
this pollutant is unknown although it may be a trace contaminant of
the zinc used in the amalgamation process. The wastewater streams
generated from washing the amalgamation equipment and the floor areas
are highly alkaline as a result of the potassium hydroxide addition to
gelled amalgam formulation and the inclusion of utensil wash water
from electrolyte preparation.
Table V-94 (page 434) shows the daily pollutant mass loadings in units
of mg/kg for both clean-up processes. Statistical analysis of these
data are presented in Tables V-95 and V-96 (pages 435 and 436) for
both mg/1 and mg/kg analysis results, respectively.
Dry Amalgamated Zinc Powder Anodes - This process is a dry operation
and involves no process wastewater discharge.
Zinc Oxide Powder, Pasted or Pressed Anodes - Since the formation
operation is not conducted on-site, there is no wastewater associated
with anode formation. No other sources of wastewater associated with
the production of this anode type were reported.
Zinc Oxide Powder, Pasted or Pressed, Reduced Anodes - The only source
of wastewater discharge is the post-formation rinse operation. Since
the raw materials are comparable for the powder and the slurry
techniques of preparing the plaques, the pollutant characteristics for
the rinse water discharges are similar. The discharge flow rate of
the post-formation rinse based on weight of zinc applied in anode
formulation ranges from 33.3 to 277.3 I/kg (142.4 I/kg mean). The
rinse wastewater stream was sampled at two of these plants, Plants A
and B. One plant, C, is excluded from the flow analysis because the
required data were not provided in the dcp. At Plant B, plaques are
rinsed in a multistage countercurrent rinse after formation.
The analysis results for each sample day from Plants A and B are
presented in Table V-97 (page 437). Table V-98 (page 438) presents
the pollutant mass loadings from anode preparation on a daily basis.
Tables V-99 and V-100 (pages 439 and 440) show the statistical
analysis of the raw wastewater data in units of mg/1 and mg/kg,
respectively.
Zinc Electrodeposited Anodes - The process wastewater associated with
the manufacture of electrodeposited anodes are: (1) post-
electrodeposition rinses, (2) amalgamation solution dump, and (3)
post-amalgamation rinse.
250
-------
Two plants (A and B) in the data base used the electrodeposition
process. Based on the data received in the survey for Plant B and the
visit data for Plant A, the discharge flows range from 1420.7 to
4966.9 liters per kilogram of zinc applied during the
electrodeposition operation. Only the first two wastewater streams
were sampled at Plant A because that plant does not require a rinse
following the amalgamation step.
At Plant A, the post-electrodeposition rinse flows are higher than at
Plant B because the latter plant has implemented a countercurrent
rinse system. The post-electrodeposition rinse operation which was
sampled at Plant A has a discharge flow ranging from 4655.6 to 5368.3
I/kg (4965.3 I/kg mean) which exceeds by at least a factor of four the
discharge flow for the same rinse operation at Plant B. Ninety-seven
percent of the total electrodeposition process wastewater at both
plants results from post-electrodeposition rinsing. The most signifi-
cant pollutant in the sampled rinse wastewater stream is zinc
particles. Poorly adherent zinc particles are removed from the
product by rinsing, and by compressing the deposited material between
the rinses.
The other wastewater stream at Plant A which is associated with the
zinc electrodeposition process is the amalgamation solution dump. At
this plant, the amalgamation solution is dumped after sixteen hours of
operation of a single electrodeposition line. Table 101 (page 441)
presents the chemical characteristics of two batch dumps of the spent
amalgamation solution. The resulting normalized discharge flow
averages one liter per kilogram of zinc applied. Table V-102 (page
442) presents chemical characteristics of the total wastewater
discharge resulting from the production of electrodeposited zinc
anodes. For the first and third days, these characteristics were
determined by mass balance calculations from the measured
characteristics of the electrodeposition rinse and amalgamation
solution wastewater streams. In addition, the pollutant mass loadings
on each sample day are presented in Table V-103 (page 443).
Cathode Operations - Porous Carbon Cathode - No wastewater is
discharged from this operation at either the two plants reporting the.
manufacture of porous carbon cathodes.
Manganese Dioxide-Carbon Cathode - The processes used to formulate the
cathode material do not generate any wastewaters.
Mercuric Oxide (And Mercuric Oxide-Manganese Dioxide-Carbon) Cathodes
- The cathode formulation process generates no process wastewater
since the blended and pelletized materials are in dry powdered forms.
Mercuric Oxide-Cadmium Oxide Cathode - No process water is used and no
wastewater discharge results from the production of these cathodes.
251
-------
Silver Powder Pressed and Electrolytically Oxidized Cathodes - Three
plants reported pressing silver powder on grids to produce sintered
plaques which are subsequently formed. The postformation rinse was
the only source of wastewater and was sampled at both Plants A and B.
Table V-104 (page 444) presents the normalized discharge flows which
range from 79.7 to 1135.5 liters per kilogram of silver powder applied
to the grid material. With the value for the second day at Plant A
eliminated because of variability observed with floor area maintenance
water use, the mean normalized flow is 196.25 I/kg. Analysis results
are presented in Table V-105 (page 445).
Table V-106 (page 445) presents the daily pollutant mass loadings of
both plants and statistical analysis in units of mg/1 and mg/kg are
presented in Table V-107 and V-108 (pages 447 and 448), respectively.
generated from this process since the materials are combined in the
dry powdered state and further processing, involving pelletizing and
insertion in the cell container, is executed under dry conditions.
Electrolytically Formed Cathode - The normalized wastewater flow rates
for the two plants using this process ranged from 25.0 to 237.1 liters
per kilogram of silver in the silver oxide applied to the grid
material. These plants reported that wastewater discharges result
from slurry paste preparation, formation, and post-formation rinsing.
However, Plant A reported data only for post-formation rinsing
(corresponding to the 25.0 I/kg), and Plant B reported data only for
spent formation solutions and post-formation rinses (corresponding to
the 237).
Two samples were taken at Plant B which together represent an entire
post-formation rinse cycle. The rinse cycle at Plant B has two
phases. The first phase involves rinsing the plaques for
approximately an hour while they are still positioned inside the
formation tanks, and the second phase involves removing the plaques
from the tanks and subsequently submerging them in water to soak for
approximately 24 hours. The analysis results of the post-formation
rinse wastewater (both phases) are presented in Table V-109 (page 449 )
and the pollutant mass loading estimates are presented in Table V-110
(page 450 ). The wastewater of the first phase of the post-formation
rinse operation was sampled on the second day and the discharge flow
was 437.3 I/kg. This wastewater stream is highly alkaline due to the
residual formation caustic.
The second phase of the rinse cycle was sampled on the third day
during which the normalized discharge flow was 100.9 I/kg. The
significant pollutants in this wastewater stream are mercury and
silver. The higher silver concentration in the wastewater of the
second rinse phase compared to that reported for the first phase is
due to the fact that a smaller volume of water is contacting the
surface of the plaques for a considerably longer time span.
252
-------
Silver Peroxide (AgO) Cathodes - Process wastewater streams are
associated with the first phase of chemical treatment. The wastewater
results from (1) spent potassium hydroxide and methanol bath dumps (2)
rinsing, and (3) soaking. Two Plants (A and B) reported chemically
treating silver peroxide pellets. The normalized discharge flow from
this chemical treatment phase range from 5.6 to 12.8 liters per
kilogram of silver processed. The latter value represents the average
discharge flow observed during the sampling visit at Plant B.
Observed daily discharge flows ranged from 5.5 to 22.4 I/kg. Table V-
111 (page 451) presents the analysis results of the wastewater sampled
at Plant B which is a combination of both the spent solution dump and
subsequent rinse wastewater. Analytical results vary through the
three sampling days due to the batch nature of the processes and the
one-hour sampling interval.
The only wastewater from the slurry pasting process is from the clean-
up of utensils used to mix the slurry and apply the material to a
support.
Plant C reported manufacturing reinforced silver peroxide cathodes.
The wastewater was sampled at this plant. The normalized discharge
flow for the sample day was 76.0 liters per kilogram of silver
processed. This flow varied according to the operator's discretion in
the amount of water used to wash the utensils. Table V-lll (page 451)
presents the results of analysis of the wastewater from the utensil
wash operation at Plant C.
Table V-112 (page 452) presents the pollutant mass loadings in the
process wastewater streams of both Plants C and B. These data are the
basis for the statistical summary of wastewater characteristics from
processes for producing silver peroxide cathodes. The wastewater
streams resulting from both pellet chemical treatment and slurry
application on support material are summarized in the statistical
analyses presented in Tables V-113 and V-114 (pages 453 and 454).
Nickel Impregnated Cathodes - Discussion of wastewaters from
manufacture of impregnated nickel cathodes is under the cadmium
subcategory. Table V-19 (page 345) and Table V-20 (page 346) present
the results of the analyses in terms of concentrations and mass
loadings; corresponding statistical analyses are presented in Tables
V-21 (page 347) and V-22 (page 348).
Ancillary Operations Generating Wastewater - Only wastewater
generating ancillary operations are described in this part. Dry
ancillary operations such as soldering, punching, or shearing are not
described.
Cell Washing - Many of the cells produced in this subcategory are
washed prior to assembly or shipment. These cell wash operations
253
-------
serve to remove spilled electrolyte, oils and greases, and general
soil from the cell case and to minimize the probability of corrosion
of the battery case, contacts, or devices into which the battery is
placed. There are a variety of cell washing systems including both
manual and automatic types and cleaning agents including solvents,
compounds and plain water.
Cell wash operations presently conducted at the seven plants reporting
cell wash operations can be assigned to one of five groups based on
the chemicals used to wash the cells. This scheme is used as a
framework for describing each of the cell wash operations. These
groups are (1) acetic acid cell wash, (2) cleaning compounds (usually
containing chromic acid) cell wash, (3) methylene chloride cell wash,
(4) freon cell wash, and (5) plain water cell rinse. Within each
group there J.s at least one plant in which the cell wash operation
wastewater was sampled.
The first grouping listed involves the use of acetic acid in the
preliminary phase of the cell wash operation. The sealed cells are
immersed in a solution consisting of acetic acid with an unspecified
detergent. Afterwards, the cells are transferred from the acidic
solution to a potassium hydroxide solution; thoroughly rinsed to
remove any remaining chemical used to clean the cells; and dipped in a
solution containing an oil base additive. Two plants reported using
this technique for cleaning cells.
The second general grouping involves the use of cleaners; usually
containing chromic acid. Rinsing occurs after washing these cells.
Four plants in the data base reported using cleaners containing
chromic acid. Wastewater from three of these cell wash operations was
sampled*.
The third cell wash grouping involves submerging the cells in a series
of tanks containing methylene chloride, methyl alcohol and ammonium
hydroxide. The wastewater from one plant which used this process was
sampled. The fourth cell wash group uses freon to clean cell
surfaces. Two plants presently use freon in the cell wash operations.
Wastewaters were not sampled at these two plants. In the fifth cell
wash group, only water (no chemical) was reported to be used to clean
the cell container surfaces. Two plants are in this group, and
samples were taken at one plant. A total of seven plants reported
using a cell wash operation in the manufacture of zinc subcategory
cells. The production normalized discharge flows are determined for
each of the seven plants by using data either obtained in the dcp's or
during sampling visits. Table V-115 (page 455) presents the
normalized discharge flows from cell wash operations at Plants A-G.
Based on these data, after deleting an abnormally high flow of 34.1
I/kg, the range is 0.09 to 4.21 liters per kilogram of finished cells
(1.13 I/kg mean). The large observed variations in discharge from
254
-------
cell wash operations may be related primarily to differences in plant
water conservation practices although cell size and plant specific
washing procedures were also observed to have an influence. Table V-
116 (page 455) presents the data from sampling cell wash operation
wastewaters at four plants. All of the cell wash groups are
represented. In the table all of the wastewater streams from cell
wash operations that were sampled at each plant are combined on a
flow-proportioned daily basis to achieve complete plant-by-plant raw
wastewater characterizations from cell washing. Table V-117 (page
457) .presents the pollutant mass loadings on a daily basis for each
plant. Statistical summaries are presented in Tables V-118 and V-119
(pages 457,459). The normalized discharge flows range from 0.085 to 1.8
liters per kilogram. The low value reflects a recirculating wash
operation and the high value is a composite of wastewaters from three
cell wash operations at one plant.
Electrolyte Preparation - The electrolytes used in cells in this
subcategory are primarily aqueous solutions of potassium or sodium
hydroxide, but may in some cases contain zinc oxide as well. In
general, they are added to the batteries in solution form during cell
assembly and must first be prepared from purchased solid constituents.
The preparation of these electrolyte solutions sometimes results in
the generation of some process wastewater, particularly where
different cell types requiring a variety of electrolyte compositions
are produced, and electrolyte mixing equipment is rinsed or washed
between batches of electrolyte.
Nine plants reported using water to formulate electrolyte solution.
One plant reported using sodium hydroxide solution as a substitute
electrolyte for potassium hydroxide solution in the manufacture of
certain cells. Two plants reported adding zinc oxide to the
electrolyte solution. Five plants reported no wastewater discharge
from electrolyte processing. However, the remaining four plants did
report wastewater discharges from electrolyte formulation primarily
resulting from utensil washing. Table V-120 (page 460) presents the
analytical results of the wastewater stream sampled at Plant A. The
measured flow is 0.37 liters per kilogram of finished cells processed
during the sampling day. Based on both the visit and dcp data, the
wash-up operation associated with the preparation of electrolyte
solution generates minimal wastewater (mean normalized flow of 0.12
I/kg). The observed pollutant mass loadings of the sampled wastewater
stream at Plant A as presented in Table V-121 (page 461) do not con-
tribute substantially to the total cell manufacture raw waste.
Silver Etching - The silver etch process prepares silver basis
material for use in the zinc electrodeposition process. The silver
foil is etched with nitric acid, rinsed and dried prior to
electrodeposition. After use in the process, the nitric acid is
collected in containers for contractor removal. Squeegees are used to
255
-------
wipe the etched silver foil surfaces before rinsing, and only residual
acid contaminates the rinse wastewater. The only wastewater discharge
results from rinsing the etched silver foil. The wastewater stream
was sampled at Plant A. The process is conducted on an intermittent
basis depending on the production of silver oxide-zinc cells requiring
the etched material. The observed discharge flow is 49.1 liters per
kilogram of silver processed. Tables V-122 and V-123 (pages 462 and
463) present the analytical results in units of mg/1 and mg/kg for the
silver etch process wastewater. The pollutant characteristics of this
acidic waste stream include zinc and silver. The presence of zinc
probably results from process material contamination. The
concentration of silver in the wastewater is high, reflecting the
absence of effective silver recovery measures.
Mandatory Employee Wash - For the purpose of ensuring health and
safety, some plants require the employees to wash before each work
break and at the end of each work day. Since process materials are
removed during the wash operation, the resultant wastewater stream is
considered process wastewater from the zinc subcategory. Two plants
(A and B) reported mandatory employee washing. Employee wash
wastewater from both plants was sampled. The composited sample taken
at Plant B is a combination of wastewaters generated from washing
clothes previously worn by manufacturing process employees and from
employee showers. However, a flow measurement was not obtained due to
pipe inaccessibility. The analytical results are presented in Table
V-124 (page 464). The employee wash wastewater was separately sampled
at Plant A. The observed discharge flow is 0.27 liters per kilogram
of finished cells. Table V-125 (page 465) presents the analytical
results of the wash wastewater stream. The most significant
pollutants are suspended solids and oil and grease which are probably
due to the employees handling both process materials and lubricated
machinery. Table V-126 (page 466) presents the pollutant mass
loadings of the employee wash wastewater stream only from Plant A.
Reject Cell Handling - Inspections are performed throughout the cell
assembly process. When a cell does not meet quality control
specifications, it is removed from the process line for future
repairs or disposal. If a cell cannot be repaired, it is scrapped.
The disposal techniques used by the zinc subcategory cell
manufacturers differ according to whether the materials composing the
rejected cells require deactivation. By submerging certain cells in
water, the active materials are discharged to reduce the potential
fire hazard in both handling and disposal of these cells. Three
plants (B, C, and A) reported using water for handling reject cells.
The discharge flows are minimal ranging from 0.002 to 0.03 liters per
kilogram of finished cells (0.01 I/kg mean). One plant contractor
hauls the wastewater with the rejected cells to a landfill site
whereas the other two plants treat the wastewater on-site. At Plant
A, the discharge flow was observed to be 0.03 liters per kilogram of
256
-------
finished cells. Table V-127 (page 467) presents the analysis results
of the reject cell handling wastewater stream. The significant
pollutants are silver, zinc, and mercury.
The reject cell wastewater was also sampled at Plant B. Analytical
results for Plant B only are presented in Table V-128 (page 468).
This wastewater stream is characterized by a low discharge flow (0.003
liters per kilogram). The most significant pollutants observed are
suspended solids, zinc, and mercury which are constituents of the
alkaline cells being processed. Table V-129 (page 469) presents the
pollutant mass loadings from the data obtained from sampling the
reject cell wastewater at Plant B.
Floor Wash and Equipment Wash - Some plants maintain process floor
areas and equipment by using water to remove wasted process materials
and other dirt. Three plants reported using water for floor
maintenance whereas the other plants generally use other means to
clean the floors. These methods which do not require water include
vacuuming, dry sweeping, and applying desiccant materials in instances
of solution spillages. Each of the three plants that reported using
water to clean process floor areas has a wastewater discharge from the
cleaning operation. Two plants reported discharge flow estimates
reflecting both floor area and equipment cleaning wastewater in their
dcp's. Based on dcp estimates and the discharge flows observed during
the sampling visit at Plant A which represents floor cleaning only,
the range of discharge flows is 0.0008 to 0.030 I/kg of finished
cells. Table V-130 (page 470) presents the analytical results of the
wastewater resulting from the floor wash operation at Plant A. Table
V-131 (page 47l) presents the pollutant mass loadings based on the
data obtained at Plant A. Lead is a significant pollutant which
apparently results from contamination with solder constituents used to
attach tabs to the electrode substrate materials. In addition,
suspended solids are high in the floor wash wastewater as is ammonia
which is a chemical used to clean the floors.
Four plants in the data base reported using water to clean equipment
used to manufacture zinc subcategory cells. All of these plants have
wastewater discharges resulting from cleaning equipment used to handle
process materials. As was previously cited in the floor wash
discussion, two plants reported wastewater discharge estimates
representing both equipment and floor cleaning. Separate equipment
cleaning discharge flow estimates have been obtained in sampling
wastewater at Plants A and B. At these two plants, the observed
discharges averaged 5.1 and 9. The significant pollutants in the
equipment wash wastewater streams at Plant B include suspended solids,
zinc, and mercury which result from the formation operation. Table V-
132 (page 472) presents the analytical results for equipment wash.
The relatively high discharge flow occurred on the first sampling day
because all of the equipment was washed. The same table shows the
257
-------
analytical results from the sample visit of Plant A. The wastewater
at this plant is generated from equipment wash operations and
occasional employee hand washing. The observed flow is 5.1 liters per
kilogram of finished cells. The significant pollutants in this
wastewater stream are suspended solids, mercury, and zinc which result
from process material contamination. Table V-133 (page 473) presents
the pollutant mass loading calculated from the analytical data from
Plants A and B. Statistical summaries of both the concentration and
loading data are presented in Table V-134 and V-135 (pages 474 and
475), respectively.
Silver Powder Production - Silver powder for use in battery cathodes
is manufactured by electrodeposition and mechanical removal. The
slurry which results is filtered to recover the silver powder, and the
filtrate is returned for continued use in the electrodeposition
process. The wet silver powder is rinsed to remove residual acid and
dried prior to storage or use in cathode manufacture. Process
wastewater from the product rinse step was characterized by sampling
at Plant A. Observed wastewater discharge flows range from 19.8 to
23.7 I/kg (21.2 I/kg mean). The results of analyses of samples from
this wastewater source are presented in Table V-136 (page 476). Table
V-137 (page 477) presents corresponding pollutant mass loading data.
Silver Peroxide Production - Silver peroxide is produced from silver
oxide or silver nitrate by two chemical oxidation processes. The
results of analysis of wastewater samples from peroxide production are
presented in Table V-138 (page 478) and corresponding pollutant mass
loadings in Table V-139 (page 479).
Total Process Wastewater Discharge and Characteristics
Wastewater discharge from zinc subcategory manufacturing operations
varies between 0 and 26,000 1/hr (7,000 gal/hr). The variation may be
understood primarily on the basis of the variations among these plants
in the mix of production operations used, and also on the observed
differences in water conservation practices in the subcategory.
Total process wastewater.flow and characteristics were determined for
eight plants in the zinc subcategory which were sampled. These
characteristics, reflecting the combined raw wastewater streams from
all zinc subcategory process operations at each site on each of up to
three days of sampling, are summarized statistically in Table V-140
(page 480). Prevailing discharge and treatment patterns in this
subcategory generally preclude directly sampling a total raw
wastewater stream because wastewaters from individual process
operations are often treated or discharged separately. Consequently,
the total process wastewater characterisics shown in Table V-140 were
determined for each plant by mass balance calculations from analyses
of wastewater samples from individual process operations.
258
-------
As Table V-140 shows, concentrations of some pollutants were observed
to vary over a wide range. These variations may generally be related
to variations in manufacturing processes discussed in the preceding
pages. Despite the observed variations, it may be seen that the most
significant pollutants are generally consistent from plant to plant
and that waste treatment requirements of all of the sampled plants are
quite similar.
Wastewater Treatment Practices and Effluent Data Analysis
The plants in this subcategory reported the practice of numerous
wastewater treatment technologies (Table V-141, page 481) including pH
adjustment, sulfide precipitation, carbon adsorption, amalgamation,
sedimentation, and filtration. Several indicated the recovery of some
process materials from wastewater streams. In addition to the
wastewater treatment systems reported in dcp's, a complete system
combining in-process controls with ion exchange and wastewater recycle
has recently been installed at one plant, which will ultimately
eliminate the discharge of wastewater effluent. Process changes at
another plant have also eliminated process wastewater discharge since
the data presented in the dcp were developed. Many of the tech-
nologies practiced (e.g., amalgamation and carbon adsorption) are
aimed specifically at the removal of mercury. Effluent data and on-
site observations at plants in the zinc subcategory reveal that most
of the technologies employed are not effectively applied for the
reduction of pollutant discharges. In some cases, such as
amalgamation, this is due to treatment system design and the inherent
limitations of the technologies employed. In others, such as sulfide
precipitation, failure to achieve effective pollutant removal results
from specific design, operation, and maintenance deficiencies at the
plants employing the technologies.
An analysis of the treatment in-place was done for all plants which
submitted process information. Some of these plants were visited and
sampled, others provided effluent data, and others just reported what
treatment was in-place.
As shown in Table V-142 (page 482), plants submitted limited data.
Only four plants submitted data on pH which could be related to
treatment performance, however the effectiveness could not be
substantiated by this data alone.
At plant A which was visited with sulfide precipitation, settling, and
filtration it was observed that the plant did not operate the
precipitation system at optimum pH values. The results of sampling
for this plant are shown in Table V-143 (page 483). In this same
table the sampling data for plant B are also shown. Observations made
during the plant visit indicated that non-process streams were mixed
259
-------
with battery process water, severly overloading the treatment system.
Additionally, the system was not consistently operated at optimum pH
values, and the treatment tanks were long over due for sludge removal.
Another plant which was sampled had chemical precipitation, settling
and filtration technology. As shown in Table V-144 (page 484) / this
plant had four separate treatment systems to treat wastewaters from
the zinc subcategory. Observation made during sampling, however
indicated that the systems were inadequately maintained. pH was not
controlled properly and excessive accumulations of sludge from
previously treated batches of wastewater were in the settling tanks.
Observations at two plants with settling and amalgamation in-place
revealed that the treatment systems were crude in design and
operability. Sampling results for these two plants are in Table V-145
(page 485)
At another plant having skimming, filtration, amalgamation and carbon
adsorption in-place, the equipment was designed and operated
inadequately. Sampling results for this plant are shown in Table V-
146 (page 486).
One plant had just installed a settling, filtration and ion exchange
treatment system. Because the system had just been installed and was
not in full operation prior to sampling, the results shown in Table V-
147 (page 487) could not be evaluated.
After evaluating all dcp and plant visit effluent data, the conclusion
is made that although plants which discharge have treatment equipment
in-place, the operation and maintenance of these systems are generally
inadequate for treating zinc subcategory pollutants.
260
-------
ELECTROLYTE RAW
MATERIALS
53
c <
III K
Q U
i
ELECTROLYTE
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
t
ANODE
PREPARATION
1
ANODE
ASSEMBLY
t
CELL
CATHODE
CATHODE
PREPARATION
1
0 K
*S
si
WASTEWATER
WASH
T
WASTEWATER
PRODUCT
FLOOR
AND EQUIPMENT
WASH
WASTEWATER
EMPLOYEE
WASH
WASTEWATER
SPECIAL
CHEMICALS
AND
METALS
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
FIGURE V-l
GENERALIZED CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING PROCESS
261
-------
Grouping
Anode
Manufacture
FIGURE V-2
CADMIUM SUBCATEGOEY ANALYSIS
Element Specific Wastewater Sources (Subelements)
Pasted and Pressed Powder . Process Area Clean-up
Electrodeposited
Impregnated
Cathode
Manufacture
Silver Powder Pressed
Nickel Pressed Powder
Nickel Electrodeposited
Nickel Impregnated
Ancillary
Operations
Mercuric Oxide Powder
Pressed
Cell Wash
Product Rinses
Spent Caustic
Scrubbers
Sintered Stock Preparation Clean-up
Impregnated Rinses
Spent Impregnation Caustic
Product Cleaning
Pre-formation Soak
Spent Formation Caustic
Post-formation Rinse
No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. Spent Caustic
. Post-formation Rinse
. Sintered Stock Preparation Clean-up
. Impregnation Rinses
. Impregnation Scrubbers
. Product Cleaning
. Impregnated Plague Scrub
. Pre-formation Soak
. Spent Formation Caustic
. Post Formation Rinses
. Impregnation Equipment Wash
. Nickel Recovery Filter Wash
. Nickel Recovery Scrubber
. No Process Wastewater
. Cell Wash
262
-------
Grouping
Ancillary
Operations
FIGURE V-2
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY ANALYSIS
Element Specific Wastewater Sources (Subelements)
Electrolyte Preparation . Equipment Wash
Floor and Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Floor and Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Product Rinses
Scrubber
Silver Powder Production . Product Rinses
Nickel Hydroxide Production . Product Rinses
Cadmium Hydroxide Production . Seal Cooling Water
263
-------
CADMIUM NITRATE,
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE
GRID*
SOLUTION
PREPARATION
SCRUBBERS
ELECTRO-
DEPOSITION
WASTEWATER
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
FORMATION
CAUSTIC SOLUTION PROCESS
REUSE OR DISCHARGE
WATER'
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
FINISHED ANODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-3
PRODUCTION OF CADMIUM ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
264
-------
SINTERED
STOCK
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
CADMIUM NITRATE.
SINTERED GRIDS-
CAUSTIC SOLUTION-
WATER.
SOLUTION
PREPARATION
IMPREGNATION
SCRUBBERS
IMMERSION
RINSE
WASTEWATER
TO REUSE OR SPENT
CAUSTIC DISCHARGE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
WATER-
CLEANING
TO REUSE OR RINSE
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
CAUSTIC SOLUTION-
FORMATION
SPENT CAUSTIC
DISCHARGE
WATER-
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
FINISHED CATHODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-4
PRODUCTION OF CADMIUM IMPREGNATED ANODES
265
-------
NICKEL NITRATE,
COBALT NITRATE
SOLUTION
PREPARATION
GRIDS
ELECTRODE-
POSITION
CAUSTIC
SOLUTION
FORMATION
WATER
I
RINSE
CAUSTIC SOLUTION PROCESS
REUSE OR DISCHARGE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
FINISHED CATHODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-5
PRODUCTION OF NICKEL ELECTRODEPOSITED CATHODES
266
-------
NICKEL NITRATE,
COBALT NITRATE
SOLUTION
PREPARATION
SCRUBBERS
SINTERED GRIDS
CLEAN-UP
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
IMPREGNATION
WASTEWATER
CAUSTIC SOLUTION-
IMMERSION
WASTER
RINSE
WATER-
TO REUSE OR SPENT
CAUSTIC DISCHARGE
CLEANING
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
TO REUSE OR RINSE
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
FORMATION
WATER-
RINSE
SPENT CAUSTIC
DISCHARGE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
TO ASSEMBLY
FINISHED
CATHODES
FIGURE V-6
PRODUCTION OF NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
267
-------
BLEND DEPOLARIZER
AND ELECTROLYTE
HEATING
COMPONENT
PREPARATION
DEPOLARIZER
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
ASSEMBLY
ANODE
MANUFACTURE
SHIP
CELL
TESTING
WASTEWATER
FIGURE V-7
GENERALIZED CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING PROCESS
268
-------
Grouping
Anode
Manufacture
Cathode
Manufacture
Ancillary
FIGURE V-8
CALCIUM SUBGA3EGQRY ANALYSIS
Element
Vapor Deposited
Fabricated
Calcium Chromate
Tungstic Oxide
Potassium Oichromate
Specific Wastewater Sources
(Subelements)
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
Heating Component Production:
Heat Paper . Slurry Preparation
. Filtrate Discharge
Heat Pellet . No Process Wastewater
Cell 'Testing
. Leak lasting
-------
LEAD
PbO-Pb m
SULFURIC ACID ป
WASTE ซ GRID
WATER ! CASTING j ,
I MACHINE i 1
U J f
LEAD DROSS*
j PLUS REJECTS
RECYCLED OR
TO TREATMENT
r , ป ,
! GRID '
PASTE
PbO-Pb
RECYCLED
TO MIXER
I REJECT
SEPARATORS^ปj STACKER | PLATES
DEHYDRATED LINE
\ FORM |
fc.^,^
CLOSED FORMATION
WET BATTERY LINE
I DRAIN I I sปwr*i-ป rv^ซ9 i I
-r 1 PLATES I -r '
H -Q, f WATER f
H2SO4 i ' U^4 I^ปl I
* RINSE r* FRESH ACID ^| ACID FILL
H2O I I l.i I I | I
f EVA.P i , H2S04 J
| DRY
BATTERY T
CASE -^-| ASSEMBLY |
| BURN POST |
COVER ^ป| SEAL f
J J
1
t
I DUMP
]
1
J
1 ' }
|
boO5T CHARG
i
i
H
i '
WASTE
WATER
WATER ^ WASH \
I
WASTEWATER
| TEST
I
REJECTS*
NOT CONSIDERED UNDER
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
RECYCLED TO SMELTER | PRODUCT [
FIGURE V-9
LEAD SUBCATEGORY GENERALIZED MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
270
-------
Process
Elements
Anodes and Cathodes
Leady
Oxide Production -
Paste Preparation and
Application
Curing
Closed Formation (In Case)
Single Fill
Double FdJJL
Fill and EXjmp
FIGURE V-10
IEAD SUBCA3EGOBY ANALYSIS
Specific Wastewater Sources
Ban Mill Shen Cooling
Scrubber
Product Soak
Equipment and Floor Area
Clean-up
Scrubber
Steam Curing
Contact Cooling
Scrubber
Contact Cooling
Scrubber
Product Rinse
Formation Area Washdown
Formation Area Washdown
Product Rinse
Scrubber
Contact Cooling
Open Formation (CXit of Case)
Wet
Dehydrated
Ancillary Operations
Battery Wash
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
Scrubber
Formation Area Washdown
Formation Area Washdown
Product Rinse
Vacuum Pump Seals and Ejectors
Scrubber
. Battery Wash
. Floor Wash
. Battery Repair Area Wash
271
-------
LEAD
ACID WATER
ft
LCAOY
OX1OE
PRODUCTION
LEAD ALLOY
ACID
CUTTING
PASTE
PREPARATION
DUMP AND
REFILL
DOUBLE FILL
BOOST
CHARGE
PASTING
GRID CASTING
OR ROLLING
I
CURING
I
STACKING
AND
WELDING
-SEPARATORS
I
ASSEMBLY
.CASE, COVERS
TERMINALS
ACID FILL
CLOSED
FORMATION
WASTEWATER
SINGLE FILL
WASH
WASTEWATER
NOT CONSIDERED UNDER BATTERY
MANUFACTURING CATEGORY
TEST
PRODUCT
FIGURE V-t 1
PRODUCTION OF CLOSED FORMATION WET BATTERIES
272
-------
LEAD
f
AC1O WATER
LEADY
OXIDE
PRODUCTION
LEAD ALLOY
PASTE
PREPARATION
PASTING
I --- --
| GRID CASTING
^
OR ROLLING i
CURING
SEPARATORS-
CASE. COVERS
TERMINALS
I
STACKING
AND
WELDING
I
NOT CONSIDERED UNDER
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
CATEGORY
ASSEMBLY
ACID FILL
CLOSED
FORMATION
WASTEWATER
DUMP ACID
SEAL
WASH
WASTEWATER
TEST
I PRODUCT
FIGURE V-12
PRODUCTION OF DAMP BATTERIES
273
-------
LEAD
i
ACID WATER
J L.
ACID
CUTTING
I
PASTE
PREPARATION
PASTING
1
CURING
I
GROUPS
I
LEAD ALLOY
(GRID CASTING
I OR ROLLING
OPEN
FORMATION
1
RINSING
AND
DEHYDRATION
WASTEWATER
SEPARATORS, CASES,
COVERS. TERMINALS
ASSEMBLY
I
WASH
WASTEWATER
NOT CONSIDERED UNDER BATTERY
MANUFACTURING CATEGORY
TEST
PRODUCT
FIGURE V-13
PRODUCTION OF DEHYDRATED BATTERIES
274
-------
PURCHASED GREEN
PLATES
ACID WATER
ACID
CUTTING
DUMP AND
REFILL
DOUBLE FILL
BOOST
CHARGE
STACKING
AND
WELDING
SEPARATORS
ASSEMBLY
CASE, COVERS
TERMINALS
ACID FILL
CLOSED
FORMATION
WASTEWATER
SINGLE FILL
WASH
WASTEWATER
TEST
PRODUCT
FIGURE V-14
PRODUCTION OF BATTERIES FROM GREEN (UNFORMED) ELECTRODES
275
-------
FORMED PLATE
GROUPS
ACID WATER
ASSEMBLY
ACID
CUTTING
ACID
FILL
SEPARATORS, CASES
COVERS, TERMINALS
WASH
I
TEST
WASTEWATER
PRODUCT
FIGURE V-15
PRODUCTION OF BATTERIES FROM PURCHASED FORMED PLATES
276
-------
100
SAMPLE
MEDIAN
(ZEROS
INCLUDED)
MEDIAN
ZEROS
EXCLUDED)
NUMBER NUMBER
FORMATION.
OPEN CASE:
SHIPPED WET
DEHYDRATED
CLOSED CASE:
DAMP
WET
BATTERY WASH
LEADY OXIDE PRODUCTION
PASTING
CURING
O.I
30 40 50 60 70
PERCENT OF PLANTS
FIGURE V-l 6
PERCENT PRODUCTION NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FROM
LEAD SUBCATEGORY PROCESS OPERATIONS
277
-------
SAMPLE
PROCESS MEDIAN
ซL/KG)
SINGLE FILL FORMATION 0
DOUBLE FILL FORMATION 0.305
NUMBER NUMBER
OF OF
VALUES ZEROS
40
30
36
O
to
DOUBLE FILL
FORMATION
SINGLE FILL
FORMATION
CUMULATIVE PERCENT OF PLANTS
100
FIGURE V-17
PRODUCTION NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FROM DOUBLE AND SINGLE FILL
FORMATION
-------
ELECTROLYTE
RAW
MATERIALS
SEPARATOR
RAW
MATERIALS
i
ELECTROLYTE
FORMULATION
i
SEPARATOR
PREPARATION
ZINC
i.
ANODE
METAL
FORMING
ANODE
WASTEWATER
CATHODE RAW
MATERIALS
ASSEMBLY
t
i
CATHODE
PREPARATION
PRODUCT
MISCELLANEOUS TOOLS
AND EQUIPMENT FROM
ALL OPERATIONS
EQUIPMENT
AND AREA
CLEANUP
WASTEWATER
FIGURE V-18
GENERALIZED SCHEMATIC FOR LECLANCHE CELL MANUFACTURE
279
-------
FIGURE V-19
IECLANCHE SDBCA3EGOBY ANALYSIS
Grouping
Anode
Manufacture
Cathode
Ancillary
Operations
Element
Zinc Powder
Manganese Dioxide - Pressed
- Electrolyte with Mercury
- Electrolyte without
Mercury
- Gelled Electrolyte with
Mercury
Carbon (Porous)
Silver Chloride
Manganese Dioxide - Pasted
Separators
Cooked Paste
Uncooked Paste
Pasted Paper with Mercury
Equipment and Area
Cleanup
Specific Wastewater Sources
. NO Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. No Process Wastewater
. Paste Setting
. Equipment Wash
. Equipment Wash
. Electrolyte Preparation
. Assembly Equipment Wash
. Ertployee Wash
. Electrode Preparation
Equipment Wash
. Miscellaneous Equipment
Wash
280
-------
ANODE
MANUFACTURE
HEATING COMPONENT
PREPARATION
(THERMAL CELLS ONLY)
DEPOLARIZER
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
BLEND
DEPOLARIZER
ELECTROLYTE
ELECTROLYTE
WASTEWATER
LITHIUM SCRAP
DISPOSAL
WASTEWATER
PRODUCT
WASTEWATER
FLOOR AND
EQUIPMENT
WASH
WASTEWATER
AIR SCRUBBERS
WASTEWATER
FIGURE V-20
GENERALIZED LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING PROCESS
281
-------
FIGURE V-21
LITHIUM SUBCATEGOFY ANALYSIS
Grouping
Anode
Manufacture
Cathode
Manufacture
Ancillary
Operations
Element
Formed and Stamped
Iodine
Iron Disulfide
Lead Iodide
Lithium Perchlorate
Sulfur Dioxide
Thionyl Chloride
Titanium Disulfide
Heating Component Production:
Heat Paper
Heat Pellets
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Cell Testing
Floor and Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
Cell Wash
Specific Wastewater Sources
(Subelements)
. No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
Product Treatment
Equipment Wash
No Process Wastewater
Spills*
Spills*
No Process Wastewater
Filtrate Discharge
Slurry Preparation
No Process Wastewater
Scrap Disposal
Leak Testing
Floor and Equipment Wash
Slowdown from various
production areas
Cell Wash
* - Wastewater discharged from air scrubbers for the manufacture of
these cathodes is included with ancillary operations.
282
-------
I ANODE |
| METAL I
I FORMING I
WASTEWATER
| I
! CLEAN & i
I CHROMATE '
to
00
U)
ELECTROLYTE
PREPARATION
SEPARATOR
PREPARATION
ANODE
WASTEWATER
DEPOLARIZER
pREpARATION
ASSEMBLY
CELL
TEST
WASTEWATER
PRODUCT
FLOOR &
EQUIPMENT
WASH
WASTEWATER
WASTEWATER
CATHODE
MANUFACTURE
SUPPORT
HEATING
COMPONENT PREP.
(THERMAL CELLS
ONLY)
WASTEWATER
WASTEWATER
OPERATIONS NOT REGULATED IN BATTERY
MANUFACTURING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
FIGURE V-22
GENERALIZED MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING PROCESS
-------
FIGURE V-23
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY ANALYSIS
Grouping
Anode
flfenufacture
Cathode
Manufacture
Ancillary
Operations
Element
Magnesium Powder
Carbon
Copper Chloride
Copper Iodide
Lead Chloride
M-Dinitrobenzene
Silver Chloride -Chemically
Reduced
Silver Chloride-Electro-
lytic
Silver Chloride
Vanadium Pentoxide
Heating Component
Production:
Heat Paper
Heat Pellets
Cell Testing
Separator Processing
Floor and Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
Specific Wastewater Source
(Subelements)
. No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
Product Rinsing
Product Rinsing
No Process Waste^ter
No Process Wastewater
Filtrate
Slurry Preparation
No Process Wastewater
Activation of Sea-Water
Reserve Batteries
Etching Solution
Product Rinsing
Floor and Equipment Wash
Slowdown from Various
Production Areas
284
-------
ANODE RAW
MATERIALS
CATHODE RAW
MATERIALS
AMALGAMATION
WASTEWATER
I
ELECTROLYTE
RAW MATERIALS
CHEMICAL
PREPARATION
OF
DEPOLARIZER
WASTEWATER
ANODE
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
ANODE
FORMATION
WASTEWATER
SPECIAL
CHEMICALS,
METALS
PRODUCTION
CATHODE
PREPARATION
WASTEWATER
ELECTROLYTE
PREPARATION
ANODE
WASTEWATER
I
CATHODE
FORMATION
ASSEMBLY
EMPLOYEE
WASH
WASTEWATER
CATHODE
WASTEWATER
"I
REJECTS
CELL WASH
WASTEWATER
9*
REJECT CELL
HANDLING
WASTEWATER
PRODUCT
FLOOR AND
EQUIPMENT
WASH
WASTEWATER
SILVER
ETCH
WASTEWATER
FIGURE V-24
GENERALIZED ZINC SUBCATEGORY MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
285
-------
FIGURE V-25
ZINC SUBCATEGORY ANALYSIS
Grouping
Anode
Manufacture
Cathode
Manufacture
Element
Cast or Fabricated
Zinc Powder - Wet Amal-
gamated
Zinc Powder - Gelled
Amalgam
Zinc Powder - Dry Amal-
gamated
Zinc Oxide Powder - Pasted
or Pressed
Zinc Oxide Powder - 'Pasted
or Pressed, Reduced
Zinc Electrodeposited
Porous Carbon
Manganese Dioxide - Carbon
Mercuric Oxide (and mercuric
oxide - manganese dioxide
carbon)
Mercuric Oxide - Cadmium
Oxide
Silver Powder Pressed
Silver Powder Pressed and
Electrolytically Oxidized
(Formed)
Specific Wastewater Sources
. No Process Wastewater
. Floor Area and Equipment Clean-up
. Spent Aqueous Solution
. Amalgam Rinses
. Reprocess Amalgam Rinses
. Floor Area and Equipment Clean-up
. No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
Post-formation Rinse
Post-electrcdeposition Rinses
Spent Amalgamation Solution
Post-amalgamation Rinse
No Process Wastewater
No Process Wastewater
NO Process Wastewater
NO Process Wastewater
NO Process Wastewater
Post-formation Rinse
286
-------
Grouping
Cathode
Manufacture
(Gontd.)
Ancillary
Operations
FIGURE V-25
ZINC SUBCATEGORY ANALYSIS
Element
Silver Oxide (Ag20)
Powder
Specific Wastewater Sources
. No Process Wastewater
Silver Oxide (Ag20)
Powder - Thermally Reduced
or Sintered, Electrolytically.
Formed
Silver Peroxide (AgO) Powder .
Nickel Impregnated and Formed
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Silver Etch
Mandatory Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor Wash and Equipment
Wash
Silver Powder Production
Silver Peroxide Production
Slurry Paste Preparation
Spent Caustic Formation
Post-formation Rinse
Utensil Wash
Spent Solution
Product Rinse
Product Soak
Refer to Cadmium Subcategory
Analysis (Figure V-2)
Acetic Acid Cell Wash
Chromic Acid Containing Cell Wash
Msthylene Chloride Cell Wash
Freon Cell Wash
Non-chemical Cell Wash
Equipment Wash
Product Rinse
Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor and Equipment Wash
Product Rinse
Product Rinses
Spent Solution
287
-------
ZINC, MERCURY
SOLUTION
MIX
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
METHANOL
METHANOL
RINSE
CONTRACTOR REMOVAL
OF SPENT METHANOL
DRY
DRY POWDERED
AMALGAM
FIGURE V-26
PRODUCTION OF ZINC POWDER - WET AMALGAMATED ANODES
288
-------
ZINC, MERCURY,
ELECTROLYTE
MIX
GELLING AGENT
I
BLEND
TO ASSEMBLY
WATER
EQUIPMENT
AND FLOOR
AREA WASH
WASH WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
FIGURE V-27
PRODUCTION OF ZINC POWDER GELLED AMALGAM ANODES
289
-------
ZINC OXIDE AND
MERCURIC OXIDE
POWDERS
MIX
BINDING AGENT
BLEND
GRIDS
PRESS ON
GRIDS
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
*
ELECTROLY-
TICALLY
REDUCED
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
DRY
FINISHED ANODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-28
PRODUCTION OF PRESSED ZINC OXIDE ELECTROLYTICALLY REDUCED ANODES
290
-------
ZINC OXIDE, MERCURIC
OXIDE SLURRY
MIX
BINDING AGENT
BLEND
GRIDS
LAYER ON
GRIDS
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
ELECTRO-
LYTICALLY
REDUCED
WATER
RINSE
1
DRY
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
COMPRESS
FINISHED ANODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-29
PRODUCTION OF PASTED ZINC OXIDE ELECTROLYTICALLY REDUCED ANODES
291
-------
ZINC CAUSTIC
SOLUTION
GRIDS
SOLUTION
PREPARATION
ELECTROOE-
POSITION
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTE WATER
DISCHARGE
MERCURIC CHLORIDE
ACIDIC SOLUTION
AMALGAMATION
DRY
SPENT AMALGAMATION
SOLUTION DISPOSAL
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
DRY
FINISHED ANODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-30
PRODUCTION OF ELECTRODEPOSITED ZINC ANODES
292
-------
SILVER POWDER
MIX
GRIDS
PRESS
ON GRIDS
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
WATER
ELECTRO-
LYTICALLY
FORMED
I
RINSE
I
DRY
RINSE WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
FINISHED CATHODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-31
PRODUCTION OF SILVER POWDER PRESSED ELECTROLYTICALLY OXIDIZED
CATHODES
293
-------
SILVER OXIDE
POWDER, WATER
MIX
GRIDS
LAYER ON
GRIDS
SINTER
CAUSTIC SOLUTION
i
ELECTROLY-
TICALLY
FORMED
WATER
I
RINSE
TO RESERVOIR OR SPENT
CAUSTIC DISCHARGE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
WATER
SOAK
SOAK WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
WATER
EQUIPMENT
AND FLOOR
AREA WASH
WASH WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
DRY
FINISHED CATHODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-32
PRODUCTION OF SILVER OXIDE (Ag2O) POWDER THERMALLY REDUCED OR
SINTERED, ELECTROLYT1CALLY FORMED CATHODES
294
-------
SILVER PEROXIDE
POWDER
PELLETIZE
SOLUTION
I
CHEMICAL
TREATMENT
I
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
WATER
RINSE
RINSE WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
CONTAINERS
I
DRY AND PLACE
IN CONTAINER
METHANOL-HYDRAZINE
SOLUTION _
CHEMICAL
TREATMENT
METHANOL
I
CONTRACTOR REMOVAL
OF SPENT SOLUTION
METHANOL
RINSE
I
CONTRACTOR REMOVAL
OF METHANOL
DRY
FINISHED CATHODES
TO ASSEMBLY
FIGURE V-33
CHEMICAL TREATMENT OF SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODE PELLETS
295
-------
SILVER PEROXIDE POWDER
AND WATER
MIX
BINDING AGENT
BLEND
GRIDS
LAYER ON
GRIDS
DRY
FINISHED CATHODES
WATER
TO ASSEMBLY
EQUIPMENT
WASH
WASH WASTE WATER
DISCHARGE
FIGURE V-34
PRODUCTION OF PASTED SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
296
-------
TRBtE V-1
SOREENINS AND VEREFICHT1CN ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
NJ
vo
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.
Pollutants
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Aotylcnitrile
Benzene
BenzictLne
Carbon Ttetrachloride
( letradiloranethane)
Chlordbenzene
1,2,4-Triciilorobenaene
Hexachlorcbenzene
1, 2^Dichlaroethane
1 , 1 , 1-Tridiloroethane
Hexadiloroethane
1 , 1-Oichloroethane
1,1, 2-JIriciilaroethane
1 , 1 , 2, 2-TetrachloroethBuie
Chloroethane
BLs(Qiloranethyl) Ether
Bi8(2-Qiloroethyl) Ether
2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether (Mixed)
2-
-------
TABLE V-1
SCREENING AND VEKEFICATICN ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
oo
Screening Analysis \ferification Analysis
Pollutants Mathodology Methodology
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
2 , 4-Dichlorcfhenol
1 1 2-^Dichloroprqpane
1 , 2-Dichlorcp:opy lene
( 1, 3-)ichlorqprcpene)
2, 4-Dimethylphenol
2 , 4-Dinitr otoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
1 , 2-Oiphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenaene
Fluoranthene
4-Chlorophenyl Ihenyl Ether
4-Bronophenyl Ihenyl Ether
Bis(2-ChlorQisoprofyl) Ether
Ms(2Kliloroethox/) Methane
Methylene Chloride (DichLoranethane)
Mathyl Chloride (Chlorone thane)
Methyl aromide (Brotanethane)
Bronoforra (Tribromcmethane)
DidiLoj^haroromethane
Tririilorafluoranethane
Diciilorodifluoraniethane
Chlorodibrancmethane
Hexaciilorobutadiene
HsxacMorocyclopentadiene
Isophorone
tfephthalene
Nitrobenzene
2-Nitcophenol
4-Nitrophenol
2 , 4-Dinitr ophenol
4, 6-^iinitro-O-Cresol
SP
SP
SP
SP VP: QC - FID
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP SP
SP SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
-------
TftHLE V-1
SCREENItC AND VEREFICAOICN ANALYSIS 1H3iNIQUES
N)
vo
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
Pollutants
bW^troaodimethylamine
N-Nitrosodlphenylarnine
bW^troaodi-N-Propylaraine
Pentachlorqphenol
Ihenol
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Ihthalate
Butyl Benzyl Ihthalate
Di-N-Butyl Ihthalate
Di-N-Octyl Ihthalate
Diethyl Ihthalate
Dimethyl Ihthalate
1 , 2-Benzanthr acene
(Benzo (a) Anthracene)
TVvrvr / \ T>irrvปrn"k /I A T> TV, Tltrt-r\ \
oenzo \&) tyrene (jfQ ucnzo cyrenej
3,4-Benzofluoranthene
1 1, 12-Benzof luoranthene
(Benzo (k) Flvnranthene)
Chrysene
Aoenaphthylene
Anthracene
1, 12-Benzoperylene
(Benzo (ghi)-Perylene)
Bluorene
Phenanthrene
1 , 2 , 5 , SHDibenzathracEne
(Dlbenzo (a,h) Anthracene)
Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrene
(s/S-O-Phenylene Pyrene)
Pyrene
letrachloroethylene
Screening Analysis
Methodology
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
\ferification Analysis
Methodology
VP: QC,ID
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
-------
TABLE V-1
SCREENBG AND VERTFIGATICN ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
U>
o
o
Screening Analysis Verification Analysis
Pollutants Methodology ffethodology
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.
Toluene
Ttichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride (Chloroethylene)
Aldrin
DLeldrin
Chlordane
(Technical Mixture and Metabolites)
4,4-DOT
4,4-DDE (p,p'-DDX)
4,4-DDD (p,p'-OEE)
Alpha Endosulfan
Betar-Endosulfan
Endosulfan Sulf ate
Bidrin
Endrin Aldehyde
I^Ttachlor
Heptachlor E^oxide
(BTC-flexachlorocyclchexane)
Alfiia-BK:
Beta-ซC
Ganma-BHC: (LLndane)
Delta-EHC
(JCB-Balychlorinated Biphenyls)
PCB-1242 (Aroclor 1242)
PCB-1254 (Aroclor 1254)
PCB-1221 (Aroclor 1221)
ICB-1232 (Aroclor 1232)
PCB-1248 (Aroclor 1248)
PCB-1260 (Aroclor 1260)
PCB-1016 (Aroclor 1016)
Tbxaphene
Antimony
Arsenic
SP VP: Ir-L Extract; QC^FID
SP VP: Ir-L Extract; OS, BCD
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP i'
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
-------
TABLE V-1
SGREENIN3 AND VEKTFICATXCN ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
Pollutants
Screening Analysis
Methodology
\ferification Analysis
Methodology
oo
o
116. Asbestos
117. Beryllium
118. Cadmium
119. Chronitm
Hexavalent Chromium
120. Capper
121. Cyanide
Cyanide Amenable to Chlorination
122. lead
123. Mercury
124. Nickel
125. Selenium
126. Silver
127. Thallium
128. Zinc
129. 2,3,4,8-JItetrachloEodibenssc>-
P-Dioxin (TCDD)
Aluminxn
Elcurides
Iron
Manganese
Etenols
Fhosphorous Total
Oil & Grease
TSS
TDS
pH Minimum
pH Maxiitutn
Tenperature
TCKP
ICAP
1CAP
ICAP
40CFR 136: Ddst.Abl. Mea.
1EAP
SP
SP
SP
SP
SP
ICAP
SP
40CPR 136: AA
40CBR 136: AA
40CER 136: ColorinBtric
40CFR 136: AA
40CFR 136: Ddst./Col. Mea.
40CER 136: DLst./Col. Mea.
40CFR 136: AA
40CFR 136: AA
40CFR 136: AA
40CBR 136: AA
Etist./I.E.
46CER 136: AA
40CFR 136: AA
40CRR 136
94: Dig/SflCl
40CER 136: Ed.st.A-E.
40CFR 136
40CER136
Electrochemical
Electrochemical
-------
TABLE V-1
SCREENING AND VERIFICATION ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
Notes
40CFR 136: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 136.
SP - Sanpling and Analysis Proซ"*ปATres for Screening of Industrial Effluents for Priority Pollutants,
U.S. EPA, March, 1977, Revised April, 1977.
VP - Analytical Methods for the Verification Phase of BAT Review,
U.S. EPA, June, 1977.
SM - Standard Methods, 14th Edition.
ICAP - Inductively Coupled Argon Plasna.
AA - Atonic Absorption.
L-L Extract; GC,ECD - Liquid-Liquid Extraction/Gas Chronatography, Electron Capture Detection.
Dig/SnCl2 - Digestion/Stannous Chloride.
u> Filt./Grav. - Filtration/Gravimetric
ฐ Freon Ext. - Freon Extraction
Dist./Col. Mea. - Distillation/pvridine pyrazolcne colorimetric
Dist.AซE. - Distillation/Ion Electrode
QC-FID - Gas Chranatography - Flame lonization Detection.
SIE - Selective Ion Electrode
-------
TABLE V-2
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U>
O
u>
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
1.
2.
3.
tt.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
11.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
31.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
10.
11.
42.
13.
11.
45.
46.
DCP Data
KTBP, BTBP
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Aery Ion itrile
Benzene
Benzidine
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
1, 2 Dichloroethane
1,1,1 Trlchlorethane
Hexachloroethane
1,1 Dichloroethane
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane
Chloroethane
Bis Chloromethyl Ether
Bis 2-Chloroethyl Ether
2-Chloroethyl Vinly Ether
2-Chloronaphthalene
2,1,6 Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
2 Chlorophenol
1,2 Dichlorobenzene
1,3 Dichlorobenzene
1,1 Dichlorobenzene
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine
1,1 Dichloroethylene
1,2 Trans-Dichloroethylene
2,4 Dichlorophenol
1,2 Dichloropropane
1,2 Dichloropropylene
2,4 Dimethylphenol
2,4 Dinitrotoluene
2,6 Dinitrotoluene
1,2 Diphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
4 Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether
1 Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Bis (2 Chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bis (2 Chloroethoxy) Methane
Methylene Chloride
Methyl Chloride
Methyl Bromide
Plant
Influent
Cone.
roq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.530
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.024
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone.
roq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.061
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.027
ND
ND
Effluent
Cone.
roq/1
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.013
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.61
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NO
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.044
ND
ND
-------
TABLE V-2
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
51.
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.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
CADMIUM
DCP Data
KTBP, BTBP
Bromoform
Dichlorobromomethane
Trichlorof luorocne thane
Dichlorodif luoromethane
Ch lorod ibromomethane
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
2 Nitrophenol
4 Nitrophenol
2,4 Dinitrophenol
4,6 Dinitro-o-cresol
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
B-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol 0,2
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-N-butyl Phthalate
Di-N-octyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
1,2 Benzanthracene
Benzo (A) Pyrene
3,4 Benzof luoranthene
11, 12 -Benzof luoranthene
Chrysene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
1, 12-Benzoperylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthracene
Indenopyrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene 0,1
Vinyl Chloride
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Chlordane
4,4 DDT
SUBCATEGORY
Plant Raw
Influent Waste
Cone. Cone.
mq/1 mg/1
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
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
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
*
ND
ND
ND
VD
ND
Effluent
Cone.
mq/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.025
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
*
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-2
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
O
01
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
111.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
4, 4 DDE
4,4 DDD
Alpha-Endosul fan
Beta-Endosulfan
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxlde
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Gamma -BHC (Lindane)
Delta-BHC
PCB- 12
-------
TABLE V-2
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
O
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Oil and Grease
Phenols (Total)
Phosphorus
Sodium
Strontium
TSS
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
DCP Data Plant
KTBP, BTB"P Influent
Cone.
ma/1
<0 . 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
7.8
0.03
<0.006
6.0
<0.005
ND
8.8
NA
<5.0
0.05
<0.006
<0.002
<0.002
Raw
Haste
Cone.
mg/1
1.00
7.00
0.10
<0.06
<5.00
<0.005
0.05
400.
NA
368.
0.30
<0.06
<0.02
<0.02
Effluent
Cone.
mq/1
<1.00
7.00
0.09
<0.06
<5.00
0.009
ND
510.
NA
338.
<0.08
<0.06
<0.02
<0.02
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ฑNA
NA
ND
Not detected
NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes 6 Alkyl Epoxides since laboratory analysis were
not finalized for these parameters) .
KTBP Known to be present indicated by number of plants*
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by number of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates < .01 mg/1.
** Indicates < .005 mg/1.
* For asbestos analysis; indicates presence of chrysotile fibers.
-------
TABLE V- 3
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
O
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.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGOPY
DCP Data
KTBP. BTBP
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Acrylontirile
Benzene
Benzidine
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
1,2 Dichloroethane
1,1,1 Trichloroethane
Hexachloroe thane
1,1 Dichloroethane
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1,1,2,2 Tetrchloroethane
Chloroethane
Bis Chloromethyl Ether
Bis 2-Chloroethyl Ether
2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether
2-Chloronapthalene
2,4,6 Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
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
1,2 Dichloropropylene
2,4 Dimethylphenol
2,4 Dinitrotoluene
2,6 Dinitrotoluene
1,2 Diphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
4 Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether
Plant
Influent
Cone.
mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.055
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone.
mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.013
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.038
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-3
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
O
00
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.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
DCP Data
KTBP. BTEP
4 Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Bis (2 Chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bis (2 Chloroethoxy) Methane
Methylene Chloride
Methyl Chloride
Methyl Bromide
Bromoform
Dichlorobromomethane
Trichlorofluorome thane
Dichlorodi ฃ luorome 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
Benzo (A) Pyrene
3,4 Benzof luorathene
11, 12-Benzofluoranthene
Chrysene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
1, 12-Benzoperylene
Fluorene
Plant
Influent
Cone.
tng/1
ND
ND
ND
0.011
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
ND
ND
ND
0.014
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
0.024
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-3
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
DCP Data
CJ
o
vo
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.
121.
122.
123.
Phenanthrene
1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthracene
Indenopyrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Chlordane
4,4 DDT
4,4 DDE
4,4 ODD
Alpha-Endosulfan
Beta-Endosulfan
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Gamma-BHC (Lindane)
Delta-BHC
PCB-1242
PCB-1254
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
Toxaphene
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
0,2
Plant
Influent
Cone.
sa/I .
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.005 <0
<0.005 <0
ND
<0.001 <0
0.001 0
0.005 2
0.068 0
ND
0.025 0
Raw
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
.005
.005
*
.001
.002
.06
.118
ND
.044
<0.001 <0.001
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-3
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
CJ
M
O
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
Plant
Influent
DCP Data Cone.
KTBP, BTBP mq/1
Nickel 0.060
Selenium <0.005
Silver 0.003
Thallium <0.050
Zinc 0.018
2,3,7,8 TCDD (dioxin) ND
Xylenes NA
Alkyl Epoxides NA
Aluminum - - 0.086
Ammonia
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Cobalt
Fluoride
Gold
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Oil and Grease
Phenols (Total)
Phosphorus
Sodium
Strontium
TSS
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
NA
0.016
0.040
15.4
0.011
1.7
NA
0.091
3.47
0.007
<0.001
ND
ND
ND
5.73
NA
ND
0.012
0.001
0.030
<0.001
Raw
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
0.067
<0.005
0.012
<0.050
0.045
ND
NA
NA
0.104
NA
2.67
0.116
15.9
0.006
1.7
NA
0.122
3.66
0.008
0.001
ND
ND
ND
6.06
NA
21.
0.006
0.001
0.030
0.001
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND Not detected
NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes C Alkyl Epoxides since laboratory analysis
were not finalized for these parameters).
KTBP Known to be present indicated by number of plants.
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by number of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates < 0.01 mg/1.
** Indicates < 0.005 mg/1.
* For asbestos analysis; indicates presence of chrysotile fibers.
-------
TABLE V-4
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
1.
2.
3.
a.
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.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
LEAD
DCP Data
KTBP, BTBP
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Aery Ion itrile
Benzene
Benzidlne
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
1,2 Dichloroethane 0,1
1,1,1 Tr ichlorethane 0,5
Hexachloroethane
1,1 Dichloroethane
1,1,2 Trichloroe thane
1,1,2,2 Te trachloroe thane
Chloroethane
Bis Chloromethyl Ether
Bis 2-Chloroethyl Ether
2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether
2-Chloronaphthalene
2,4,6 Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
2 Chlorophenol
1,2 Dichlorobenzene
1,3 Dichlorobenzene
1,4 Dichlorobenzene
3,3 Dichlorobenzidine
1,1 Dichloroethylene
1,2 Trans-Dichloroethylene
2,4 Die h lorophenol
1,2 Dichloropropane
1,2 Dichloropropylene
2,4 Dimethylphenol
2,4 Dinitrotoluene
2,6 Dinitrotoluene
1,2 Diphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
4 chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether
4 Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Bis (2 Chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bis (2 Chloroethoxy) Methane
Methylene Chloride 6,0
Methyl Chloride
Methyl Bromide
SUBCATEGORY
Plant
Influent
Cone.
ma/1
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND 0.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.017
ND
ND
Raw
Haste
Cone.
mq/1
*
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
025
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
*
ND
ND
Effluent
Cone.
ma/1
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
0.029
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.012
ND
VD
-------
TABLE V-4
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
M
to
17. Bromofortn
a8. Dichlorobromomethane
U9. Trichlorofluoromethane
50. Dichlorodifluoromethane
51. Chlorodibromomethane
52. Hexachlorobutadlene
53. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. Isophorone
55. Naphthalene
56. Nitrobenzene
57. 2 Nitrophenol
58. 4 Nitrophenol
59. 2,4 Dinitrophenol
60. 4,6 Dinitro-o-cresol
61. N-Nitrosodimethylamine
62. B-Nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine
64. Pentachlorophenol
65. Phenol
66. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
67. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
68. Di-N-butyl Phthalate
69. Di-N-octyl Phthalate
70. Diethyl Phthalate
71. Dimethyl Phthalate
72. 1,2 Benzanthracene
73. Benzo (A) Pyrene
74. 3,4 Benzofluoranthene
75. 11, 12-Benzofluoranthene
76. Chrysene
77. Acenaphthylene
78. Anthracene
79, 1,12-Benzoperylene
80. Fluorene
81. Phenanthrene
82. 1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthracene
83. Indenopyrene
84. Pyrene
85. Tetrachloroethylene
86. Toluene
87. Trichloroethylene
88. Vinyl Chloride
89. Aldrin
90. Dieldrin
91. Chlordane
92. 4,4 DDT
LEAD
DCP Data
KTBP, BTBP
0,4
ne
0,6
ne
alate
e
e
0,1
SUBCATEGORY
Plant
Influent
Cone.
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone.
ND
*
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
0.135
0.017
*
0.140
ND
ND
ND
0.032
ND
*
0.032
ND
ND
*
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Effluent
Cone.
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
0.016
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
0.007
ND
ND
0.007
ND
ND
*
MD
*
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
MA
MA
NA
*
*
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-4
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
H
OJ
LEAD SOBCATEGORY
DCP Data Plant Raw
KTBP, BTBP Influent Waste
Cone. Cone.
93.
9
-------
TABLE V-4
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
u>
LEAD SOBCATEGORY
DCP Data Plant Raw
KTBP, BTBP Influent Waste
Cone.
mg/1
Gold
Iron
Magnesim
Manganese
Molybdenum
Oil and Grease
Phenols (Total)
Phosphorus
Sodium
Strontium
TSS
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
ND
<0.2
1.800
0.090
0.020
7.30
ND
0.010
<0.015
NA
ND
0.060
0.040
<0.01
<0.02
Cone.
mq/1
ND
2.00
2.20
0.06
0.008
36.5
0.08
0.58
100.
NA
57.8
0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
Effluent
Cone.
mq/1
ND
<0.2
2.10
0.03
<0.005
10.0
<0.005
0.04
260.
NA
90.6
<0.005
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
Analysis
Blark
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
Not detected
NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes E AlKyl Epoxides since laboratory analysis were
not finalized for these parameters).
KTBP Known to be present indicated by number of plants.
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by number of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates 5 .01 mg/1.
** Indicates S .005 mg/1.
-------
TABLE V-5
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
OJ
I-1
Ui
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.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
DCP
KTBP,
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
Aery Ion itr lie
Benzene
Benzldine
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trlchlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
1, 2 Dichloroethane
1, 1,1 Trichlore thane
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
2 -Chloronaphthalene
2,4,6 Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
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
1,2 Dichloropropylene
2,4 Dimethylphenol
2,4 Dinitrotoluene
2,6 Dinitrotoluene
1,2 Diphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
4 Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether
4 Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Bis (2 Chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bis (2 Chloroethoxy) Methane
Methylene Chloride 1
Methyl Chloride
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
Data Plant
BTBP Influent
Cone*
mq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.043
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
,0 *
ND
Raw
Haste
Cone.
mq/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.006
ND
-------
TABLE V-5
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U>
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
DCP Data Plant
KTBP, BTBP Influent
Cone.
mq/1
46. MethylBromide
47. Bromoform
U8. Dichlorobromomethane
49. Trichlorof luoromethane
50. Dichlorodif luoromethane
51. Chlorodibromomethane
52. Hexachlorobutadiene
53. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. Isophorone
55. Na pht ha lene
56. Nitrobenzene
57. 2 Nitrophenol
58. 4 Nitrophenol
59. 2,1 Dinitrophenol
60. 4,6 Dinitro-o-cresol
61. N-Nitrosodimethylamine
62. B-Nitrosodi penny lamine
63. N-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine
61. Pentachlorophenol
65. Phenol
66. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
67. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
68. Di-N-butyl Phthalate
69. Di-N-octyl Phthalate 0,1
70. Diethyl Phthalate
71. Dimethyl Phthalate
72. 1,2 Benzanthracene
73. Benzo (A) Pyrene
74. 3,4 Benzofluoranthene
75. 11, 12-Benzofluoranthene
76. Chrysene
77. Acenaphthylene
78. Anthracene
79. 1, 12-Benzoperylene
80. Fluorene
81. Phenanthrene
82. 1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthracene
83. Indenopyrene
84 . Pyrene
85. Tetrachloroethylene 0,1
86. Toluene 0,2
87. Trichloroethylene 0,1
88. Vinyl Chloride 0,1
89. Aldrin
90. Dieldrin
91. Chlordane
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Paw
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
ND
ND
ro
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
*
*
*
ND
0.016
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
TO
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
HA
NA
MA
-------
TABLE V-5
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
CO
h-1
-J
LECLANCHE SUBCATECjyKY
DCP Data Plant
KTBP, BTBP Influent
Cone.
mq/1
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113;
111.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
4,4 DDT
4,4 DDE
4,4 DDD
Alpha-Endosul fan
Beta-Endosulfan
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
AlphaBHC
BetaBHC
GammaBHC (Lindane)
DeltaBHC
PCB1242
PCB1254
PCB1221
PCB1232
PCB1248
PCB1260
PCB1016
Toxaphene
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
2,3,7,8 TCDD (Dioxin)
Xylenes
Alkyl Epoxides
Aluminum
Ammonia
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Cobalt
0,3
0,4
0,5
1.2
4,2
4,3
5,1
1,3
1,0
0,2
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
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
<0.001
<0.002
<0.005
<0.009
ND
<0.02
0.020
<0.005
ND
<0.001
ND
0.080
NA
NA
NA
<0.09
NA
0.010
0.100
52.000
<0.002
Paw
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.00
ND
ND
<0.01
0.10
0.20
1.00
0.018
0.018
6.00
4.00
ND
<0.01
ND
2000.
NA
NA
NA
<0.09
ND
0.40
2.00
150.
<0.02
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
MA
NA
-------
TABLE V-5
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
Fluoride
Gold
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Oil and Grease
Phenols (Total)
Phosphorus
Sodium
M Strontium
oo TSS
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Yttrium
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
DCP Data Plant
KTBP, BTBP Influent
Cone .
mg/1
-,- 1.200
-,- ND
-,- <0.10
-,- 7.500
-,- 0.02
-,- <0.006
-,- ND
-,- 1.600
-,- 0.2UO
-,- 66.00
-,- NA
-,- ND
-,- <0.008
-,- <0.006
-,- <0.002
-,- <0.002
Raw
Waste
Cone .
mg/1
2.20
ND
5.00
33.00
10.0
0.20
ND
1U.9
0.82
180.
NA
1630.
3.00
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone .
mg/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
Not detected
NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes 5 Alkyl Epoxides since laboratory analysis were
not finalized for these parameters) .
KTBP Known to be present indicated by number of plants.
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by number of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates < .01 mg/1.
** Indicates < .005 mg/1.
-------
TABLE V-6
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
VO
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.
Acenaphthene
Acrolein
AeryIonitrile
Eenzene
Benzidine
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
Bexachlorohenzene
1,2 Dichloroethane
1.1,1 Trichloroethane
Hexachloroethane
1,1 Dichloroethane
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane
chloroethane
Bis Chloromethyl Ether
Eis 2-Chloroethyl Ether
2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether
2-Chloronaphthalene
2,4,6 Trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
,2 Dichlorobenzene
,3 Dichlorobenzene
,4 Dichlorobenzene
,3 Dichlorobenzidine
,1 Dichloroethylene
,2 Trans-Dichloroe
,4 Dichlorophenol
,2 Dichloropropane
,2 Dichloropropylene
2,4 Dimethylphenol
2,4 Dinitrotoluene
2,6 Dinitrotoluene
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
Plant Raw>
Influent Haste
DCP Data Cone. Cone.
KTBP. BTBP mq/1 mq/1
ND
ND
MD
ND
ND
i ND
ND
ne ND
ND
ND
ie ND
ND
ND
e ND
thane ND
ND
ter KD
her ND
Ether ND
ND
1 ND
ND
0.055
ND
ND
ND
ND
>e ND
i ND
hylene ND
ND
ND
ie ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.013
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.038
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
ND
ND
Analysis Raw*
Blank Waste
Cone . Cone .
mq/1 mq/1
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.012
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-6
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
OJ
to
o
37.
38,
39.
40.
41.
42.
13.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
SO.
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.
1,2 Oiphenylhydrazine
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
4 Chlorophenyl Pi
4 Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Bis (2-Chloroiaop
Bis (2-Chloroetho
Hethylene Chloride
Methyl Chloride
Methyl Bromide
Bromoform
CichlorobronoMethane
Trichlorofluoronethane
Dichlorodifluoronethane
Chlorodibronomethane
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
2 Nitrophenol
4 Nitrophenol
2,4 Dinltrophenol
4,6 Dinitro-o-cresol
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
B-Nitrosodiphenylamine
M-Nitrosodi-N-propylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-N-butyl Phthalate
Di-N-octyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
1,2 Benzanthracene
Benzo (A) Pyrene
3,4 Benzofluoranthene
11, 12-Benzofluoranthene
CCP Data
KTBP. BTBP
>e
'1 Ether
Ether
yl) Ether
Methane
i
me
tane
i
idiene
.ne
ne
amine
'hthalate
ite
\
i
ie
hene
LITHIUM SUECATEGORY
Plant Raw*
Influent Haste
Cone. Cone.
ปq/l nq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.011
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
0.014
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
0.024
ND
*
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis Raw*
Blank Waste
Cone * Cone .
ma/1 nq/1
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ซ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.016
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.013
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TABLE V-6
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
U)
to
76. Chrysene
77. Acenaphthylene
78. Anthracene
79. 1,12-Benzoperylene
80. Fluorene
81. Phenanthrene
82. 1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthracene
83. Indenopyrene
84. Pyrene
85. letrachloroethylene
86. Toluene
87. Irlchloroethylene
88. Vinyl Chloride
89. Aldrin
90. Dieldrin
91. Chlordane
92. 4,4 DD1
93. 4,4 DDE
94. 4,4 ODD
95. Alpha-Endosulfan
96. Beta-Endosulfan
97. Endosulfan Sulfate
98. Endrin
99. Endrin Aldehyde
100. Heptachlor
101. Heptachlor Epoxide
102. Alpha-BHC
103. Eeta-BHC
104. Gamma-BHC (Llndane)
105. Celta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108, FCE-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. FCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. loxaphene
LITHIUM SOBCATEGCRY
Plant Raw*
Influent Haste
DCP Data Cone. Cone.
KTBP. BTBP mq/1 mq/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
acene 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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Raw*
Waste
Cone.
mq/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mq/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
ซ
1
>
Ul
hj
0)
<
e
CO
H
g
(0
w
B
(0
&H
CO
X
,-J
<
z
<
i
M
z
u
u
Qt
O
CO
?*
a
u
C9
M
g*
<
^^
CD
D
CO
jjj
H
S
H
M
ป-)
CO
t^
ax .
~* n e*\
e ซ o E
a*
N 4J U fl
3 a CN
10 10 O 0
ซn f i &
** w B
CO
ax
_j jft ฃ V.
^^ o o ^ n ^ in *">
roofnooovo^iCOD^tncn P* m ซc U^CDO o o o o
v v M in v M
zzzzzzzzzzzzzSzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
N o m
in ^ in ป- in ป v ซ0ซe o^o^
o o >e o o o o a < < o ซ rป ^ o < M in ^" (Nป~O^
(N o ซo o i ซ z z z o z o o w or* z o o 9 o o z z orป as zo oe o
oooo - vv v
v v
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
*- i i i i i i i i i i i t i i i i i i i i i i
o
^
c
X
o
>. ซ 3 6
C O O -H 6 3 V
O'^^'H 3*H W "U
860) ^*H S Q>f4
30ICO>f-4
CO ซ W 3 (0
* 0) C-H 8
f*. C -*-H C 3
B ฃ
3 -P-*
H -ป U
01-<
a 10
m *J
V O
B u e* a
B 01 3 W 3 B
3 CD C U 3
E'Hvv'oao -H
3i C 7) ~^ O
6 B
3 9
322
-------
TABLE V-6
SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
ND Not detected
NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes & Alkyl Epoxides since laboratory
analysis were not finalized for these parameters).
KTBP Known to be present indicated by number of plants.
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by number of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates < .01 mg/1.
** Indicates < .005 mg/1.
1. Heat Paper Production Wastewater
2. Cathode Process Wastewater
+ For asbestos analysis; indicates presence of chrysotile fibers
-------
TRBU3 V-7
9CEEENIN3 ANALYSIS RESULTS
to
DCP
KEBP,
1 Aoenaphthene
2 Acrolein
3 Acrylonitrile
4 Benzene
5 Benzidine
6 Carbon Tetrachloride
7 Chlorobenzene
8 1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
9 Hexachlorobenaene
10 1,2 Dichloroethane
11 1,1,1 Trichloroethane
12 Hexachloroethane
13 1,1 Dixiiloroethane
14 1,1,2 Tridiloroethane
15 1,1,2,2 Tetrachloroethane
16 Chloroethane
17 Bis Chlorcmethyl Ether
18 Bis 2-Chloroethyl Ether
19 2-Chloroetnyl Vinyl Ether
20 2Kliloronaphthalene
21 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol
22 Parachlorametacresol
23 Chloroform
24 Chlorcphenol
25 1,2 Dichlorobenzene
26 1,3 Dichlorobenzene
27 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
28 3,3 Dichlorobenzidine
29 1,1 Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 Trans^idiLorcethylene
31 2,4 Dichlorophenol
32 1,2 Dichlorcprcpane
33 1,2 Dichloropropylene
34 2,4 Dimethylfhsnol
35 2,4 Dirdtrotoluene
36 2,6 Dinitrotolxiene
37 1,2 Difhenylhydrazine
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGOpy
Data Plant Raw
BTBP Influent Vfaste
Gone. Cone. I/
rag/1 mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.055
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
0.013
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.038
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
Plant Raw
Influent Waste
Cone. Cone. 2/
mg/1 mg/1
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.380
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.155
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone. 3/
mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.140
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
>l
I
In
>\
ggggggigggiggggggggggggggg^gggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggg*gggggggg
gggggg, gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggogggggggggggggggggggปg
-------
V-7
ANAUfsrs rasucrs
75 11,12-Benaoflxiaeanthene
76 Chrysene
77 Acenaphthylene
78 Anthracene
79 1,12-Benzcperylene
80 Fluorene
81 Phsnanthrene
82 1,2,5,6 Dibenzanthraoene
83 Indenopyrene
84 Pyrene
85 Ifetrachlocroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Ttiฃiilocoethylene
88 Viiyl Chloride
89 Aldrin
90 Dieldrin
91 Qilordane
92 4,4 DOT
93 4,4 ECE
94 4,4 DCD
95 Alpha-Endoeulf an
96 Beta-Qidosulf an
97 End3sulfan Sulf ate
98 fiidrin
99 Bidrin Aldehyde
100 Heptachlor
101 Heptachlor Epoxide
102 Alpha-HC
103 Beta-HC
104 Gatma-aC (Undane)
105 Delta-HC
106 PCB-1242
107 PCB-1254
108 PCB-1221
109 PCB-1232
110 PCB-1248
111 PGB-1260
MAGNESIUM ffVT
DGP Data Plant
KEEP, BEEP Influent
Cone.
mj/1
ND
ND
1C
ND
1C
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
AJ|WA iflf
Raw
Waste
Gene. V
ag/l
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Gone.
roj/1
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Plant
Influent
Gone.
mcf/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Cone. 2/
mj/1
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
Waste
Gone. V
rag/1
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
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-------
TRBUB V-7
SLJW4MIMS ANALYSIS RESULTS
MAGNESIUM SOBGKTB30Ry
DCP Data Plant Raw
KEEP, BTBP Influent Waste
Gone. Cone. I/
mg/1 mg/1
112 PCB-1016
113 Tbxaptene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
116 Asbestos
117 Beryllium
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
121 Cyanide
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
127 Thallium
128 Zinc
129 2,3,7,8H^trachlorodLbenacr
p^dioxin (TCED)
Aluminum
Ammonia
Barium
Boron
BCD
Calcium
Chlorides
Cobalt
COD
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Oil and Grease
Phenols (Tbtal)
Sodium
Tin
1C
ND
< 0.005
< 0.005
1,0 ND
< 0.001
0,1 0.001
1,2 0.005
0.068
ND
0.025
0.001
0.060
< 0.005
0.003
<0.050
0.018
ND
-,- 0.086
NA
-,- 0.016
-,- 0.040
NA
-,- 15.4
NA
0.011
-,- NA
-,- 0.091
-,- 3.47
-,- 0.007
-,- <0.001
ND
-,- ND
-,- 5.73
-,- 0.012
ND
ND
< 0.005
<0.005
+
<0.001
0.001
2.06
0.118
ND
0.044
0.001
0.067
<0.005
0.012
<0,050
0.045
ND
0.104
NA
2.67
0.116
NA
15.9
NA
0.006
ND
0.122
3.66
0.008
0.001
ND
ND
6.06
0.006
Analysis
Blank
Gone.
mgA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Plant Raw
Influent Waste
Cone. Cone. 2/
mg/1 mg/1
ND
ND
<0.015
< 0.015
+
0.001
< 0.005
<0.01
0.015
ND
< 0.050
< 0.0003
< 0.050
< 0.015
< 0.002 4/
< 0.015
0.066
ND
0.300
< 0.050
0.013
<0.020
<1.000
6.460
17.0
<0.005
<5.00
0.064
2.210
<0.010
< 0.010
<0.500
< 0.020
24.500
< 0.010
ND
ND
<0.015
< 0.015
+
<0.001
<0.005
<0.01
0.011
ND
< 0.050
Raw
Waste
Cone. 3/
mgA
ND
ND
< 0.015
<0.015
+
< 0.001
<0.005
0.088
0.180
ND
< 0.050
<0.0003 <0.0004
<0.050
<0.015
0.039
<0.015
0.035
ND
0.260
2.013
0.015
< 0.020
40.268
6.720
54.309
<0.005
140.0
< 0.030
2.380
< 0.010
< 0.010
< 0.500
0.001
300.0
< 0.010
< 0.050
< 0.015
V 0.248 4/
<0.015
0.130
ND
0.270
0.004
0.015
< 0.020
NA
7.740
2010.
< 0.005
NA
0.560
2.470
0.014
<0.010
< 0.500
0.004
24.60
<0.010
-------
TKEOLE V-7
ANALYSIS RESDUS
MAGNESIUM SUBCACTXPY
DCP Data Plant Raw Analysis Plant Raw Raw
KTBP, BEEP Influent Waste Blank Influent Waste Waste
Cone. Gone. V Cone. Cone. Cone. 2/ Gone. 3/
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
Titanium
TOC
TSS
Vanadium
Yttrium
-,- 0.001
-,- NA
-,- ND
-,- 0.030
-,- < 0.001
0.001
NA
21.0
0.030
0.001
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.005
<2.000
< 1.000
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
42.201
0.705
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.530
NA
0.283
<0.005
<0.005
ND Not detected.
w NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes & Al>yl E^oxLdes since laboratory analyses were not finalized for these parameters).
K) KEEP Known to be present indicated by number of plants.
BIBP Believed to be present indicated by nuntoer of plants.
-,- Not investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates ฃ.01 rag/1.
** Indicates ฃ.005 mg/1.
I/ Process water from heat paper production.
2/ Process water from silver chloride surface reduced cathode element.
V Process water from silver chloride electrolytically oxidized cathode element.
ฃ/ Silver analysis done by B>A ftethad 272.1 or 272.2.
+ for asbestos analysis; indicates presence of chrysotile fibers.
-------
TMCJE V-8
saaaoNS ANALYSIS RESUUTS
u>
N)
^ryu^ 9dBCytH3Uty
OOP Data Plant Raw Effluent
IOTP, BTBP Influent Waste Cbnc.
Cone. Gone.
mg/1 mg/1 raj/1
2 Acrolein
3 Acrylonitrile
4 Danzene
5 Banzldlne
6 Carbon Tetrachloride
7 Chlnrobenzene
8 1,2,4 Trichlorobenzene
9 Hexachlorobenzene
10 1,2 Dichloroethane
11 1,1,1 Trichloroathane
12 HeKachloroethane
13 1,1 Dichloroethane
14 1,1,2 TricMoroethane
15 1,1,2,2 Tetrachlotoetlaie
16 Chloroethane
17 Bis Chloranethyl Ether
18 Bis 2-Ghloroethyl Ether
19 2-Chloroathyl Vinyl Ether
20 2-<3iloronaphthalene
21 2,4,6 TrichLDrophenol
22 Rarachlorcmetacresol
23 Chloroform
24 2-Chlorophenol
25 1,2 Dichlorobenzene
26 1,3 Dichlorobenzene
27 1,4 Dichlorobenzene
28 3,3 Dichlorobanzidine
29 1,1 Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 TransHMriiloroethylene
31 2,4 Dichloropherol
32 1,2 Dichloroptopane
33 1,2 Dichloropropylene
34 2,4 Dimetฑylrhenol
35 2,4 Dinitrotoluene
36 2,6 Dinitrotoluene
37 1,2 Diphenylhydrazine
38 Ethylbenzene
*rป
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1,0 ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.086
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
UA
NA
ND
ND
*
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
4.2
NA
0.018
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.64
0.016
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
i^^
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
6.4
ND
0.079
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.42
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.032
Analysis
Blank
Cbnc.
mg/1
fcJK
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
Plant
Influent
Cone.
mg/1
Wl
NU
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw
M- r-fr
waste
Osnc.
105/1
IOT
ru
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Effluent
Ctanc.
wg/l.
ftjr%
WU
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
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mgfl
MIL
NA
ND
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
NA
NA
ND
ND
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
-------
BfflUB V-6
ANAUSI3 RESLJCTS
ZBC SUUKUUCJRF
U)
u>
o
DCP Data
KIBP, BMP
39 Cluaranthene
40 4 Chloraphenyl Phenyl Ether
41 4 Bramphenyl Phenyl Ether
42 Bis (2 Chloroiscprcpyl) Ether
43 Bis (2 Oiloroetnoxy) Methane
44 Methylene Chloride 1,1
45 Methyl Chloride
46 Methyl Bromide
47 Brtnrtfocra
48 Didilorobroncraethane
49 Tridilorofluoranethane
50 Di<*ilorodlf luororaethane
51 Ghlogodibroianethane
52 Hexachlorobutadiene
53 Hexachlonxyclapentadiene
54 Isophorone
55 Naphthalene
56 Nitrobenzene
57 2 Nitrophenol
58 4 Nitrophenol
59 2,4 Dinitrophenol
60 4,6 Dinitro-oxTiesol
61 N-Nitrosodimethylamine
62 N-Kitrosodiphenylamine
63 N-Nitzosodi-N-FCopylamine
64 Pantachlorophenol
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
67 Butyl Benzyl Ptithalate
68 Di-N-butyl Phthalate
69 Di-N-octyl Phthalate
70 Diethyl Phthalate
71 Dimathyl Phthalate
72 1,2 Benzanthraoene
73 BenzD (A) Pyrene
74 3,4 Benzoluoranthane
75 11,12-Benzoflunranthene
76 dirysene
77 Aoenaphthylene
Plant
Influent
Cone.
mg/1
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
ND
*
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw Effluent
Haste Cone.
Cone.
mg/1 mg/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.35
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8.4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.190
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.06
*
ND
*
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mg/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Plant
Influent
Cone.
mg/1
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
ND
ND
ND
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Raw Effluent
Waste Cone.
Cone.
mg/1 mg/1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.022
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.040
ND
0.012
*
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.031
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.027
*
0.031
*
*
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
mg/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.018
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
TSMU! V-8
ajRBBCNS ANALYSIS PB3UMS
ZDC 9UBCMBQOW
DCP Data Plant Rw
KTH>, BTBP Influent Haste
Gone. Gone.
mg/1
Effluent Analysis Plant Ifew
Obnc. Blank Influant Haste
Gone. Gone. Oonc.
rag/1 mg/1 rag/1 mg/1
Effluent Analysis
Cbnc- Blank
Oonc.
roj/1 mg/1
U>
(jJ
78 Anthracene
79 1,12-Benaoperylene
80 Fluonene
81 Phenanthrene
82 1,2,5,6 QLbenzanthraoene
83 Indanopyrene
84 Pyrene
85 Ttetrachloroethylene
86 Itoluene
87 Trlchlotoethylene
88 Vinyl Chloride
89 Aldrin
90 Dieldrin
91 Chlnrdane
92 4,4 DDT
93 4,4 CCE
94 4,4 DDD
95 Alpha-Bvfbsulfan
96 BetaHMosulf an
97 En&sulfan Sulf ate
98 Endrin
99 Endrin AMahyde
100 feptachlor
101 Heptachlor Bpoxida
102 Alpha-arc
103 Beta-HC
104 Grana-BC (Undane)
105 Delta-arc
106 PC8-1242
107 PCB-1254
108 PCB-1221
109 PCB-1232
110 PGB-1248
111 PCB-1260
112 PCB-1016
113 TtaKaphane
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
116 Asbestos
0,1
2,0
1,0
1,0
ND
ND
HD
1C
ND
ND
HD
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.025
0.11
0.39
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.07
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
*
0.055
0.045
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
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
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
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
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
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
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
ND
ND
ND
ND
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
SCVBMDG MAUSIS REMITS
OJ
OOP Data Plant
IOTP, B1BP Influent
Gone.
117 Beryllium
118 Cadmium 0,1
119 Chromium 5,0
120 Copper
121 Cyanide 1,2
122 Lead 0,1
123 Mercury 12,0
124 Nickel 1,0
125 Selenium
126 Silver 6,0
127 Thallium
128 Zinc 13,2
129 2,3,7,8 tOX) (Dicxin)
130 Xylenes
131 Alkyl Epooddas
Aluminum -,-
Ammonia ~,~
Barium -,-
Boron -,-
Calcium -,-
Cobalt -,-
Fluoride -,-
Gold -,-
Iron -,-
Magnesium -,-
Manganese -,-
Molybdenum -,-
Oil and Grease -,-
Pherols (Tttal) -,-
Phoaphorus -,-
Sodium -,-
Strontium -,-
TSS -,-
Tin -,-
Titanium -,-
Vanadium -,-
Yttriun -,-
<0.001
<0.002
<0.005
< 0.006
ND
<0.02
ZINC SUBCXMJUWf
Raw Effluent
Waste Gone.
Cone.
mj/1 ugfl
<0.001
0.16
2.13
0.078
ND
<0.02
0.0060 110
<0.005
to
<0.001
ND
0.170
NA
NA
NA
0.068
NA
0.026
<0.05
<5.0
< 0.005
1.10
ND
0.17
2.600
<0.005
<0.005
3.3
0.018
ND
18.80
NA
ND
<0.005
< 0.015
<0.012
< 0.016
< 0.005
ND
0.192
ND
21.0
NA
NA
NA
0.387
NA
0.029
0.316
<5.0
<0.005
2.65
ND
2.06
1.50
0.45
0.015
6.00
0.110
1.73
1570
NA
270
<0.005
< 0.015
<0.12
<0.16
<0.00l
<0.002
<0.005
0.047
ND
<0.02
0.06
<0.005
0.08
0.036
ND
0.226
NA
NA
NA
0.217
NA
0.358
0.321
<5.0
<0.005
1.90
ND
62.8
1.90
0.377
<0.005
3.7
0.180
1.54
1580
NA
38.0
<0.005
<0.015
<0.12
<0.16
Analysis
Blank
Cone.
0g/l
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Plant
Influent
Oonc.
mg/1
<0.001
<0.002
0.020
0.030
<0.005
<0.02
0.100
<0.005
ND
<0.001
ND
0.200
NA
NA
NA
<0.09
0.12
<0.006
<0.08
66.0
<0.002
0.13
ND
<0.1
30.00
<0.006
<0.006
1.0
ND
0.11
4.20
NA
5.0
<0.008
< 0.006
<0.002
<0.002
RM
Haste
Gone.
ND
0.060
0.020
0.100
0.001
0.100
0.800
0.010
0.080
0.010
ND
10
NA
NA
NA
3.00
11.3
<0.006
<0.08
25.0
0.003
0.44
ND
0.50
5.90
2.00
0.04
8.00
ND
410
428
0.07
0.02
0.002
0.002
Effluent
Cbnc.
rag/1
<0.001
0.030
0.020
0.100
0.001
0.100
0.800
0.050
ND
0.020
ND
40
NA
NA
NA
2.00
1.81
<0.006
<0.08
14.0
0.004
0.23
ND
0.30
3.10
0.80
0.02
8.00
0.001
260
476.6
0.05
0.01
0.004
0.003
Analysis
Blank
done.
nc/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-------
1ABCE V-8
ANALYSIS PESHL/PS
ZINC 9UBCMB30RY
DCP Data Plant Raw Effluent Analysis Plant Raw Effluent Analysis
KHBP, Bit* Influent Waste Gone. Blank Influent Haste Gone. Blank
Gone* Gone. Gone. Gone* Gone. Gone.
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
w ND Not detected.
u> NA Not analyzed (includes Xylenes & Alkyl Epoxides since laboratory analyses were not finalized for these parameters).
KTBP Known to be present indicated by ruriber of plants.
BTBP Believed to be present indicated by nuntoer of plants*
-,- Hot investigated in DCP survey.
* Indicates ^.01 mgA.
** Indicates ฃ.005 mj/l.
-------
TABLE V-9
VERIFICATION PARAMETERS
11
13
14
23
29
30
38
44
55
64
65
66
67
68
LJ 69
W 70
*" 78
81
84
85
86
87
114
115
116
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
CADMIUM
PARAMETERS SUBCATEGORY
1,1,1-Trichlo re thane
1,1-Dichlorethane
1,1, 2-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1,2 Trans-dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene Chloride X
Naphthalene
Pentachloro phenol
Phenol
Bis(2-ethyl hexyl) Phthalate
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Di-N-butyl Phthalate
Di-N-octyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene X
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos
Cadmium X
Chromium X
Copper
Cyanide X
Lead X
Mercury X
Nickel X
Selenium
Silver
CALCIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LEAD
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LECLANCHE
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LITHIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MAGNESIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ZINC
SUBCATEGORY
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-9
VERIFICATION PARAMETERS
PARAMETERS
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Barium
Cobalt
COD
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
rhenols (Total)
Strontium
Oil and Grease
TSS (Total Suspended Solids
U) pH
U)
cn
CADMIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CALCIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LEAD
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LECLANCHE
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
LITHIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
-X
X
X
MAGNESIUM
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ZINC
SUBCATEGORY
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
Cathodes
Mercuric Oxide
Fcwder Pressed
Eilver Powder
Pressed
Kickel
Powder Pressed
Dickel Electro-
deposited
Kickel Impregnated
TABLE V-10
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY PROCESS ELEMENTS
(Reported Manufacture)
Anodes
Cadmium Pasted
and Pressed
Powder
Cadmium
Electrodeposited
Cadmium
Impregnated
u>
-------
TABLE V-ll
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLOWS
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY ELEMENTS
Elements
Anodes
Pasted & Pressed
Powder
Electrodeposited
Impregnated
Cathodes
Nickel Electrode-
posited
Nickel Impregnated
Ancillary Operations
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Floor and Equipment
Wash
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder
Silver Powder
Production
Mean
Discharge
(I/kg)
2.7
697.
998.
569.
1640.
4.93
0.08
12.0
1.5
65.7
21.2
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
1.0
697.
998.
569.
1720.
3.33
0.08
2.4
1.5
65.7
21.2
Total
Raw Waste
Volume (1/yr)
(106)
0.948
80.9
179.6
0.680
274.2
4.71
0.037
7.78
0.068
27.0
0.80
Production
Normalizing
Parameter
Weight of Cadmium
Weight of Cadmium
Weight of Cadmium
Weight of Nickel Applied
Weight of Nickel Applied
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cadmium Powder Prodi
Weight of Silver Powder Produ<
Cadmium Hydroxide
Production
Nickel Hydroxide
Production
0.9
110
0.9
110.
1.60
170.0
Weight of Cadmium Used
Weight of Nickel Used
-------
TABLE V-12
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN CADMIUM PASTED AND
PRESSED POWDER ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
u>
u>
03
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Methylene chloride
87 Irichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor,
122 lead
123 Mercury
12
-------
TABLE V-13
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE CADMIUM PASTED
AND PRESSED PCWDEF ANCDE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
ing/kg
U)
uป
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Pethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor,
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
1.533
29.0
0.00
0.00
U37.0
0.017
0.000
0.155
0.152
0.077
0.000
62.1
0.813
4. U46
0.000
0.064
7.67
1239.
10.0
10.0
1.781
29.0
0.00
0.00
650.
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.952
0.623
1.193
0.000
0.023
3491.
1845.
9.6
9.6
2.680
31.0
0.00
0.00
404.6
0.000
0.000
25.32
25.19
0.054
0.000
36.18
0.938
3.082
0.000
0.166
1340.
3403.
9.0
9.0
-------
TABLE V-11
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE CADMIUM ELECTRODEPOSI1ED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
O
Temperature (Deg C)
11 Methylene chloride
87 Irichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Kercury
12
-------
TAELE V-15
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE CADMIUM ELECTPODEPOSITED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
U)
mg/kg
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Kethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor,
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
691.
24.6
0.00
0.068
74700.
0.000
0.000
14.28
I
0.000
0.4128
55.28
6.04
1566.
0.000
8.24
3490.
129600.
2.9
11.9
697.
21.6
0.00
0.069
90200.
0.423
0.000
14.12
I
0.000
0.2116
58.34
4.482
1734.
0.000
8.29
3548.
123700.
4.5
11.8
697.
24.7
0.00
0.070
32160.
0.093
0.000
16.53
I
0.093
0.3939
33.63
1.542
2835.
0.000
8.29
3815.
10400.
3.7
11.7
- Interference
-------
TABLE V-16
POLLUTAKT CCNCENTRATIONS AND MASS LOADINGS IN THE CACMIUM IMPREGNATED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
mg/kg
44
87
118
119
121
122
123
124
128
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
Kethylene chloride
Trichloroethylene
Cadirium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
lead
Fercury
Kickel
Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
21.6
*
*
63.3
0.190
I
0.060
0.020
0.000
0.0007
3.300
0.060
3.20
0.110
0.030
2.7
354.1
5.2
13.5
14.2
0.00
*
0. 110
0.100
I
0.020
0.000
0.000
0.0300
1.200
0.020
1.40
0.040
0.010
2.3
54.0
7.0
13.0
800.
21.6
0.00
0.00
50700.
152. 1
I
48.00
16.00
0.000
0.5602
2641.
48.00
2560.
88.0
24.00
2160.
283400.
5.2
13.5
1284.
14.2
0.00
0.00
141.2
128.4
I
25.70
0.000
0.000
38.52
1541.
25.70
1800.
51.36
12.80
2930.
69300.
7.0
13.0
I - Interference
* - < 0.01
-------
TAELE V-17
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE NICKEL ELECTPODEPOSITED
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 11.0 12.0 10.0
4U Fethylene chloride 0.00 * 0.00
87 Irichloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
118 Cadmium O.OU8 0.090 0.013
119 Chromium, Total 0.000 0.000 0.007
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000 0.000 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total 0.012 O.OaO 0.011
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. O.OU2 0.016 0.000
122 lead 0.000 0.000 0.000
123 Kercury 0.0160 0.000 0.0320
121 Nickel 1.980 6.01 1.550
128 Zinc 0.000 0.000 0.000
Ammonia 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cobalt 0.000 0.250 0.053
Phenols, Total 0.006 0.042 0.011
Cil 6 Grease 1.0 2.0 2.0
lotal Suspended Solids 0.0 5.0 0.0
pH, minimum 7.1 5.2 7.0
pH, maximum 7.1 5.8 7.2
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-18
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE NICKEL ELECTPODEPOSITED
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/kg
U)
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Kethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cofcalt
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
97.7
11.0
0.00
0.00
4.688
0.000
0.000
4.102
4.102
0.000
1.563
193.4
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.586
97.7
0.000
7.1
7.1
416.3
12.0
0.042
0.00
37,47
0.000
0.000
16.65
6.66
0.000
0.000
2502.
0.000
0.000
104.1
17.49
833.
2082.
5.2
5.8
1167.
10.0
0.00
0.00
15*17
8.17
0.000
12.84
0.000
0.000
37.34
1809.
0.000
0*000
61.9
16.34
2334.
0.000
7.0
7.2
-------
TABLE V-19
Temperature (Deg C)
11 Methylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to
Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Airmonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended
Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
PLANT A
28.6
0.00
*
79.2
0.178
0.0000
0.025
0.018
0.010
0.0009
514.0
0.045
8.64
0.000
0.007
27.6
1163.
4.1
13.1
16.7
0.00
#
25.46
0.086
0.0000
0.033
0.016
0.00
0.0113
189.2
0.027
9.39
0.000
0.006
7.4
341.9
4.0
13.0
30.2
*
*
10.73
0.045
0.0000
0.023
0.017
0.00
0.0004
120.1
0.055
9.03
0.000
0.006
6.2
185.2
5.2
12.8
51.5
0.00
*
0.020
0.049
0.000
0.046
0.046
0.00
0.0012
21.10
0.120
8.46
0.264
0.008
1.0
2690.
9.7
12.0
mg/1
PLANT C
38.7
*
0.00
0.039
0.138
I
0.072
0.008
0,020
0.0003
9.19
0.324
8.14
0.209
0.024
1.3
644.
6.5
10.0
PLANT D
43.9
*
*
0.142
0.109
I
0.008
0.000
0.00
0.0274
44.71
0.027
3.46
1.275
0.013
6.9
92.5
8.0
11.5
16.0
0.00
*
0.026
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
0.000
59.00
0.220
NA
4.700
0.015
2.4
96.0
7.7
10.9
PLANT B
16.0
0*00
*
0.004
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
0.000
1.960
0.150
NA
0.081
0.000
3.0
28.0
8.5
10.5
71.9
0.00
0.00
13.38
0.002
0.0000
0.286
0.000
0.00
0.000
199.2
0.303
86.6
0.101
0.025
6.1
87.9
1.0
14.0
69.9
0.00
0.00
0.772
0.002
0.0000
0.051
0.000
0.00
0.000
14.45
0.712
18.92
0.001
0.086
6.1
64.8
1.0
14.0
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-20
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE NICKEL IMPREGNATED
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
U>
ON
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
ซ4 Methylene chloride
87 Irichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, lotal
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn* to
Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Oil C Grease
Total Suspended
Solids
pH, minimum
pHr maximum
mg/kg
PLANT A
1817.
) 28.
! 0.
0.
143900.
323.
nt 0.
45.
32.
18.
1.
81.
15700.
0.
12.
50100.
2113000.
6
00
00
4
1630.
16.7
0.00
0.00
41500.
140.2
0000 0.0000
43
71
17
635
8
000
72
53.8
26.08
0.000
18.42
44.01
15310.
0.000
9.78
12060.
1621.
30.
0.
0.
17390.
72.
0.
37.
27.
0.
0.
89.
14640.
0.
9.
10050.
557000. 300200.
4.1
13.
0
4.0
13.0
5.
12.
2
00
00
9
0000
28
56
000
648
2
000
73
1363.
51.5
0.00
0.00
27.26
66.8
0.000
62.7
62.7
0.000
1.636
163.6
11530.
359.8
10.90
1363.
PLANT C
1954.
38.7
0.00
0.00
76.2
269.7
I
140.7
15.63
39.08
0.586
633.
15190.
408.4
46.90
2540.
3666000. 1258000.
2
8
9.7
12.0
6.5
10.0
1638.
43.9
0.00
0.00
232.6
178.5
I
13.10
0.000
0.000
44.88
44.23
5670.
2088.
21.29
11300.
151500.
8.0
11.5
PLANT
1934.
16.0
0.00
0.00
50.1
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
425.5
NA
9090.
29.01
4642.
185700.
7.7
10.9
D
3869.
16.0
0.00
0.00
15.48
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
580.
NA
313.4
0.000
11610.
111000.
8.5
10.5
PLANT B
228.3
71.9
0.00
0.00
3050.
0.457
0.0000
65.3
0.0000
0.000
0.000
69.2
19770.
23.06
5.71
1393.
20080.
1.0
14.0
197.3
69.9
0.00
0.00
152.3
0.395
0.0000
10.06
0.0000
0.000
0.000
140.5
3733.
0.197
16.97
1204.
12790.
1.0
14.0
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TAELE V-21
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) CF THE NICKEL IMPREGNATED
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Methylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
MINIMUM
16.0
0.00
0.00
O.OOO
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
1.960
0.027
3.46
0.000
0.000
1.0
28.0
1.0
10.0
MAXIMUM
71.9
*
*
79.2
0.178
0.0000
0.386
0.046
0.02
0.0274
514.0
0.712
86.6
4.700
0.086
27.6
2690.
9.7
14.0
MEAN
38.3
*
*
12.98
0.061
0.0000
0.054
0.011
0.000
0.0042
117,3
0.198
19.08
0.663
0.019
6.8
539.
5.6
12.2
MEDIAN
34.5
0.00
*
0.457
0.047
0.0000
0.029
0.004
0.000
0.0004
51w85
0.135
8.55
0.091
0.008
6.1
140.6
5.9
12.4
i
VAL
10
3
7
10
8
8
8
5
2
6
10
10
8
7
9
10
10
10
10
f
ZEROS
0
7
3
0
2
0
2
2
8
4
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
ซ
PTS
10
10
10
10
10
8
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-22
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) OF THE NICKEL
IMPREGNATED CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
MINIMUM
Flow (I/kg)
lemperature (Deg C)
44 Kethylene Chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor,
ฃ 122 Lead
00 123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
197.
16.
0.
0.
15.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2851.
44.
3733.
0.
0.
1204.
12790.
1.
10.
3
0
00
00
48
000
000
000
000
000
0000
01
000
000
MAXIMUM
3869.
71.9
0.00
0.00
143900.
323.4
0.000
140,7
62.7
9.08
44.88
934000.
633.
19770.
9090.
46.90
50100.
3666000.
9.7
14.0
MEAN
1625.
38.3
0.00
0.00
20640.
105.2
0.000
42.84
16.47
5.73
6.78
172700.
227.1
12780.
1228.
16.30
10630.
838000.
5.6
12.2
MEDIAN
1634.
34.4
0.00
0.00
192.5
69.9
0.000
41.36
7.82
0.000
0.617
59300.
114.9
14915.
168.2
11.81
7350.
243000.
5.9
12.4
-------
TABLE V-23
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE FLOOR
AND EQUIPMENT WASH ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
iwg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 16.0
Kethylene chlorid
87 Irichloroethylene
Kethylene chloride NA
Irichloroethylene NA
118 Cadmiuir
29.20
119 Chromium, Total 0.081
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.000
121 Kickel 9.08
128 Zinc 12.90
Ammonia NA
Cobalt 5.0UO
Phenols, Total NA
Cil 6 Grease NA
Total Suspended Solids NA
pH, minimum 7.9
pH, maximum 7.9
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-24
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE FLOOR AND
EQUIPMENT WASH ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
ing/kg
Flow (I/kg) 0.246
lemperature (Deg C) 16.0
*ปa Kethylene chloride NA
87 Irichloroethylene NA
118 Cadmium 7.18
119 Chromium, Total 0.020
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.000
12M Nickel 2.232
w 128 Zinc 3.171
o Ammonia NA
Cobalt 1.239
Phenols, Total NA
Cil 6 Grease NA
total Suspended Solids NA
pH, minimum 7*9
pH, maximum 7.9
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-25
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN EMPLOYEE WASH
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
Ul
Temperature (Deg c)
4U Kethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chior.
122 lead
123 Mercury
12U Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
31.0
0.00
0.00
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.190
0.00
0.000
0.007
1.0
0.0
7.3
7.3
32.0
0.00
0.00
0.130
0.000
0.000
0.030
0.025
0.00
0.000
0.130
0.240
0.00
0.000
0.010
212.0
280.0
6.8
6.8
32.0
0.00
0.00
0.076
0.000
0.000
0.036
0.036
0.00
0.000
0.260
0.050
0.00
0.000
0.000
288.0
312.0
7.9
7.9
-------
TABLE V-26
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN EMPLOYEE WASH
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/kg
u>
Ul
ro
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
44 flethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
1.475
31.0
0.00
0.00
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.280
0.000
0.000
0.010
1.475
0.000
7.3
7.3
1*475
32.0
0.00
0.00
0.192
0.000
0.000
0.044
0.037
0.000
0.0000
0.192
0.354
0.000
0.000
0.015
312.6
412.9
6.8
6.8
1.475
32.0
0.00
0.00
0.112
0.000
0.000
0.053
0.053
0.000
0.0000
0.383
0.074
0.000
0.000
0.000
424.7
460.1
7.9
7.9
-------
TABLE V-27
KEAN CONCENTFATIONS AND POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS
IN THE CADMIUM POWDER ELEMENT WASTE STBEAMS
Mean
(mg/1)
Mean
(wig/kg)
u>
U1
U)
Flew (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
44 Fethylene chloride
87 Trichloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor,
122 Lead
123 Kercury
124 Kickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia
Cobalt
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
21.9
0.00
0.00
177.3
0.004
0.000
0.026
0.000
0.000
0.0077
0.062
4274.
5.16
0.000
0.022
4.4
17.5
1.3
3.3
65.7
21.9
0.00
0.00
11650.
0.263
0.000
1.708
0.000
0.000
0.506
4.073
280800.
339
0.000
1.445
298.1
1150.
1.3
3.3
-------
TABLE V-28
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY EFFLUENT FLOW RATES
FROM INDIVIDUAL PLANTS
U)
PIANT
1C
A
E
C
D
E
F
6
H
I
J
FLCW RATE
1/day
15700
>U50000
1H5000
>U50000
0
5U500
3780
0
1890
67000
-------
TABLE V-29
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE CADMIUM SOECATEGORY TOTAL
RAW HASTE CONCENTRATIONS
LJ
Ul
Ul
PCLLOTANTS MINIMUM
Temperature (Deg C) 14.0
11 Methylene chloride 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 0.000
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total 0.000
Cyanide, Aron. to Chlor. 0.000
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.000
121 Nickel 0.570
126 Silver* 0.000
128 Zinc 0.000
Airmonia 1.94
Ccfcalt 0.000
Phenols, Total 0.000
Cil and Grease 0.8
Total Suspended solids 13.0
pH Minimum 1-0
pR Maximum 2.5
MAXIMUM
66.8
0.027
*
186.5
0.756
0.000
0.364
0.354
0.400
0.0250
281.2
13.90
2489.
80.8
1.572
0.080
20.2
2290.
7.1
14.0
MEAN
29.6
*
*
37.06
0.198
0.000
0.079
0.040
0.161
0.003
61.8
8.467
270.4
15.17
0.390
0.018
7.2
325.1
3.4
11.6
MEDIAN
25.4
17.27
0.086
0.000
0.023
0.000
0.123
0.0004
19.20
9.89
0.150
6.69
0.047
0.0049
5.7
72.0
2.6
12.9
I
Val
12
6
9
11
12
0
9
8
3
8
12
3
11
9
7
10
11
12
12
12
I
Zeros
0
6
3
1
0
12
2
3
1
4
0
1
1
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
I
Pts
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
11
4
12
12
4
12
9
12
11
11
12
12
12
+ - Not a cadmium subcategory verification parameter, analyzed only where silver cathodes produced.
* - < 0.01
-------
U)
TABLE V-30
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT CADMIUM SUBCATEJGOFY PLAOTS
PLANT IP TREATMENT IN-PLftCE DISCHARGE I/
A Settling lagoon; material recovery D
B Lagooning/ sand filter, pH adjust D (Zero)
(Replaced by additional treatment and 100% recycle)
C pH adjust, coagulant addition, clarifier, filtraton I
D Settling, pH adjust, in-process Cd, Ni recovery
E Lagooning - offsite Zero 2/
F None Zero
G None Zero 2/
H pH adjust, clarification, ion exchange D 7J
I pH adjust I
J (1) pH adjust, coagulant addition, clarification,
sand filtration D
(2) Ion exchange
K Settling I
L pH adjust, settling, filtration D
M None Zero
I/ - I = Indirect
D = Direct
2/ - No longer active in the cadmium subcategory
-------
TABLE V-31
PERFORMANCE OF ALKALINE PRECIPITATION, SETTLING
AND FILTRATION - CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
TREATMENT SYSTEM I
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
118 Cadmium
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
Concentrations (mg/1)
Day
Raw
0.026
59.0
0.220
1.700
2.4
96.0
7.7-10.9
1
Treated
0.490
1.760
0.0160
0.020
1.2
0.00
8.9
Day
Raw
0.004
1.960
0.150
0.081
3.0
28.0
8.5-10.5
2
Treated
0.140
0.800
0.000
0.024
0.0
0.0
8.5-10.5
00
ui
TREATMENT SYSTEM II
Day 1
Raw Treated Raw
Concentration (mg/1)
Day 2
Day 3
Treated Raw Treated
118 Cadmium
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Cobalt
Oil 6 Grease
TSS
pH
0.000
0.610
12.00
0.160
0.000
NA
27.0
2.0-2.6
0.030
0.620
0.220
1.400
2.200
NA
51.0
6.7-11.4
0.007
1.500
24. 10
0.440
2.700
NA
23.0
2.2-2.5
0.008
0.550
0.240
3.100
2.700
NA
216.0
9.2
0.000
0.570
13.90
0.380
0.000
NA
13.0
2.1-2.5
0.010
0.500
0.270
2.800
3.000
NA
18.0
9.9
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-32
PERFORMANCE OF SETTLING - CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
Pollutant
or Pollutant Property
Concentration (mg/1)
u>
en
oo
118 Cadmium
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Cobalt
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH
Day 1
0,100
0.820
2.000
0.000
1.0
11.0
11-12
Day 2
0.061
0.800
0.150
0.000
2.0
8.0
11.1-12.3
Day 3
0.250
1.000
1.970
0.012
3.0
10.0
11.1-12.5
-------
TABLE V-33
TC1AI DISCHARGE
FLOW
U>
(Jl
vo
FIANT
ID NO.
A
B .
C
D
E
F
G+
G* +
B
1/hr
114
114000*
27250
33160*
23
7880
4630
7040
49500
pH OilGGrease
(gal/hr) (mg/1)
(30)
(30000)
(7200) 7-14
(8760) 12.4 3
(6.1)
(2081) 7.5
(1220)
(1860)
TSS Cd
(mg/1) (mg/1)
1.1
0.01
8.1
150 41
0.1
0.04
0.26
3.73
Co Ni Ag
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
6.7
0.034
18.5
46
<0.08 <0.02
0.09
0.08 0.54
0.34
3.06
Zn
(mg/1)
75
* - Combined discharge includes wastewater from other subcategories and categories.
+ - Effluent from pR adjustment and clarification
** - Effluent from ion exchange
-------
TABLE V-34
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLOWS
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY ELEMENTS
(jj
o
Elements
Heat Paper
Production
Cell Testing
Mean
Discharge
(I/kg)
115.4
0.014
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
24.1
0.014
Total
Raw Waste
Volume (1/yr)
1.3xl05
200
Production
Normalizing
Parameter
Weight of Reactants
Weight of Cells Produced
-------
TABLE V-35
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
Plant B Plant A
Temperature (ฐC) 20 17
14 1,1, 2-tr ichloroethane 0.00 0.013
23 Chloroform * 0.038
44 Methylene Chloride 0.00 0.14
66 Bis (2-ethylhexy) Phthalate 0.00 0.024
116 Asbestos4" 0.0 630.
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.002
119 Chromium 120. 2.064
120 Copper 0.150 0.118
122 Lead 0.000 0.044
124 Nickel 0.000 0.067
126 Silver 0.000 0.012
128 Zinc 0.110 0.045
Cobalt 0.000 0.006
Iron 0.520 0.122
Manganese 0.021 0 . 008
Oil and Grease 0.0 0.0
Total Suspended Solids 715. 21.
pH, Minimum 2.9 6.2
pH, Maximum 4.7 6.2
+ Chrysotile fibers - millions of fibers/liter
* <0.01
-------
TABLE V-36
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
mg/kg
POLLUTANT Plant B Plant A
Flow (I/kg) 99.9 14.0
Temperature (ฐC) 20 17
14 1,1,2-trichlorethane 0.00 0.182
23 Chloroform 0.00 0.532
44 Methylene Chloride 0.00 0.196
66 Bis (2-ethylhexy) Phthalate 0.00 0.336
116 Asbestos* 0.0 8820.
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.028
119 Chromium 12000. 28.90
w 120 Copper 15.0 1.652
5 122 Lead 0.000 0.616
124 Nickel 0.000 0.938
126 Silver 0.000 0.168
128 Zinc 11.0 0.630
Cobalt 0.000 0.084
Iron 51.9 1.708
Manganese 2.10 0.112
Oil and Grease 0.0 0.0
Total Suspended Solids 71400. 294.
pH, Minimum 2.9 6.2
pH, Maximum 4.7 6.2
+ Chrysotile fibers - millions of fibers/kg
-------
U)
TABLE V-37
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE
A pH adjust, settling I
B None Zero
C None I
I/ I = Indirect
-------
TABLE V-38
EFFLUENT CHARACTEPISTICS FROM CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS - DCP DATA
PLANT A
Flow Rate Cd Ba Cr
1/hr mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
1385.* 0.01 20.0 0.20
* - Intermittent flow, average is < 15 1/hr on a monthly basis
u>
-------
TABLE V-39
NOFMALIZED DISCHARGE FICWS
LEAD SOBCATEGOPY ELEMENTS1/
Element
Anodes and Cathodes
leady Oxide Production
Paste Preparation and
Application
Curing
Closed Formation
w (in Case)
ฃ Single Fill
Doutle Fill
Fill and Dump
Cpen Formation (Out of
Case)
Dehydrated
Met
Ancillary Operations
Eattery Mash
Floor Mash
Eatterv Repair
Mean
Discharge
(1/kcr)
0.21
0.57
0.01
0.09
1.26
1.73
18.4
4.77
1.28
0.41
0.14
Median
Discharge
(1/Kq)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.31
0.83
9*0
0.0
0.72
O.U9
0.17
No. of Plants
Represented
in Data
34
95
89
40
30
11
35
7
60
5
3
J/- Production normalizing parameter is total weight of lead used,
-------
TABLE V-40
LEAD SUBCATEGORY CHARACTERISTICS OF INDIVIDUAL
PROCESS WASTES
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene Chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthaiate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH Maximum
PASTING
mg/1 mg/kg
WET BATTERIES
CLOSED FORMATION
mg/1 mg/kg
DAMP BATTERIES
CLOSED FORMATION
mg/1 mg/kg
DEHYDRATED
BATTERIES
OPEN FORMATION
mg/1 mg/kg
BATTERY WซV SH
mg/1 mg/kq
29.0
*
*
0.00
0.006
0.00
*
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.009
0.000
0.101
280.0
0.000
0.008
0.1800
0.510
2.030
0.079
0.000
35.0
1000.
6.7
8.9
0.218
29.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.021
16.26
0.000
0.001
0.0120
0.045
0.219
0.005
0.000
2.217
1320.
6.7
8.9
18.5
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.015
0.000
0.170
0.960
0.000
0.020
0.000
0.083
5. 100
0.016
0.000
1.1
6.0
2.0
2.6
0.454
18.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.017
0.000
0.077
0.498
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.038
2.025
0.008
0.000
0.519
3.1
2.0
2.6
19.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.006
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.025
0.005
0.117
0.000
0.395
1.835
0.000
0.092
0.000
0.135
6.88
0.021
0.000
1.3
10.5
2.0
3.9
1.296
19.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.008
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.023
0.006
0. 131
0.000
0.487
2.331
0.000
0.100
0.000
0.162
7.97
0.027
0.000
1.640
12.7
2.0
3.9
49.2
*
*
0.00
*
NA
0.064
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.048
NA
0.041
7.66
0.000
0. 133
0.000
0.340
1.570
0.011
0.000
4. 1
4.5
2.0
4.8
13.92
49.2
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.919
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.053
0.660
NA
0.582
108.6
0.000
1.536
0.000
4.760
20.46
0. 158
0.000
60.0
72.5
2.0
4.8
23.0
*
*
0.00
0.006
0.00
0.015
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.616
0.000
0.450
7.41
0.000
0.342
0.000
0.525
16.86
0.019
0.000
16.0
81.5
2.0
9.9
0.730
23.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OOU
0.00
0.015
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 000
0.000
0.000
1.339
0.000
0.361
9. 14
0.000
0.745
0.000
0.96U
31.85
0.017
0.000
10.32
68.4
2.0
9.9
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-41
PASTING WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
mg/1
U)
Stream Identification
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
14 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 chromium. Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids 10890.
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
PLANT A PLANT D
PLANT E
Holding Pit-Includes
Some Floor Wash 6
Clean Up Water From
Pasting Machine
NA NA NA
* 0.00 0.00
* 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
* * *
NA 0.00 NA
te * * *
* 0.00 0.00
* * *
0.00 0.00 0.00
* 0.00 *
* 0.00 *
* 0.00 0.00
0.000 0.000 3.670
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.180
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.120 0.083 0.580
2700. 6000. 3360.
0.0200 0.000 I
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.2600 0.1900 0.710
0.038 0.160 0.510
0.800 2.650 7.23
0.085 0.150 0.110
0.000 0.000 0.000
38.0 1620. 1200.
0890. 12450. 42310.
7.2 9.8 11.4
7.9 9.8 11.4
In-Line Sump
Under Pasting
Machine
29.0 NA
* *
* *
* 0.00
0,020 0.012
NA NA
* *
0.00 0.00
* 4<
0.00 *
* *
* *
0.00 0*00
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.007 0.006
0.033 0.017
NA NA
0.025 0.025
280.0 208.0
0.000 0.000
0.027 0.016
0.0100 0.0100
0.780 0.540
0.760 0.540
0.061 0.079
0.000 0.000
9.3 35.0
De ionized
NA
*
*
0.00
0.016
NA
0. 113
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.310
0.000
0.036
0.030
NA
0.190
254.0
0.000
0.024
0.1800
0.410
2.030
0.069
0.023
30.0
6600. 20900. 11000.
6. 1 NA
6. 1 NA
NA
NA
Spillage
mately 2
Water
(Approxi-
Days Resi-
dence Time Before
Treatment) .
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
41
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. 130
NA
0.034
NA
0.000
NA
13.40
0.0460
NA
0.0080
3.880
190.0
0.020
0.000
3.0
184.0
NA
NA
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-42
PASTING WASTE LOADINGS
mg/kg
PLANT A
PLANT D
U>
-------
TABLE V-43
CLOSED FORMATION POLLUTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF
BOTH WET AND DAMP BATTERIES
Plant A
mg/1
DAMP BATTERIES
VO
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroetbane
23 Chloroform
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Eutyl benzyl phthalate
68 Ci-n-butyl phthalate
69 Ci-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Fhenanthrene
81 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
121 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
18.5
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.026
0.000
0.100
0.960
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.060
3.900
0.016
0.000
1.0
6.0
2.0
6.8
20.0
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.070
0.000
0.170
1.710
0.0150
0.044
0.000
0,083
7.92
0.010
0.000
1.1
8.0
2.0
2.4
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.045
0.000
0.400
0.850
0.000
0.020
0.000
0.180
5.100
0.078
0.000
4.2
1.0
2.0
2.6
20.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.064
0.000
0.330
1.710
0.000
0.043
0.000
0.100
4.400
0.020
0.000
1.3
8.0
2.0
5.7
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.012
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.050
0.005
0.170
0.000
0.460
1.960
0.000
0.140
0.000
0.170
9.36
0.022
0.000
1.2
13.0
NA
2.0
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < o.oi
-------
TABLE V-44
CLOSED FORMATION WASTE LOADINGS CF BOTH
WET AND DAMP BATTERIES
PLANT A
mg/kg
WET BATTERIES
DAMP BATTERIES
U)
-J
O
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1f1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Ci-n-butyl phthalate
69 Ci-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Fhenanthrene
81 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
lotal Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pR, Maximum
0.52
18.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.052
0.498
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.031
2.025
0.008
0.000
0.519
3.115
2.0
6.8
0.45
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.032
0.000
0.077
0.777
0.0070
0.020
0.000
0.038
3.598
0.005
0.000
0.500
3.634
2.0
2.4
0.38
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.017
0.000
0.151
0.321
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.068
1.926
0.029
0.000
1.586
0.378
2.0
2.6
1.68
20.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.008
0. 108
0.000
0.554
2.873
0.000
0.072
0.000
0.168
7.393
0.034
0.000
2.184
13.44
2.0
5.7
0.91
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.011
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.046
0.005
0.155
0.000
0.420
1.789
0.000
0.128
0.000
0.155
8.541
0.020
0.000
1.095
11.86
NA
2.0
FA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-45
OPEN FORMATION DEHYDRATED BATTERY
HASTE CHARACTERISTICS
Plant D
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 50.0 48.0
11 1, 1,1-Trichloroethane NA *
23 Chloroform NA 8
4 Kethylene chloride NA 0.00
55 Naphthalene * *
65 Phenol NA NA
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 0.077 0.051
67 Eutyl fcentyl phthalate 0.00 0.00
68 Ci-n-butyl phthalate * *
69 Ci-n-octyl phthalate 0.00 0.00
78 Anthracene * *
81 Phenanthrene * *
84 Pyrene 0.00 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.009
119 Chromium, Total 0.047 0.048
Chromium, Hexavalent NA NA
120 Copper 0.046 0.036
122 lead 8.59 6.72
123 Mercury 0.000 0.000
124 Nickel 0.096 0.130
126 Silver 0.000 0.000
128 Zinc 0.350 0.330
Iron 0.930 2.210
Phenols, Total 0.016 0.005
Strontium 0.000 0.000
Cil 6 Grease 5.7 2.4
lotal Suspended Solids 9.0 0.0
pB, Minimum 2.0 2.0
pB, Maximum 4.1 5.4
NA - Not Analyzed
* - S 0.01
-------
TABLE V-46
OPEN FORMATION DEHYDRATED BATTERY
WASTE LOADINGS
PLANT D
mg/kg
u>
^1
NJ
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Kethylene chloride
ICaphthalene
Phenol
Eis (2-ethylhexyl)phthaiate
Eutyl benzyl phthalate
Ci-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Anthracene
Fhenanthrene
Fyrene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium* Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Iron
Fhenols, Total
Strontium
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
16.10
50.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
1.240
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.757
NA
0.741
138.3
0.000
1.546
0.000
5.636
14.98
0.258
0.000
91.8
144.9
2.0
4.1
11.7U
48.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.599
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.106
0.564
NA
0.423
78.9
0.000
1.526
0.000
3.875
25.95
0.059
0.000
28.18
0.000
2.0
5.4
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-47
BATTERY WASH WASTEWATEP CHARACTERISTICS
PLANT A
PLANT D
CJ
^J
U)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
14 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended 'Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
18.0
*
*
0.00
0.012
NA
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.072
0.000
0.570
6.39
0.000
0.055
0.000
0.240
6.93
0.016
0.039
18.0
120.0
2.0
7.7
18.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.025
0.00
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.280
1.200
0.0090
0.000
0.000
0.130
3.900
0.014
0.000
23.0
19.0
2.0
6.8
mg/1
18.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.037
NA
0.017
28.0
*
*
*
*
NA
0.013
*
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.017
0.000
0.330
1.370
0.0650
0.007
0.000
0.160
5.000
0.022
0.000
17.0
29.0
2.0
5.7
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.160
NA
0.290
8.42
0.000
0.630
0.000
0.810
26.80
0.018
0.000
14.0
160.0
2.0
12.0
28.0
*
*
*
*
NA
0.048
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
0.00
0.190
0.000
0.004
1.450
NA
1.470
9.69
0.000
0.910
0.000
1.770
40.00
0.021
0.000
10.4
70.4
2.0
12.0
28.0
*
*
0.00
*
NA
0.042
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.180
0.130
0.000
3.670
NA
2.790
18.90
0.000
2.800
0.0030
7.60
83.0
0.023
0.000
15.0
93.0
2.0
12.0
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-48
BATTERY WASH WASTEWATER LOADINGS
mg/kg
PLANT A
PLANT D
U)
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Dl-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 chromium. Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pHr Minimum
pH, Maximum
0.651
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.008
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.047
0.000
0.371
4.159
0.0000
0.036
0.0000
0.156
4.511
0.010
0.025
11.72
78.12
2.0
7.7
0.639
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.016
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.179
0.767
0.0056
0.000
0.0000
0.083
2.491
0.009
0.000
14.70
12.14
2.0
6.8
0.280
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.010
NA
0.005
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.005
0.000
0.093
0.384
0.0182
0.002
0.0000
0.045
1.402
0.006
0.000
4.760
8.13
2.0
5.7
0.730
28.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.009
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.847
NA
0.212
6.15
0*0000
0.460
0.0000
0.591
19.56
0.013
0.000
10.22
116.8
2.0
12.0
0.600
28.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.029
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.114
0.000
0.004
0.870
NA
0.882
5.814
0.0000
0.546
0.0000
1.062
24.00
0.013
0.000
6.24
42.00
2.0
12.0
0.500
28.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.021
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.090
0.065
0.000
1.835
NA
1.395
9.45
0.0000
1.400
0.0015
3.800
41.50
0.011
0.000
7.50
46.50
2.0
12.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-49
BATTERY REPAIR AND FLCOP VASH WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
mg/1
FLOOR NASH
PLANT A
BATTERY REPAIR
PLANT A
BAFTERY REPAIR
PLANT D
U>
Ul
Temperature (Deg C) NA
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00
23 Chloroform 0.00
44 Methylene chloride *
55 Naphthalene *
65 Phenol NA
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate *
67 Eutylbenzyl phthalate *
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate *
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate *
78 Anthracene *
81 Phenanthrene *
84 Pyrene *
114 Antimony 0.940
115 Arsenic 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.042
119 Chromium, Total 0.034
Chromium, Rexavalent 0.000
120 Copper 0.290
122 Lead 251.0
123 Mercury 0.000
124 Nickel 0.033
126 Silver 0.000
128 Zinc 0.940
Iron 9.76
Phenols, Total 0.153
Strontium 0.000
CilSGrease NA
TotalSuspended Solids NA
pH,Minimum NA
pH,Maximum NA
22.0
0.00
0.00
*
*
0.00
0 00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.035
0.019
0.000
0.210
107.0
0.000
0.023
0.000
0.710
6.82
0.090
0.000
25.0
1116.
NA
10.2
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
*
*
*
0.00
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.011
0.018
0.000
0.320
51.00
0*000
0.000
0.000
0.470
6.45
0.161
0.000
28.0
952.
NA
10.2
NA
*
*
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.640
0.110
0.220
0.250
0.000
5.460
65.00
0.0060
0.430
0.0130
8.97
460.0
0.039
0.000
62.0
624.
2.3
2.3
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.010
*
0.012
0.00
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.340
0.100
0.000
9.83
0.540
0.0100
0.520
0.000
7.510
370.0
0.174
0.000
46.0
362.0
NA
2.0
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
NA
0.014
*
0.014
0.00
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.013
0.000
0.280
0.270
0.0060
0.007
0.000
4.210
8.05
0.130
0.000
54.0
572.0
NA
NA
32.0
*
*
0.00
*
NA
0.013
0.00
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.150
0.013
0.250
NA
1.220
1.020
0.000
0.130
0.000
1.410
5.940
0.011
0.000
6.0
1.3
2.9
3.9
31.0
*
*
*
*
NA
0.011
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.120
NA
0.250
0.830
0.000
0.170
0.000
0.500
2.310
0.091
0.000
9.3
12.0
3.4
5.6
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-50
BATTERY REPAIR AND FLOOR WASH WASTE LOADINGS
ing/kg
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
14 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Ci-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
81 Pyrene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
121 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
FLOOR
PLANT
0.026
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.025
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.008
6.62
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.025
0.257
0.001
0.000
NA
NA
NA
NA
WASH
A
0.020
22.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.001
2.162
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.011
0.138
0.002
0.000
0.505
22.55
NA
10.2
0.026
NA
0.00
0*00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
1.319
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.012
0.169
0.001
0.000
0.721
21.62
NA
10.2
0.003
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.0008
0.218
0.0000
0.001
0.0000
0.033
1.515
0.000
0.000
0.208
2.096
2.3
2.3
BATTERY REPAIR
PLANT A
0.001
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.038
0.002
0.0000
0.002
0.000
0.029
1.138
0.001
0.000
0.179
1.107
NA
2.0
I
0.001
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.001
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.016
0.030
0.000
0.000
0.201
2.157
NA
NA
0.170
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.002
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.025
0.002
0.012
NA
0.207
0.173
0.000
0.022
0.000
0.239
1.007
0.002
0.000
1.017
0.220
2.9
3.9
BATTERY REPAIR
PLANT D
0.321
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.001
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.039
NA
0.080
0.266
0.000
0.055
0.000
0.161
0.712
0.029
0.000
2.986
3.853
3.1
5.6
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-51
OBSERVED DISCHARGE FICW RATES
FOF EACH PLANT IN LEAD SUBCATEGORY
U)
*J
vl
Plant Number
107
110
112
122
132
133
135
138
Kill
146
147
152
155
158
170
173
178
179
182
184
190
191
198
207
208
212
213
226
233
237
239
242
255
261
269
277
278
280
288
295
299
Observed Flow
Rate (1/hr)
1699
4883
2952
11640
0.4
NA
0.0
329
0.0
2725
8
9278
NA
0.0
0.0
57
0.0
8
NA
0.0
0.0
37320
10260
18850
NA
6813
454
9312
9372
11360
6086
NA
NA
2271
31385
15
5678
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
Plant Number
311
320
321
331
342
346
349
350
356
358
361
366
370
371
372
374
377
382
386
387
400
402
403
406
421
429
430
436
439
444
446
448
450
462
463
466
467
469
472
480
Observed Flow
Rate (1/hr)
20900
34450
0.0
2566
61910
0.0
7843
NA
0.0
6699
NA
0.0
NA
2184
0.0
454
0.0
2763
7949
43671
4269
NA
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
29042
0.0
6927
14630
27252
2574
NA
0.0
0.0
15
2892
22210
-------
TABLE V-51
OBSERVED DISCHARGE FLCW RATES
FOR EACH PLANT IN LEAD SUECATEGORY
U>
>J
00
Plant Number
486
491
193
494
495
501
503
504
513
517
520
521
522
526
529
536
543
549
553
572
575
594
620
623
634
635
640
646
652
656
668
672
677
660
681
682
683
685
686
690
704
Observed Flow
Rate (1/hr)
NA
NA
NA
7816
NA
11920
11128
0.0
1817
0.0
4542
0.0
0.0
22710
568
NA
0.0
47460
3429
3274
2725
0.0
NA
NA
1533
4360
22030
810
12692
NA
0.0
22500
0.0
2074
31794
6813
265
5450
9084
0.0
8849
Plant Number
705
706
714
716
717
721
722
725
730
731
732
733
738
740
746
765
768
771
772
775
777
781
785
786
790
796
811
814
815
817
820
828
832
852
854
857
863
866
877
880
883
Observed Flow
Rate (1/hr)
2725
0.0
1590
NA
6472
0.0
NA
0.0
443
2840
3588
NA
29080
NA
0.0
13073
3452
1363
11470
1135
4315
6624
41640
5110
0.0
0.0
NA
13110
598
0.0
3407
68
8327
16070
0.0
4201
11057
0.0
18573
0.0
0.0
-------
TAB1E V-51
OBSERVED DISCHARGE PLOW RATES
FOR EACH PLANT IN LEAD SOECATEGORY
Observed Flow Observed Flow
Plant Number Rate (1/hr) Plant Number Rate (1/hr)
893 2157 963 0.0
901 0.0 9614 0.0
917 188H9 968 0.0
920 NA 971 0.0
927 0.0 972 238U6
936 3631 976 26800
939 NA 978 1226
912 0.0 979 0.0
913 17187 982 10537
917 18100 990 3180
951 1136
NA - Not Available
-------
TABLE V-52
TOTAL RAW WASTE FOR VISITS
mg/1
U)
00
O
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phena n t hre ne
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
18.2
*
*
*
0.006
NA
*
*
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.002
0.000
0.027
0.120
0.000
0.436
6.88
0.0000
0. 120
0.0000
0.305
6.64
0.015
0.021
49.0
416.0
2.0
11.9
PLANT A
18.9
*
*
*
0.013
0.00
*
*
0.00
*
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.032
0.000
0.278
1.434
0.0100
0.022
0.000
0.134
6.55
0.014
0.000
13.0
15.0
2.0
6.8
18.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.015
NA
0.008
*
0.00
*
*
*
*
0.000
0.005
0.005
0.047
0.000
0.378
1.170
0.0260
0.027
0.000
0.193
5.522
0.050
0.000
9.2
16.4
2.0
5.7
17.0
0.025
*
*
*
*
0.135
0.017
*
0. 140
0.032
0.032
*
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.009
0.000
0.083
13.00
HA
0.000
0.0330
0.333
2.000
0.008
NA
36.5
57.8
2.2
3.6
PLANT B
17.0
*
0.00
*
*
NA
0.044
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.012
NA
0.090
15.40
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.350
3.800
0.000
0.000
10.6
31.2
2.0
4.9
17.0
*
0.00
0.00
*
NA
0.030
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
0.000
0.012
0.017
NA
0.110
45.90
0.000
0.020
0.0150
0.380
4.370
0.000
0.000
5.2
52.4
1.R
3.9
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-52
TOTAL RAW WASTE FOR VISITS
mg/1
U)
00
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
81 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil & Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
PLANT
15.3
*
0.00
0.00
*
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.097
0.063
1.000
0.000
0.077
0.000
0.051
9.24
0.000
0.027
3.1
6.0
2.1
2.9
C
16.5
*
0.00
*
0.00
NA
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.057
0.078
1.360
0.000
0.036
0.000
0. 120
15.51
0.000
0.033
1.0
14.0
2.0
2.4
16.7
*
0.00
*
0.00
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.068
0.053
1.450
0.000
0.069
0.000
0.190
9.41
0.000
0.033
3.9
5.0
2.0
2.4
PLANT D
35.1
*
*
*
0.001
NA
0.032
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.000
0.019
0.002
0.670
0.324
18.29
0.000
0.384
0.0000
0.747
15.45
0.018
0.000
10.3
350.1
2.0
12.0
33.5
*
*
*
0.001
NA
0.037
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.090
0.000
0.004
0.732
0.772
15.64
0.000
0.506
0.0000
1.068
20.14
0.038
0.000
9.4
974.
2.0
12.0
28.0
*
*
0.00
0.002
NA
0.050
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0. 194
0. 116
0.004
3.267
2.502
44.94
0.000
2.493
0.0230
6.80
74.0
0.028
0.003
16.7
1300.
2.0
12.0
PLANT I
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.130
NA
0.034
NA
NA
13,40
0.0460
NA
0.0080
3.880
390.0
0.020
0.000
3.0
184.
NA
NA
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-53
LEAD SUBCATEGORY TOTAL RAW WASTE LOADINGS
mg/kg
U)
00
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1, 1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
81 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil G Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
PLANT A
1.207
18.2
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.008
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.002
0.000
0.033
0. 1H5
0.000
0.526
8.31
0.0000
0. 1U5
0.0000
0.368
8.02
0.019
0.025
59. 15
502.2
2.0
11.9
1.196
18.9
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.016
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.038
0.000
0.333
1.715
0.0120
0.026
0.0000
0.160
7.84
0.017
0.000
15.51
17.97
2.0
6.8
0.705
18.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.011
NA
0.006
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.004
0.004
0.033
0.000
0.266
0.825
0.0185
0.019
0.0000
0.136
3.894
0.035
0.000
6.52
11.60
2.0
5.7
PLANT B
8.84
17.0
0.221
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.193
0.150
0.00
1.237
0.283
0.283
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.071
0.080
0.000
0.734
114.9
NA
0.000
0.2920
2.903
17.68
0.071
NA
322.6
510.8
2.2
3.6
9.87
17.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.434
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.030
0.118
NA
0.889
152.0
0.000
0.000
0.0690
3.455
37.52
0.000
0.000
104.7
308.0
2.0
4.9
10.27
17.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.308
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.123
0.175
NA
1.130
471.4
0.000
0.205
0.0000
3.903
44.88
0.000
0.000
53.41
538.2
1.8
3.9
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-53
LEAD SUBCATEGORY TOTAL RAW WASTE LOADINGS
mg/kg
to
00
CO
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phe na n t hre ne
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
6.68
15.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.648
NA
0.421
6.68
0.0000
0.515
0.0000
0.361
61.8
0.000
0.180
20.72
40. 11
2.1
2.9
PLANT C
6.59
16.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.066
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.376
NA
0.514
8.96
0.0000
0.237
0.0000
0.791
102.2
0.000
0.218
26.37
92.28
2.0
2.4
6.98
16.7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.474
NA
0.370
10.12
0.0000
0.481
0.0000
1.326
65.7
0.000
0.230
27.21
34.89
2.0
2.4
PLANT
1.351
35.1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.043
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.025
0.003
0.905
NA
0.437
24.71
0.0000
0.519
0.0010
1.009
20.87
0.025
0.000
13.96
472.8
2.0
12.0
D
1.252
33.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.046
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.113
0.000
0.005
0.917
NA
0.967
19.60
0.0000
0.634
0.0010
1.337
25.21
0.048
0.000
11.82
1220.
2.0
12.0
0.562
28.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.028
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.109
0.065
0.002
1.835
NA
1.405
25.24
0.0000
1.400
0.0129
3.821
41.58
0.016
0.001
9.36
731.
2.0
12.0
PLANT I
0.218
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.028
NA
0.007
NA
0.000
NA
2.920
0.0101
NA
0.0018
0.845
85.0
0.004
0.000
0.654
40.1
NA
NA
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-54
U>
00
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1r 1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Ci-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil C Grease
lotal Suspended Solids
pfl. Minimum
pH, Maximum
15.3
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.009
0.000
0.053
1.000
0.0000
0.000
0.0000
0.054
2.000
0.000
0.000
3.0
5.0
1.8
2.4
35.1
0.025
*
*
0.015
0.015
0.135
0.017
*
0.140
0.032
0.032
*
0.194
0.116
0.034
3.267
0.000
2.502
45.90
0.046
2.493
0.0330
6.80
390.0
0.050
0.033
49.0
1301.
2.2
12.0
17.5
0.002
*
*
0.003
*
0.029
0.001
*
0.011
0.002
0.002
*
0.032
0.012
0.008
0.427
0.000
0.431
13.84
0.0068
0.313
0.0067
1.120
43.28
0.015
0.010
13.4
263.3
2.0
6.7
17.5
*
0.00
*
*
*
0.030
*
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.063
0.000
0.194
13.00
0.0000
0.053
0.0004
0.333
9.240
0.014
0.000
9.4
52.4
2.0
5.3
12
13
6
8
10
1
13
7
8
6
7
7
5
4
4
10
12
0
12
13
4
10
8
13
13
8
5
13
13
12
12
I
Pts
12
13
13
13
13
3
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
12
13
12
5
12
13
12
12
13
13
13
13
12
13
13
12
12
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-55
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (rag/kg) OF THE LEAD SUBCATEGORY
TOTAL RAW WASTE LOADINGS
OJ
00
Ul
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-ri-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Tota1
Strontium
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINIMUM
0.218
15.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.033
0.000
0.266
0.825
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.136
3.894
0.000
0.000
0.654
11.60
1.8
2.4
MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
10.27
35.1
0.221
0.00
0.016
0.00
1.193
0.028
0.00
1.237
0.283
0.283
0.00
0.113
0.065
0.123
1.835
0.000
1.405
471.4
0.0185
1.400
0.2920
3.903
102*2
0.071
0.230
322.6
1220.
2.2
12.0
4.287
17.5
0.017
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.185
0.012
0.00
0.095
0.022
0.022
0.00
0.019
0.008
0.022
0.479
0.000
0.666
65.2
0.0034
0.348
0.0409
1.574
40.16
0.018
0.055
51.69
347.7
2.0
6.7
1.351
17.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.043
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.275
0.000
0.520
10.12
0.0000
0.221
0.0010
1.009
37.52
0.016
0.000
20.72
308.0
2.0
5.3
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE I/
107 pH adjust, settling I
110 None I
112 pH adjust I
122 pH adjustment, settling, lagooning I
132 None I
133 None indicated U
135 None Zero
138 pH adjust I
144 pH adjust, clarification, sand Zero
filtration
146 Settling, pH adjust, settling I
147 Evaporation I
152 pH adjust, settling I
155 None indicated (J
U)
CO
158 None Zero
170 None Zero
173 None indicated I
178 pH adjust, clarification, lagooning Zero
179 None D
182 None U
184 None Zero
190 None Zero
191 pH adjust I
J/ I ซ Indirect
"" D = Direct
U = Unknown
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN- PL ACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN- PL ACE DISCHARGE I/
198 pH adjust D
207 pH adjust I
208 pH adjust I
212 pH adjust, clarification I
213 None I
226 pH adjust I
233 pH adjust, clarification I
237 pH adjust, settling I
239 pH adjust, settling I
242 None indicated U
255 None indicated U
261 pH adjust I
269 pH adjust, clarification I
277 pH adjust, clarification I
278 pH adjust I
280 None indicated U
288 None indicated U
295 None indicated Zero
299 None Zero
311 pH adjust I
320 pH adjust I
321 None Zero
331 pH adjust I
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGOR? PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE I/
342 pH adjust, lagooning I
346 None ZerO
349 pH adjust I
350 None indicated U
356 None indicated Zero
358 pH adjust I
361 None I
366 None Zero
370 None indicated I
371 pH adjust I
372 None Zero
374 pH adjust, fiitration I
377 None Zero
382 pH adjust, clarification, sand I
filtration
386 pH adjust, settling D
387 pH adjust I
400 pH adjust, settling I
402 None indicated 0
403 None indicated U
406 None indicated U
421 None Zero
429 None Zero
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
u>
00
PLANT ID
430
436
439
444
446
448
450
462
463
466
467
469
472
480
486
491
493
494
495
501
503
504
TREATMENT IN-PLACE
None
Lagooning, sand filtration
pH adjust, clarification, lagooning
None
pB adjust, coagulant addition, clari-
fication, filtration
pH adjust
pU adjust, settling, filtration
pH adjust
None
pH adjust, settling
None
None
Settling, pH adjust, clarification
pH adjust, pressure filtration
None
None indicated
None
pH adjust, settling, lagooning
None
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust, coagulant addition, clarifi-
cation
None
DISCHARGE I/
Zero
Zero
D
Zero
I
I
D
I
I
Zero
Zero
I
D
I
I
U
D
I
Zero
I
D
Zero
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN- PL ACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGOR? PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN- PLACE DICHARGE I/
513 pH adjust I
517 None Zero
520 pH adjust, coagulant addition, settling, D
filtration
52 1 None Zero
522 None Zero
526 pH adjust, settling I
529 pH adjust, settling I
536 None indicated U
543 None Zero
549 pH adjust, clarification, filtration I
553 pH adjust I
572 pH adjust, settling I
575 pH adjust, settling I
594 None Zero
620 None indicated U
623 None I
634 pH adjust, settling I
635 pH adjust, filtration I
640 pH adjust I
646 pH adjust, coagulant addition, clarifi- I
cation
652 pH adjust I
656 None indicated U
668 None Zero
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID
672
677
680
681
682
683
685
686
690
704
705
706
714
716
717
721
722
725
730
731
732
733
738
evaporation
TREATMENT IN-PLACE
pH adjust, clarification
None
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust, settling, filtration
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust
Settling, atmos,
pH adjust
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust, settling
Settling
pH adjust, skimming, clarification
pH adjust, aeration, atmos. evaporation
None
None
pH adjust, settling
pH adjust
pH adjust
pH adjust
pfl adjust
DISCHARGE
D
Zero
I
I
I
I
I
I
Zero
I
I
Zero
I
I
I
Zero
U
Zero
D
I
I
I
I
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE I/
740 None indicated U
746 None Zero
765 pH adjust, clarification I
768 pH adjust, filtration I
771 pH adjust, settling, sand filtration D
772 pH adjust, coagulant addition, clarifi- I
cation, sand filtration
775 pH adjust, clarification D
777 pH adjust, flocculant addition, flota- I
tion
781 pH adjust I
785 pH adjust, clarification I
786 pH adjust, flotation I
790 None Zero
796 None Zero
811 Unknown U
814 pH adjust I
815 Zero I
817 pH adjust, settling Zero
820 pH adjust I
828 pH adjust settling I
832 pH adjust, settling I
852 pH adjust, flocculant addition, clari- I
fication
854 None Zero
857 None D
863 pH adjust, clarification I
-------
TABLE V-56
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE -
866 None Zero
877 pH adjust I
880 None Zero
883 Settling Zero
893 pH adjust I
901 Settling Zero
917 pH adjust I
920 None I
927 None Zero
936 pH adjust I
939 None U
942 None Zero
943 pH adjust, clarification D
947 pH adjust, filtration I
951 Clarification I
963 None Zero
964 None Zero
968 None Zero
971 Settling, filtration Zero
972 pH adjust, settling I
976 pH adjust I
978 pH adjust, flocculant addition, I
clarification
979 None Zero
982 pH adjust, settling I
990 pH adjust I
!/ I = Indirect
D = Direct
U = Unknown
-------
TABLE V-57
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS REPORTED BY PLANTS PRACTICING pH
ADJUSTMENT AND SETTLING TECHNOLOGY
U)
Direct/
IDf Indirect
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
D
I
I
D
I
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
I
D
I
Production
Normalized
Effluent
I/kg
5.10
1.88
3.15
8.0
a. 56
9.76
2.01
6.35
13.32
51.9
1.74
1.34
2.57
5.76
1.58
pH
6.9
Pollutant Parameters (mg/1)
06G
TSS
20
Fe
Pb
1.1-4.3
7.5
6.9
7
6.65
8.2 3.7
4.5 3
1.4
4.6
330
7.5
0.4
0.5
1.0
0.8
0.187
2.7
0.2 1.0
0.28
1.0
0.25
Zn
Paste
Recirc,
0.1
X
X
5.85 26.14 257.7
-------
TABLE V-58
EFFLUENT QUALITY DATA FRCM PLANTS PRACTICING pH
ADJUSTMENT AND FILTRATION
ICi Direct/
Indirect
Production
Normalized
Effluent
I/kg pH
A
B
C +
D
E
F
G
I
D
I
I
I
D
I
2.78
4.41
43.1
1.56
3.46
9.9
0.70
7.5
7.5
11.2
Pollutant Parameters (mg/1)
066 TSS Fe Ph Zn
0
0.0
0.3
1.0
0.05
0.5
0.3
0.47
0.25
0.1
0.34
0.1
Paste
Recir,
U)
vo
ui
- Filter 6 Settle
-------
TABLE V-59
EFFLUENT QUALITY DATA FROM PLANTS PRACTICING
pH ADJUSTMENT ONLY
U)
Direct/
IDf Indirect
Production
Normalized
Effluent
I/kg pH
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J+
K
L
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.07
22.9
3.73
81.7
13.5
5.35
51.9
10.1
5.02
26.4
63.3
15.0
Pollutant Parameters (mg/1)
OSG TSS Fe Pfc
29.8
10-15
2.77
6.0
27.5
6.65
5.7
1.U
33
32
0.2
1.0
3.95
10-15
3.0
26.92
Zn
Paste
Pecirc,
0.2U
- Reports no effluent treatment prior to release to POTW.
-------
TABLE V-60
EFFLUENT FROM SAMPLED PLANTS
PLANT B
rg/1
PLANT C
U)
VO
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Ci-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Lron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
17.0
*
0.029
*
0.00
*
0.016
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.350
NA
0.000
0.000
0.095
0.000
0.000
NA
10.0
90.6
6.5
8.5
17.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
NA
0.040
4.050
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.096
0.710
0.000
0.020
9.9
76.0
7.2
8.8
17.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
NA
0.034
3.580
0.000
0.012
0.000
0.084
0.590
0.000
0.013
5.0
39.8
6.6
7.9
7.60
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
#
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
0.018
0.110
0.000
0.011
0.000
0.000
0.760
0.000
0.029
1.4
13.0
9.0
9.3
7.80
*
0.00
*
0.00
NA
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
NA
0.014
0.130
0.000
0.009
0.000
0.000
0.920
0.000
0.027
2.7
11.0
8.7
9.1
8.50
*
0.00
*
0.00
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
NA
0.019
0.110
0.000
0.011
0.000
0.037
0.950
0.000
0.027
2.2
11.0
8.6
9.1
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0. 01
-------
TABLE V-60
EFFLUENT FROM SAMPLED PLANTS
mg/1
u>
VO
CO
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
65 Phenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
67 Butyl benzyl phthalate
68 Di-n-butyl phthalate
69 Di-n-octyl phthalate
78 Anthracene
81 Phenanthrene
84 Pyrene
liu Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Phenols, Total
Strontium
Gil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
32.0
*
*
*
0.00
NA
*
*
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
NA
0.059
6.06
0.000
0.110
0.000
0.165
0.420
0.019
0.000
2.3
3.5
6.0
10.4
Plant D
31.0
*
*
*
0.00
NA
0.023
0.023
0.00
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
NA
0.050
3.880
0.000
0.068
0.000
0.000
0.280
0.014
0.000
1.7
11.0
7.7
9.2
NA
*
*
*
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.059
NA
0.090
13.30
0.000
0.046
0.000
0.105
3.380
0.006
0.000
3.7
66.0
7.0
9.0
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-61
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGOBY ELEMENTS
(Reported Manufacture)
Anodes
Zinc
Zinc Sheet Metal Powder
Cathodes
(and Cooked Uncooked- Paper Separator Plastic
Electrolyte Paste Paste Prepared On or Separator
Form) Separator Separator off-site
Kn02 Cathode X
(and
Electrolyte
with Kercury)
Kn02 CathodesXXX^^
(and
Electrolyte
without Mercury)
Kn02 Cathode X X
(and Gelled
Electrolyte
*ith Mercury)
Carbon X
Cathode _____
Silver X
Cathode
Fasted X
y.nOj> Cathode
Ancillary Cperations
Equipment and X
Area Cleanup
-------
TABLE V- 62
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLOWS
LECLANCHE SOECATEGOPY ELEMENTS
0
0
Elements
Ancillary Operations
Separator
Cooked Paste
Separator
Uncooked Paste
Separator
Pasted Paper with Mercury
Equipment and Area
Cleanup
Mean
Discharge
(I/kg)
O.Ott
nil
0.14
0.38
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
O.Ott
nil
0.14
0
Tctal
Paw Waste
Volume (1/yr)
(10*1
3.2
nil
0.015
9.65
Production
Normalizing
Parameter
Weight of Cells
Weight of Cells
Produced
Produced
Weight of Dry Paste
Materials
Weight of Cells
Produced
-------
TABIE V-63
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE COOKED PASTE
SEPARATOR ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Diethyl phthalate
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pfl. Maximum
59.9
*
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.042
0.000
0.030
0.000
0.0060
0.000
0.000
0.110
0.130
0.011
13.0
119.0
5.1
6.8
mg/1
59.9
*
0.000
0.000
0.016
0.004
0.000
0.083
0.000
0.1600
0.054
0.000
94.0
5.48
0.009
39.0
41.0
5.1
6.8
59.9
*
0.000
0.000
0.021
0.004
0.000
0.130
0.000
0.1500
0.097
0.000
148.0
14.20
0.009
11.0
62.0
5.9
6.3
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-64
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE COOKED PASTE SEPAPATOP
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/kg
120
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Diethyl phthalate
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Oil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pB, Maximum
0.047
59.9
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.0003
0.002
0.000
4.011
0.140
0.001
0.613
5.615
5.1
6.8
0.045
59.9
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.0072
0.002
0.000
4.228
0.246
0.000
1.754
1.844
5.1
6.8
0.025
59.9
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.0038
0.002
0.000
3.750
0.360
0.000
0.279
1.571
5.9
6.3
-------
TABLE V-65
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE PAPER
SEPARATOR (WITH MERCURY) ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Diethyl phthalate
11a Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
31.0
*
0.000
0.000
0.470
0.000
0.000
0.110
0.070
0.4000
0.140
0.000
1.160
1.150
0.011
16.0
140.0
8.3
8.3
mg/1
31,1
*
0.000
0.000
0.015
0.000
0.000
0.081
0.000
0.1600
0.020
0.000
0.410
1.250
0.090
7.0
7.0
7.5
8.5
30.0
*
0.000
0.000
0.024
0.000
0.000
0.085
0.000
0.1400
0.027
0.000
0.230
0.430
0.046
83.0
96.0
8.5
8.6
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-66
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE PAPER
SEPABATOP (WITH MERCURY) ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
mg/kg
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Ciethyl phthalate
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
0.109
31.0
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.051
0.000
0.000
0.012
0.008
0.0436
0.015
0.000
0.126
0.125
0.001
1.740
15.23
8.3
8.3
0-1 1^
31.1
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.014
0.000
0.0278
0.003
0.000
0.071
0.218
0.016
1.218
1.218
7.5
8.5
0.152
30.0
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.0228
0.004
0.000
0.035
0.065
0.007
12,. 64
14.62
8.5
8.6
-------
TABLE V-67
NORMALIZED FLOW OF ANCILLARY OPERATION WASTE STREAMS
FIANT
BEE. NO,
SAMPLING
DATA MEAN
VALUE, I/kg
SURVEY
CATA, I/kg
1
2
3
-------
TABLE V-68
POLLUTANF CONCENTRATIONS IN T?IF KQIIIPME!Tt AMI) A!
0.000
3J.R3
11.30
0.011
96.1
171.1
r>.i
H.7
PLAMT Pi
117.
o.on
1 .'4?
0.0070
I - Interference
* - < 0.01
_V- Dcp data
-------
TABLE V-69
POLLfTTAfIT MA.?.'? LOAD 11*33 IN
ENT WASTE STPFAV3
na/kf
CLF.AJI11P
O
-J
PlOW (1/kq)
Temperature (De
f.1
9.0
0.010
30. 1
0.00
0.030
0.000
0.002
0.003
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.0000
O.OOtt
0.000
'1.319
0. 133
0.000
0.ซ?62
.ซ
0. 1
J.O
0.0
1r>7.
I - Interference
J_/- Dcp data
-------
TABLE V-70
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) IN THE EQUIPMENT AND AREA CLEANUP
ELEMENT HASTE STREAMS
O
00
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Diethyl phthalate
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Gil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pR, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINUM
30.1
*
0.000
0.000
0.020
0.014
0.000
0.094
0.000
0.0170
0.007
0.000
33.83
3.820
0.044
9.80
357.2
6.1
8.6
MAXIMUM
60.0
*
0.000
0.640
0.189
2.880
0.000
3.220
0.940
117.0
10.10
0.600
1640.
383.0
0.253
482.0
14230.
8.5
10.4
MEAN
45.1
*
0.000
0.133
0.072
0.597
0.000
0.650
0.1490
19.76
1.768
0.127
431.0
99.3
0.103
160.0
3714.
7.0
9.5
MEDIAN
37.1
*
0.000
0.035
0.049
0.190
0.000
0.134
0.000
0.0320
0.369
0.035
272.5
27.86
0.058
36.00
1541*
6.9
9.4
ff
Val
6
6
0
3
6
6
0
6
3
6
7
3
8
6
4
7
6
6
6
I
Zeros
0
0
6
3
0
0
6
0
M
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
Pts
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
6
7
6
8
6
4
7
6
6
6
* -
0.01
-------
TABLE V-71
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) IN THE EQUIPMENT AND AREA CLEANUP
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Eiethyl phthalate
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pB, Minimum
pH, Maximum
0.008
30.1
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.339
0.042
0.000
0.098
3.576
6.1
8.6
0.011
60.0
0.00
0.000
0.007
0.002
0.032
0.000
0.036
0.190
51.5
o.na
0.007
722.
4.316
0.003
157.
160.4
8.5
10.4
0.010
45.1
0.00
0.000
0.001
0..001
0.007
0.000
0.007
0.029
10.09
0.026
0.001
94.2
1.037
0.001
24.07
40.11
7.0
9.5
0.010
37.1
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.0005
0.006
0.000
2.697
0.281
0.001
0.962
13.27
6.9
9.4
-------
TABLE V-72
Flow (I/day)
Temperature (Deg C)
70 Diethyl phthalate
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Copper
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Gil 8 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
NIMUM MAXIMUM
636.
30.1
*
0.000
0.000
0.016
0.013
0.000
0.095
0.000
0.0414
0.086
0.000
30.57
5.155
0.006
10.2
341.7
5.1
8.6
5880.
59.9
*
0.000
0.197
0.173
0.889
0.000
1.081
0.289
0.1287
3.177
0.185
311*8
127.7
0.236
391.8
4420.
6.2
10.4
MEAN MEDIAN
2640.
55.3
*
0.000
0.038
0.062
0*207
0.000
0.263
0.051
0.0788
0.764
0.035
119.3
36.62
0.061
109.5
1150.
5.7
9.5
1920.
43.8
*
0.000
0.005
0.041
0.033
0.000
0.099
0.003
0.0742
0.318
0.005
98.2
21.60
0.031
56.8
464*3
6.0
9.4
t
VAL
6
6
6
0
3
6
6
0
6
3
6
6
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
t
ZEROS
0
0
0
6
3
0
0
6
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
t
PTS
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
* -
0.01
-------
TABUS V-73
TREATMENT IW-PLACE AT
LEOANCHE SUBCATBGOPY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLftCE DISCHARGE I/
A None I
B None Zero
C None I
D None Zero
E Grease trap, sand filter, activated I
carbon; retention and reuse of
paste area clean-up water in
paste preparation
F None Zero
G Retention and reuse of paste appli- Zero
cation washwater; contract
removal of other wastes
H None Zero
I None Zero
J None Zero
K None Zero
L None I
N pH adjust, coagulant addition, 1
vacuum filtration
N Settling, skimming I U
O None Zero
P None Zero
Q Chemical reduction, pH adjust, I
coagulant addition, pressure
filter
R Chemical reduction, pH adjust, I
coagulant addition, pressure
filter
S None Zero
T None Zero
I/ I ซ Indirect
D = Direct
y Production discontinued
-------
TABLE V- 74
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY EFFLUENT QUALITY
(FROM DCP'S)
PLANT F PLANT E
Flow, I/kg 6.37 6.37
Flow, 1/hr 2168 83
EAPAMETER rnq/1
Cil C Grease 24.6
lead 0.03
Kercury 1.42 3.15
Kickel 0.007
Zinc - 658.0
-------
TABLE V-75
TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS AT PLANT B
(TREATMENT CONSISTS OF SKIffCNG AND FILTRATION)
00
Parameter
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH !
mg/i
Day
Raw
Waste
0,012
0
0.078
0
0.130
0.034
85.00
2.97
13.0
119.
1-6.8
1
Treated
Effluent
0.018
0
0.002
0
0.011
0.038
118.0
15.30
4.2
10.0
6.2-7.0
Day
Raw
Waste
0.016
0.004
0.083
0
0.160
0.054
94.0
5.48
39.0
41.0
5.1-6.8
2
Treated
Effluent
0.005
0
0
0
0.007
0.054
103.0
8.53
4.8
4.0
6.2-7.0
Day
Raw
Waste
0.021
0.004
0.130
0
0.150
0.097
148.0
14.20
11.0
62.0
5.9-6.3
3
Treated
Effluent
0.004
0
0.007
0
0.100
0.076
115.0
8.51
3.5
1.0
5.6-5.9
-------
TABLE V- 76
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLOWS
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY ELEMENTS
Elements
Cathodes
lead Iodide
Iron Disulfide
Ancillary
Operations
Heat Paper
Product ionฃ/
lithium Scrap
Cispcsal
Cell lesting
Cell Kash
Air Scrubbers
Floor and Equipnn
Mean
Discharge
(I/kg)
63.08
7.54
115.4
nil
0.014
0.929
10.59
;nt 0.094
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
63.08
7.54
24.1
nil
0.014
0.929
10.59
0.094
Total
Raw Waste
Volume (1/yr)
(10ปJ
0.020
0.17
0.038
nil
0.0002
0.013
0.11
0.0013
Production
Normalizing
Parameter
Weight of Lead
Weight of Iron Disulfide
Weight of Peactants
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Weight of Cells Produced
Vash
_>/ Same as for calcium subcategory.
-------
TABLE V-77
POLIOTAOT 0)NCEปrRATIONS IN
THE IRON DISULFIDE CATHODE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
POLLUTANT
Ul
Temperature (ฐC)
14 1,1,2-trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene Chloride
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
116 Asbestos
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Cobalt
Iron
Lithium
Manganese
Oil & Grease
Total & Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
18
0.00
0.012
0.013
2.4+
0.025
0.015
0.109
4.94
0.235
0.001
0.473
0.176
54.9
0.00
1.60
<5.0
39.
5.6
5.8
+ Chrysotile fibers - million of fibers/liter
-------
TMSLE V-78
PCXUUTANT. MASS LOADINGS IN
THE IRON DISULFTDE CATHODE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
POLtOTANT
Flow (I/kg) 0
Temperature ' c'
14 1,1,2-trichloroethane
23 Chloroform
44 Methylene Chloride
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
116 Asbestos
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Cobalt
Iron
Lithium
Manganese
Oil & Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
rag/kg
7.54
18.
0.00
0.090
0.121
0.098
18.1+
0.189
0.113
0.822
,2
,77
0.007
3.57
1.23
414.
0.00
12.1
0.0
294.
5.6
5.8
37,
1,
+ Chrysotile fibers - millions of fibers/kg
-------
TABU: v- 79
POLLUTAOT OONCEWraftTIONS IN THE
LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL WASTE STREAM
POLLUTANT mg/1
14 1,1, 2-tr i chloroethane *
23 Chloroform *
44 Methylene Chloride 0.00
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 0.00
116 Asbestos NA
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium 0.013
120 Copper 0.025
122 Lead 0.000
124 Nickel 0.22
126 Silver 0.000
128 Zinc 0.12
Cobalt 0.000
Iron 52.00
Lithium 0.59
Manganese 0.032
Oil and Grease 1*
Total Suspended Solids 69.
pH, Minimum 5.7
pH, Maximum 5.7
* - ฃ0.01
NA - Not analyzed
-------
TABLE V-80
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT LITHIUM SUBCATEQOFQf PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLflCE DISCHARGE I/
A None I
B None Zero
C pH adjust, settling I
D Filtration I
^ E pH adjust I
(-
00
F Settling; contract haul Zero
pH adjust D
I/ I ป Indirect
D - Direct
None Zero
-------
TABLE V-81
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS OF IRON DISULFIDE
CATH3DE ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
AFTER SETTLING TREA3MEOT
PCUOTAOT rog/1
14 ia,2-trichloroethane NA
23 Chloroform NA
44 Methylene chloride NA
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA
116 Asbestos NA
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium 0.021
120 Copper ' 0.092
122 Lead 0.920
124 Nickel 0.058
126 Silver 0.000
128 Zinc 0.250
Cobalt 0.000
Iron 43.5
Lithium 0.00
Manganese 0.980
Oil and Grease NA
Total Suspended Solids NA
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-82
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLCWS
MAGNESIUM SUECATEGORY ELEMENTS
to
O
Elements
Cathodes
Mean
Discharge
(I/kg)
Silver Chloride 4915
Cathode- Chemically
Reduced
Silver Chloride
Cathode-Electro-
lytic
Ancillary
Operations
Air Scrubbers
Cell Testing
Separator
Processing
Floor and Equipment
Nash
Heat Paper
Production2/
145.
206.5
52.6
ฑ/
0.094
115. 4
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
U915
115.
206.5
52.6
ฑ/
0.094
24. 1
Total
Raw Waste
Volume (1/yr)
(10ซ)
0.64
0.11
0.45
0.091
0
0.013
0.26
Production
Normalizing
Parameter
Weight of Silver
Weight of Silver
Weight of Cells
Weight of Cells
Weight of Cells
Weight of Cells
Processed
Processed
Produced
Produced
Produced
Produced
Weight of Reactants
J/ Cannot be calculated from present information.
J/ Saire as for calciuir subcategory.
-------
TABLE V-83
POLLUTAOT CXปICENTRA.TIONS IN THE
DEVELOPER SOLUTION OF THE SILVER CHLORIDE REDUCED
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAM
23.
66.
86.
114.
115.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
chloroform
bis ( 2-ethylhexyl )pปithalate
toluene
antimony
arsenic
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
cyanide
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
aluminum
ammonia
barium
boron
BOD
calcium
chlorides
cobalt
COD
iron
magnesium
manganese
molybdenum
oil and grease
phenol s ( tota 1 )
sodium
tin
titanium
TOC
TSS
vanadium
yttrium
0.091
*
0.0190
<0.015
<0.015
<0.001
<0.005
< 0.010
0.022
<0.010
0.170
<0.0003
<0.050
<0.015
0.340
<0.015
0.049
0.200
60.0
0.008
0.038
1200.
4.160
1100.
<0.005
4100.
0.064
2.640
<0.010
<0.010
<0.500
0.040
7000.
<0.010
<0.050
1200.
21.0
<0.005
<0.005
421
-------
TABLE V-84
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGOPY PPDCESS
WASTEWATER FLOW RATES FROM
INDIVIDUAL FACILITIES
Plant ID Flow Rate
(I/day)
A 4.18 x 104
B 0
C 872
-V
to D 0
to
E 2990
F +
G 0
H 0
+ Not Available
-------
to
TAfiLE V-85
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT MW3NESIUM SUBCATEJGOR5f PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
None
pH adjust, settling, filtration
None
pH adjust, filtration
pH adjust, settling, clarification,
filtration
Filtration
None
None
Zero
D!/
Zero
I
I I/
I3/
Zero
Zero
I/ I = Indirect
D = Direct
U Not presently active in this subcategory
3/ Wastewater combined from more than one subcategory
-------
Aqqlo (Porous Carbon)
Manganese DioxLdo-Carbon
TABLE V-86
ZINC SUBCATEGORY PROCESS ELEMENTS
(REPORTED MANUFACTURE)
Zinc Anodes
Zinc Powder
Pasted or
Zinc Oxide Powder
Mercuric Oxide (and Ver-
curie Oxile-Man'ianese Dio-
xide-Carbon)
Mercuric Oxide-Cadmium Oxide
Silver Powdor
Pressed Only
Pressed and Electrolytically
Oxidized
Silver Oxide
Reduced-wintered amd Electro
lytically Formed
",
Pressed
Blended (MnO.r Mq2o)
Blended (Incl, !I-jO)
-------
TABLE V-86
ZINC SUBCATEGORY PROCESS ELEMENTS
(REPORTED MANUFACTURE)
Zinc Anodes
Zinc Powder Pasted or Zinc Oxide Powder
Cast or Wet Gelled Dry Pressed on Pasted or Electro-
Catnodes Fabricated Amalgamated Amalgam Amalgamated Grid Pressed-Reduced deposited
Silver Peroxide X x X
Nickel-sintered. Impregnated
and Formed <
Ancillary Operations
Coll K.ish
Electrolyte. Preparation
**
to Silver Ktch
tn
Mandatory Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handlinn
Floor W.ish
Equipment Wash
Silver Powder Production
Silver Peroixde Production
-------
TABLE V-87
Elements
NORMALIZED DISCHARGE FLCWE
ZINC SUECATEGORY ELEMENTS
Mean
Discharge
(I/Kg)
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
Total Production
Raw Waste Normalizing
Volume (1/yr) Parameter
(106)
Anodes
Zinc Powder-Wet
Amalgamated
Zinc Powder-Gelled
Amalgam
Zinc Cxide Powder-
Pasted or Pressed
Reduced
3.8
0.68
2.2
0.68
117.
5.60
0.175
4.86
Weight of Zinc
Weight of zinc
Weight of Zinc
Zinc Electrodeposited 3190.
3190.
15.60
Weight of Zinc Deposited
N)
Cathodes
Silver Powder Pressed 196.
and Electrolytically
Cxidized
Silver Cxide (Ag80) 131.
Pcwder-Thermally
Reduced or Sintered,
Electrolytically
Fornred
Silver Peroxide 31.U
Powder
Kickel Impregnated 1610.
196.
131.
12.8
1720.
7.90
0.066
0.230
nil
Weight of Silver Applied
Weight of Silver Applied
Weight of Silver Applied
Weight of Nickel Applied
-------
TABLE V- 87
NORMALIZED DISCHAPGE FLCWE
ZINC SOECATEGORY ELEMENTS
to
Mean
Discharge
Elements (I/kg)
Ancillary Operations
Cell Kash
Electrolyte
Preparation
Silver Etch
Mandatory Employee
Kash
Feject Cell Handling
Floor and Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide
1-13
0.
99.
0.
0.
7.
52.
12
1
27
01
23
2
Median
Discharge
(I/kg)
0.335
0
99.1
0.27
0.002
7.23
52.2
Total Production
Paw Waste Normalizing
Volume (1/yr) Parameter
110*1
19.
1.
0.
2.
0.
1.
0.
11
26
003
61
022
92
365
Weight
Weight
Weight
Weight
Weight
Weight
Weight
of
of
of
of
of
of
of
cells
cells
Silver
Cells
Cells
Cells
Silver
Produced
Produced
Processed
Produced
Produced
Produced
in Silver
Production
Peroxide Produced
Silver Powder
Production
21.2
21.2
0.800
Weight of Silver Powder
Produced
-------
CO
TABLE V-88
OBSEPVED FLOW PATES FOP
EACH PLANT IN ZINC SUECATEGCPY
Observed Flow
Pate (I/day)
Flant Number
A
E
C
t.
E
F
6
H
I
J
F
I
M
F
C
F
CCP Data
ป
25432.2
3494.2
*
16118.2
4008.0
77516.8
144000
0
16.0
27500
10900.8
0
22619.2
4542.4
21206.4
Mean Visit
Data
3772.5
101892.2
27271.2
23305.5
54186.1
11506.4
9687.1
13471.6
- Data Not Available.
-------
TABLE V-89
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE 7.JNC POWDER-WET
AMALGAMATED ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT E
mg/1
VO
Temperature (Deg C) 14.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane *
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
44 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene *
64 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA
70 Diethyl phthalate 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene *
86 Toluene 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.080
118 Cadmium 0.002
119 Chromium, Total 0.140
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.110
120 Ccpper 0.006
121 Cyanide, Total 0.000
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. I
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury I
124 Nickel 0.000
125 Selenium 0.000
126 Silver 0.000
128 Zinc 35.30
Aluminum 0.000
Ammonia NA
Iron NA
Manganese 0.030
Phenols, Total 0.088
Oil 6 Grease 2.0
Total Suspended Solids 0.0
pH, Minimum 8.8
pH, Maximum 8.8
21.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.140
0.006
0.210
0.140
0.010
0.027
I
0.000
I
0.000
0.000
0.000
22.00
0.000
NA
NA
0.055
0.055
2.8
32.0
8.2
8.5
18.0
*
0.030
*
*
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
0.080
0.000
0.034
0.030
0.011
0.000
I
0.000
I
0.000
0.000
0.000
47.40
0.000
NA
NA
0.090
0.110
9.2
25.0
8.4
8.8
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.041
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.036
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.600
0.000
NA
0.0220
450.0
NA
NA
NA
0.040
0.000
10.0
5.0
4.3
6.5
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
*
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.005
0.000
0.021
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.5000
0.000
NA
0.0140
1050.
NA
NA
NA
0.030
0.000
9.0
5.0
4.3
6.5
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.070
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.018
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.2600
0.000
NA
0.0200
206.0
NA
N7V
NA
0.010
0.000
22.0
5.0
1.3
6.5
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - <0.01
-------
TABLE V-90
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE
ZINC POWDER-WET AMALGAMATED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT B
mg/kg
U)
o
Flow (I/kg) 5.168
Temperature (Deg C) 11.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
44 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene 0.00
64 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate NA
70 Diethyl phthalate 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00
86 Toluene 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic 0*413
118 Cadmium 0.010
119 Chromium, Total 0.721
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.568
120 Copper 0.031
121 Cyanide, Total 0.000
Cyanide, Amn. To Chlor. I
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury I
124 Rickel 0.000
125 Selenium 0.000
126 Silver 0.000
128 Zinc 182.4
Aluminum 0.000
Ammonia NA
Iron NA
Manganese 0.155
Phenols, Total 0.455
Cil & Grease 10.34
Total Suspended Solids 0.000
pH, Minimum 8.8
pH, Maximum 8.8
6.82
21.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.955
0.041
1.432
0.955
0.068
0.184
I
0.000
I
0.000
0.000
0.000
150.0
0.000
NA
NA
0.375
0.375
19.09
218.2
8.2
8.5
6.82
18.0
0.00
0.205
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.546
0.000
0.232
0.205
0.075
0.000
I
0.000
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
323.2
0.000
NA
NA
0.614
0.750
62.7
170.5
8.4
8.8
2.379
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.098
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.000
0.086
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.427
0.000
NA
0.0520
1071.
NA
NA
NA
0.095
0.000
23.79
11.90
4.3
6.5
1.884
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.009
0.000
0.040
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.942
0.000
NA
0.0260
1079.
KA
NA
NA
0.057
0.000
16.96
9.42
4.3
6.5
2.159
28.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.151
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.039
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.5616
0.000
NA
0.0130
444.7
NA
NA
MA
0.022
0.000
47.49
10.70
4.3
6.5
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-91
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE
ZINC POWDER-WET AMALGAMATED ANODE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
U)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil C Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINIMUM
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.260
0.000
0.000
0.000
22.00
0.000
NA
NA
0.010
0.000
2.0
0.0
64.3
6.5
MAXIMUM
28.0
*
0.030
*
*
0.00
*
*
NA
0.070
*
*
0.00
*
0.000
0.140
0.006
0.210
0.140
0.036
0.027
0.000
0.000
0.6000
0.000
0.000
0.0220
1050.
0.000
NA
NA
0.090
0.110
22.0
32.0
3.8
8.8
MEAN
22.6
ป
0.010
*
*
0.00
*
*
NA
0.037
*
*
0.00
*
0.000
0.050
0.001
0.068
0.047
0.014
0.005
0.000
0.000
0.4533
0.000
0*000
0.0093
301.8
0.000
NA
NA
0.043
0.042
9.2
12.0
6.4
7.6
MEDIAN
24.5
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
0.041
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.040
0.000
0.026
0.015
0.011
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.5000
0.000
0.000
0.0070
126.7
0.000
NA
NA
0.035
0.027
9.1
5.0
6.3
7.5
t
VAL
6
3
1
1
1
0
1
3
3
1
1
0
2
0
3
2
6
3
5
1
0
0
3
0
0
3
6
0
6
3
6
5
6
6
f
ZEROS
0
3
2
2
2
3
5
0
0
2
2
3
a
6
3
4
0
3
1
5
3
6
0
6
3
3
0
3
0
3
0
1
0
0
f
PTS
6
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
6
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
NA - Not Analyzed
* - <0.01
-------
TABLE V-92
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) OF THE
ZINC PCWDEP-WET AMALGAMATED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTI STREAMS
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
U)
to
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg. C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ithylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Napthalene
64 Fentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiu*
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Ann. to Chler.
122 Lead
123 Keretiry
12H Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluirinum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
1.884
14.0
0.00
o.eo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.5616
0.000
0.000
0.000
150.0
0.000
NA
NA
0.022
0.000
10.34
0.000
4.3
6.5
6.82
28.0
0.00
0.205
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.151
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.055
0.041
1.432
0.955
0.086
0.184
0.000
0.000
1.427
0.000
0.000
0.0520
1979.
0.000
NA
NA
0.614
0.750
62.7
218.2
8.8
8.8
4.205
22.6
0.00
0.068
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.083
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.319
0.009
0.407
0.288
0.050
0.031
0.000
0.000
0.977
0.000
0.000
0.0202
692.
0.000
NA
NA
0.220
0.263
30.07
70.1
6.4
7.6
Median
3.77U
21.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
0.098
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.207
0.000
0.135
0.102
0.051
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.9H20
0.000
0.000
0.0130
384.0
0.000
NA
NA
0.125
0.188
2l.ua
11.35
6.3
7.5
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-93
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE ZINC
POWDER-GELLED AMALGAM ANODE ELEMENT
WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT B
mg/1
U)
u>
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Nethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Clethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Tolaene
87 Trlchloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiur
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. To Chlor.
122 lead
123 Kercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
21.0
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.014
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
1.060
0.980
0.000
0.000
0.670
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
NA
0.000
1100.
NA
10.40
NA
0.110
0.003
33.0
97.0
13.2
13.5
26.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.013
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.000
1.050
0.120
0.040
0.000
0.540
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
NA
0.000
750.
NA
5.30
NA
3.420
NA
NA
100.0
13.2
13.2
22.0
0.025
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.042
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
0.810
0.071
0.068
I
0.620
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
NA
0.000
440.0
NA
4.70
NA
4.650
0.000
26.0
NA
12.9
13.4
16.0
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.023
0.00
0.042
0.011
0.00
*
*
*
0.000
0.000
0.063
0.021
0.000
0.101
0.001
0.005
0.102
0.814
0.010
NA
0.0100
NA
3.130
11.55
0.522
2.086
0.000
7.8
413.5
NA
NA
15.0
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
*
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.080
0.006
0.014
0.000
0.081
0.005
0.005
0.000
0.4700
0.025
NA
0.0020
133.0
NA
1.57
NA
0.170
0-090
6.0
257.5
NA
NA
16.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
*
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
0.070
0.008
0.005
I
0.054
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.5000
0.000
NA
0.0130
17.60
NA
0.17
NA
0.210
0.100
0.0
545.0
NA
NA
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-94
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE
ZINC POWCEP-GELLED AMALGAM
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
mg/kg
PLANT B
Flow (I/kg) 0.228 0.212
Temperature (Deg C) 21.0 26.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00 NA
13 1,1-Dichloroethane NA NA
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene NA NA
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene NA NA
38 Ethyltenzene NA NA
44 Methylene chloride 0.00 NA
55 Naphthalene NA NA
64 Pentachlorophenol 0.00 0.00
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 0.003 0.003
70 Diethyl phthalate NA NA
ฃ> 85 Tetrachloroethylene NA NA
w 86 Toluene NA NA
** 87 Trichloroethylene 0.00 NA
114 Antimony 0.000 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.242 0.223
118 Cadmium 0.018 0.025
119 Chromium, Total 0.000 0.0080
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000 0.000
120 Copper 0.153 0.115
121 Cyanide, Total NA NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA NA
122 lead 0.000 0.000
123 Mercury I I
124 Nickel 0.000 0.000
125 Selenium NA NA
128 Zinc 250.7 159.1
Aluminum NA NA
Armenia 2.370 1.124
Iron NA NA
Kanganese 0.025 0.725
Phenols, Total 0.001 NA
Cil 6 Grease 7.52 NA
Total Suspended Solids 22.11 21.21
pH, Minimum 13.2 13.2
pH, Maximum 13.5 13.2
0.314
22.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.013
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.255
0.022
0.021
I
0.195
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
NA
138.3
NA
1*477
NA
1.462
0.000
8.17
NA
12.9
13.4
0.646
16.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.015
0.00
0.027
0.007
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.040
0.013
0.000
0.065
0.001
0.003
0.066
0.5260
0.007
0.041
NA
2.024
7.47
0.337
1.349
0.000
5.02
267.3
NA
NA
1.077
15.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.086
0.006
0.015
0.000
0.087
0.005
0.005
0.000
0.5060
0.027
NA
143.3
NA
1.692
NA
0.183
0.000
6.46
277.4
NA
NA
1.668
16.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.117
0.013
0.008
I
0.090
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.8340
0.000
NA
29.35
NA
0.283
NA
0.350
0.167
0.000
909.
NA
NA
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-95
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE ZINC
POWDER-GELLED AMALGAM ANCDE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
KIMINUM
MAXIMUM
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyi) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 letrachloroethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Irichloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide
Cyanide
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Armonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil C Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pR, maximum
Total
Amn. to Chlor.
15.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.054
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.4700
0.000
0.063
0.0000
17.60
3.130
0.17
0.522
0.110
0.000
0.000
97.0
12.9
13.2
26.0
0.025
*
0.00
0 00
0.00
0.023
0.00
0.042
0.042
0.00
*
*
*
0.00
1.060
0.120
0.068
0.000
0.670
0.005
0.005
0.102
0.8144
0.025
0.063
0.0130
1100.
3.130
11.55
0.522
4.650
0.100
33.0
545.
13.2
13.5
MEAN
20.3
0.005
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.005
0.00
0.007
0.013
0.00
0.00
0.512
0.058
0.025
0.000
0.344
0.002
0.003
0.017
0.5948
0.006
0.063
0.0042
488.1
3.130
5.61
0.522
1.774
0.021
14.6
282.6
13.1
13.4
MEDIAN
18.5
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.012
0.00
*
*
*
0.00
0.445
0.067
0.017
0.000
0.321
0.001
0.005
0.000
0.5000
0.000
0.063
0.0010
444.0
3.130
5.00
0.522
1.148
0.000
7.77
257.5
13.2
13.4
f
Val
6
4
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
6
0
1
1
4
0
5
6
5
0
6
2
2
1
3
2
1
3
5
1
6
1
6
2
4
5
3
3
f
Zeros
0
1
0
1
1
1
4
1
5
0
1
0
0
1
6
1
0
1
4
0
1
1
5
0
4
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
f
Pts
6
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
6
6
1
1
1
5
6
6
6
6
-------
TABIE V- 96
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (nig/kg) OF THE
ZINC POWDEP-GELLED AMALGAM ANODE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
U>
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 l,l~Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Napthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trlchloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadirium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINIMUM
0.212
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.065
0.000
0.000
0.5060
0.000
0.040
0.000
29.35
2.024
0.283
0.337
0.025
0.000
0.000
21.21
12.9
13.2
MAXIMUM
MEAN
1.668
26.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.015
0.00
0.027
0.013
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.255
0.040
0.021
0.000
0.005
0.020
0.005
0.066
0.834
0.027
0.040
0.0220
250.7
2.024
7.47
0.337
1.462
0.167
8.17
909.
13.2
13.5
0.691
20.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.003
0.003
0.00
0.004
0.004
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.154
0.021
0.011
0.000
0.002
0.117
0.003
0.011
0.622
0.006
0.040
0.0050
144.1
2.024
2.402
0.337
0.682
0.033
5.436
299.4
13.1
13.4
MEDIAN
0.480
18.5
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.003
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.170
0.020
0.011
0.000
0.001
0.102
0.003
0.000
0.5260
0.000
0.040
0.0010
144.3
2.024
1.584
0.337
0.538
0.000
6.46
267.3
13.2
13.4
-------
TABLE V-97
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
ZINC OXIDE PCWCEF-PASTED OP PRESSED,
RECOCED ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT B
mg/1
U>
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Kapthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Clethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlcr.
122 Lead
123 Kercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Kanganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
NA
KA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.080
0.071
0.025
0.000
0.300
NA
NA
0.078
0.1000
0.000
0.000
0.1200
53.00
0.000
NA
NA
0.010
NA
KA
122.0
11.9
11.9
13.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.110
0.058
0.059
I
0.610
NA
NA
0.140
0.1600
0.023
0.000
0.2700
129.0
0.480
NA
NA
0.006
NA
NA
96.0
11.4
11.4
15.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.011
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.280
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
KA
NA
5.0
9.4
9.4
10.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.034
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0140
0.050
0.000
0.000
2.8QO
NA
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
5.0
9.4
9.4
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-98
POLLUTANT MASS LCACINGS IN THE ZINC
OXIDE POWDER-PASTEC OR PRESSED, REDUCED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
mg/fcg
PLANT B
U>
CD
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Kapthalene
64 Fentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthaiate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadiriunr
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Kercury
124 Kickel
125 Seleniuir
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluiriruir
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
81.9
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
6.56
5.818
2.049
0.000
24.58
NA
NA
6.39
8.20
0.000
0.000
9.83
4343.
0.000
NA
KA
0.819
NA
NA
10000.
11.9
11.9
151.0
13.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
16.65
8.78
8,93
I
92.4
NA
NA
21.20
24.22
3.482
0.000
40.88
19530.
72.7
NA
NA
0.908
NA
NA
14530.
11.4
11.4
315.4
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
3.470
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
88.3
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1577.
9.4
9.4
239.2
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
8.13
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.349
11.96
0.000
0.0000
679.
NA
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1196.
9.4
9.4
- Interference
- Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-99
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE
ZINC OXIDE POWDER-PASTED OR PRESSED,
REDUCED ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
U)
VC
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylfcenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. To Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
INIMUM
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.011
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.280
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
5.0
NA
NA
MAXIMUM
15.0
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.110
0.071
0.059
0.000
0.610
NA
NA
0.140
0.1600
0.050
0.000
0.2700
129.0
0.480
NA
NA
0.010
NA
NA
122.0
NA
NA
MEAN
12.9
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.047
0.044
0.021
0.000
0.303
NA
NA
0.073
0.0685
0.018
0.000
0.0975
46.30
0.160
NA
NA
0.004
NA
NA
57.0
NA
NA
MEDIAN
14.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.040
0.046
0.013
0.000
0.300
NA
NA
0.078
0.0570
0.012
0.000
0.0600
27.92
0.000
NA
NA
0.003
NA
NA
50.5
NA
NA
t
VAL
4
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
4
2
0
2
2
3
2
0
2
4
1
2
4
I
ZEROS
f
PTS
NA - Not Analyzed
* - <0.01
-------
TABLE V-100
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) OF THE ZINC
OXIDE FOWDER-PASTEC OF PRESSED, REDUCED
ANODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Median
11
13
29
30
38
44
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dich lor oet bane
1,1-Dichloroethylene
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Napthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Bis (2-etnylhexyl) ph thai ate
Diethyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Tcluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Ann. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Armenia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
81.9
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
3.470
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
88.3
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1196.
9.4
9.4
315.4
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
1.262
0.00
0.000
16.7
8.78
8.93
0.000
92.4
NA
NA
21.20
24.22
11.96
0.000
40.88
19530.
72.7
NA
NA
0.908
NA
NA
14530.
11.9
11.9
197.0
12.9
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.375
0.00
0.000
5.80
6.55
2.745
0.000
38.98
NA
NA
9.20
8.94
3.861
0.000
12.68
6160.
24.22
NA
NA
0.432
NA
NA
6830.
10.5
10.5
195.3
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.120
0.00
0.000
3.28
6.98
1.024
0.000
24.58
NA
NA
6.39
5.772
1.741
0.000
4.917
2511.
0.000
NA
NA
0.410
NA
NA
5787
10.4
10.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
POLLUTANT
TABLE V-101
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
SPENT AMALGAMATION SOLUTION
WASTE STREAM
mg/1
Temperature (ฐC) 16.0 10.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane NA NA
13 1,1-Didiloroethane NA NA
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene NA NA
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene NA NA
38 Ethylbenzene NA NA
44 Methylene chloride NA NA
55 Napathalene NA NA
64 Pentachlorophenol NA NA
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA NA
70 Diethyl phthalate NA NA
85 Tetrachloroethylene NA NA
86 Toluene NA NA
87 Trichloroethylene NA NA
114 Antimony 0.000 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 13.10 15.10
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000 0.000
120 Copper 3.390 0.300
121 Cyanide, Total NA NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA NA
122 Lead 68.0 16.40
123 Mercury 53000. 30000.
124 Nickel 8.84 9.10
125 Selenium 0.000 0.000
126 Silver 0.2800 0.0460
128 Zinc 1300. 1200.
Aluminum 0.300 0.450
Ammonia 0.14 0.14
Iron NA NA
Manganese 0.840 0.980
Phenols, Total NA NA
Oil & Grease NA NA
Total Suspended Solids 160.0 11.0
pH, Minimum 1.3 1.0
pH, Maximum 1.3 1.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-102
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
ZINC ELECTRODEFOSITED ANODE ELEMENT
WASTE STREAMS
N)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Napthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Els (2-etbylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
66 Toluene
87 Irichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Kercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Armenia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Ictal Suspended solids
pB, Minimum
pB, Maximum
9.0
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.016
0.000
0.012
0.010
0.005
0.039
30.78
0.005
0.000
0.0651
12.15
0.000
1.10
NA
0.000
0.007
1.0
10.1
9.3
12.2
irg/1
10.0
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.020
0.005
0.005
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
0.0310
12.20
0.000
0.28
NA
0.000
0.000
7.6
10.0
10.5
12.1
7.0
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.008
0.005
0.005
0.007
13.35
0.004
0.000
0.4298
12.43
0.000
0.28
NA
0.000
0.000
4.1
3.4
9.6
12.2
KA - Not Analyzed
- * 0.01
-------
TABIB V-103
POLLUTANT MASS LOALINGS IN THE ZINC
ELECTRODEPOSITEC ANODE ELEMENT
HASTE STPEAMS
mg/kg
U>
flew (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 letrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil and Grease
lotal Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
4658.
9.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
72.7
0.000
55.72
46.56
23.28
183.8
143400.
23.90
0.000
303.4
56600.
0.811
6520.
NA
2.271
32.59
4660.
46990.
NA
NA
5370.
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
32.21
0.000
107.4
26.84
26.84
0.000
0.0000
0.000
0.000
166.4
65500.
0.000
1503.
NA
0.000
0.000
40800.
53680.
10.5
12.1
4874.
7.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.017
61.9
0.000
39.62
24.36
24.36
35.47
65100.
19.68
0.000
2095.
60600.
0.973
1364.
NA
2. 120
0.000
2000.
16590.
NA
NA
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-104
NORMALIZED FLCWS OF POST-FORMATION
RINSE WASTE STREAMS
KASTE STREAK
PLANT IDf
I/kg
PLANT MEAN
Post-formation Rinsing A
A
A
B
B
C
Mean
Median
79.7*
1135. 5*1/
100.9*
262.6
3U1.8
*
90.3
302.2
196.25
196.25
* - This flow rate reflects the combined wastewater from post-formation
rinsing, floor area maintenance, and lab analysis.
ซ - Data not provided in survey.
1/ - Value for this day eliminated from statistical analysis because
of extreme variability in floor area maintenance water use.
-------
TAELE V- 105
POLLUTANT CONCENTPATIONS IN THE SIIVEP
POWDER PRESSED ANC ELECTROLYTICALLY OXIDIZED
ELEMENT HASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT B
mg/1
Ul
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Mettiylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthaiate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trlchloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil S Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimuir
pB, Maximum
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
0.110
0.082
0.007
I
1.210
NA
NA
0.690
0.0600
0.250
0.000
0.640
235.0
0.000
NA
NA
0.009
NA
NA
362.0
10.6
11.8
15.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
*
0*000
0.000
0.008
0.007
0.000
4.110
NA
NA
0.200
0.0090
0.050
0.000
0.3200
29.40
0.000
NA
NA
0.024
NA
NA
86.0
11.8
11.8
15.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.065
11.60
0.000
4.730
NA
NA
0.820
0.0170
0.590
0.000
1.480
59.0
4.440
NA
NA
0.040
NA
NA
217.0
10.6
10.6
15.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.055
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0110
0.048
0.000
3.880
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
5.0
11.0
11.0
15.0
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0710
0.000
0.000
3.200
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.008
NA
NA
49.0
10.8
11.0
NA - Kot Analyzed
ซ - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-106
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE SILVEP
POWDER PRESSED AND ELECTBOLYTICALLY OXIDIZED
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT A
PLANT B
mg/kg
Flow (I/kg)
temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1 -Di.cn loroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Napththalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthaiate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Kercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Kanganese
Phenols, Total
Cils 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pR, Minimum
pH, Maximum
79.7
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.040
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
8.77
6.53
0.558
I
96.4
NA
NA
54.98
4.781
19.9
0.000
51.00
18730.
0.000
NA
NA
0.717
NA
KA
28850.
10.6
11.8
1136.
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
9.08
7.95
0.000
4670.
NA
NA
227.1
10.22
56.78
0:000
363.4
33380.
0.000
NA
NA
27.25
NA
NA
97700.
11.8
11.8
100.9
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
6.56
1171.
0.000
477.4
NA
NA
82.8
1.716
59.55
0.000
149.4
5955.
488.1
NA
NA
4.037
NA
NA
21900-
10.6
10.6
262.6
15.0
0.00
00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
14.45
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
2.889
12.61
0.000
1019.
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1313.
11.0
11.0
341.8
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1.367
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
24.27
0.000
0.000
1093.
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
2.735
NA
NA
16750.
10.8
11.0
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TAB1E V-107
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) Of THE
SILVER POWDER PRESSED AND ELECTROLYTICALLY
OXIDIZED CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Irichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethyltenzene
14 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
4 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Dlethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead ,
123 Kercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 5 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pHr Minimum
pH, Maximum
INI MUM
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0090
0.000
0.000
0.3200
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
5.0
10.6
10.6
MAXIMUM
15.0
*
*
.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
*
0.000
0.110
0.082
11.60
0.000
4.730
NA
NA
0.820
0.0710
0.590
0.000
3.880
235.0
4.440
NA
NA
0.040
NA
NA
362.0
11.8
11.8
MEAN
15.0
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
*
0.000
0.020
0.043
2.323
0.000
2.010
NA
NA
0.342
0.0336
0.188
0.000
1.904
64.7
0.888
NA
NA
0.016
NA
NA
143.8
11.0
11.2
MEDIAN
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.055
0.007
0.000
1.210
NA
NA
0.200
0.0170
0.050
0.000
1.480
29.40
0.000
NA
NA
0.009
NA
NA
86.0
10.8
11.0
I
VAL
5
2
2
0
0
0
3
3
1
0
3
2
0
1
5
3
0
3
3
5
4
0
5
3
1
4
5
5
5
I
ZEROS
I
PTS
KA - Not Analyzed
* - SO.01
-------
TABLE V-108
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) CF THE
SILVER POWDER PRESSED AND ELECTROLYTICALLY
OXIDIZED CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
CO
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dicbloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate
70 Ciethyl Phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Awn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 5 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
79.7
14.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1.367
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
1.716
0.000
0.000
51.00
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1313.
10.6
10.6
1136.
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
8.77
14.45
1171.
0.000
4667.
NA
NA
227.1
24.27
59.55
0.000
1094.
33380.
448.1
NA
NA
27.25
NA
NA
97650.
11.8
11.8
384.1
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
1.753
7.60
235.9
0.000
1048.
NA
NA
73.0
8.775
29.77
0.000
535.3
11610.
89.6
NA
NA
6.95
NA
NA
33290.
11.0
11.2
262.6
15.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
6.56
0.558
0.000
96.4
NA
NA
54.98
4.781
19.92
0.000
363.4
5955.
0.000
NA
NA
2.735
NA
NA
21900.
10.8
11.0
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-109
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SILVER
OXIDE (AgsO) POWDER-THERMALLY REDUCED AND
SINTERED, ELECTROLYTICALLY FORMED CATHOCE ELEMEFT
HASTE STREAMS
mg/1
vo
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1t2-Trans-dichlorcethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Napthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachlbroethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Trichlorcethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Ann. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Airmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil C Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.010
0.000
0.002
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.0130
0.000
0.000
0.3000
0.017
0.350
0.84
NA
0.000
0.004
12.0
6.1
12.4
12.4
16.0
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0200
0.000
0.000
16.70
0.011
0.000
0.28
NA
0.000
0.017
9.3
1.0
9.0
9.0
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V- 110
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE SILVER
OXIDE (AgsO) PONDER-THERMALLY REDUCED AND
SINTERED, ELECTROLYTICALLY FOFMED CATHOCE ELEMENT
WASTE STREAMS
ing/1
Ul
o
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1*1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Armenia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Mini ITU*
pR, Maximum
437.4
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.374
0.000
0.875
2.624
0.000
0.000
5.686
0.000
0.000
131.2
7.44
153.1
367.4
NA
0.000
1.750
5250.
2668.
12.4
12.4
100.9
16.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.707
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
2.019
0.000
0.000
1686.
1.110
0.000
28.26
NA
0.000
1.716
939.
100.9
9.0
9.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TAELE V-111
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SILVER
PEROXIDE (AgO) PCWDEP CATHODE ELEMENT HASTE STREAMS
PLANT C
PLANT E
mg/1
Ul
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Fentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Kickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pR, Maximum
I - Interference
VA - Not Analyzed
* - < to 0.01
i - Invalid Analysis
38.0
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.013
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.008
0.000
45.20
0.450
0.000
1.10
NA
0.000
0.000
16.0
620.
9.0
9.0
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
5.99
0.220
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
71.0
0.014
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
310.0
10.0
11.0
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
2.250
0.088
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
48.60
0.050
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
178.0
11.0
13.0
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
3.380
0. 160
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
8.80
0.030
3.560
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
730.
10.0
13.0
-------
TABLE V-112
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE SILVER
PEROXIDE (AgO) PCWCEP CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
PLANT C
PLANT B
mg/kg
U1
to
Flow (I/kg)
temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1t1-Trichloroetbane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Fentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetracbloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmiuir
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pR, Maximum
75.7
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
KA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.606
0.000
0.984
0.530
0.000
0.000
0.5300
0.606
0.000
3422.
34.07
0.000
83.3
NA
0.000
0.000
1211.
46930.
9.0
9.0
5.539
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
33.18
1.219
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
393.3
0.078
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
KA
1717.
10.0
11.0
22.35
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
50.30
1.967
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
1086.
1.118
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
3978.
11.0
13.0
10.42
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
35.22
1-667
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
I
0.000
i
91.7
0.313
37.10
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
7610.
10.0
13.0
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
i - Invalid Analysis
-------
TABLE V-113
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE
SILVER PEROXIDE (AgO) POWDER CATHODE
ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
t
VAL
f
ZERCS
I
PTS
Ln
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trlchloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Gil 6 Grease
Total suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pB, Maximum
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.000
0.000
8.80
0.014
0.000
1.10
NA
0.000
0.000
16.0
178.0
9.0
9.0
3.80
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
5.990
0.220
0.000
0.013
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.008
0.000
71.0
0.450
3.560
1.10
NA
0.000
0.000
16.0
730.
11.0
13.0
3.08
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
2.905
0.119
0.000
0.003
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.002
0.000
43.40
0.136
0.890
1.10
NA
0.000
0.000
16.0
459.5
10.0
11.5
3.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
2.815
0.124
0.000
0.000
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.0070
0.000
0.000
46.90
0.040
0.000
1.10
NA
0.000
0.000
16.0
465.0
10.0
12.0
1
1
0
1
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
4
4
1
1
0
0
1
4
4
4
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TAELE V-114
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) CF THE
SILVER PEROXIDE (AgO) POWDER
CATHODE ELEMENT WASTE STREAMS
MINIMUM
MAXIKUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
Ul
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1r1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
38 Ethylhenzene
11 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Icluene
87 Trlchloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
121 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Airmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximuir
5.539
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.606
0.000
0.000
0.530
0.000
0.000
0.5300
0.000
0.000
91.7
0.078
0.000
83.3
NA
0.000
0.076
1211.
1717.
9.0
9.0
75.7
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
50.29
1.967
0.000
0.981
0.530
0.000
0.000
0.5300
0.606
0.000
3112.
31.07
37.10
83.3
NA
0.000
0.076
1211.
16930.
11.0
13.0
28.50
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
29.67
1.365
0.000
0.216
0.530
0.000
0.000
0.5300
0.151
0.000
1218.
8.89
9.27
83.3
NA
0.000
0.076
1211.
15060.
10.0
11.5
16.39
38.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
31.20
1.113
0.000
0.000
0.530
0.000
0.000
0.5300
0.000
0.000
710.
0.715
0.000
83.3
NA
0.000
0.076
1211.
5792.
10.0
12.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-115
PRODUCTION NORMALIZED DISCHARGES
FROM CELL WASH OPERATIONS
Ul
(Jl
WASTE
STREAK
Cell fiash
Kastettater
PLANT
ID
A
E
C
D
E
F
6
FANGE
I/kg
DCP
DATA
I/kg
a. 21
ซ
0.334
MEAN
I/kg
MEAN
SAMPLING
DATA
I/kg
0*088
1.62
0.345
0.209
MEDIAN
I/kg
.088-4.21
1.13
0.3UO
t - Abnormally high flow (34.1 I/kg) deleted from consideration.
-------
V-116
PGUinnNT aoNoafrmncNS IN THE
CBZ.WSH BUMNT WVSIB STHWB
mg/1
11
13
29
30
38
44
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
128
temperature (Deg C)
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane
1,1-Dichloroethana
1, IHttchkxoethylene
l,2-Trans-dichloroetฑiylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Naphthalene
Ba iLachloimJ iw ul
Bis(2-etnylhexyl) pnthalate
DLethyl phthalat
Tetrachloroethylene
Tbluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadniun
Chroidum, Ibtal
Chroniun, Hexavalent
Q^per
cyanide, Ibtal
Cyanide, Ann. to Chlor.
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Aluidnun
Anmnia
Iron
Marvyuiese
Rienols, Ibtal
Oil 6 Qnease
Ibtal Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pfl, Maxinun
29.9
0.006
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.011
NA
NA
NA
0.012
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.032
0.000
0.272
NA
NA
0.011
0.0190
3.824
NA
0.0000
3.669
NA
1.46
NA
17.64
0.015
41.4
21.6
8.9
11.4
PUWTG
30.3
0.006
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
O.LLL
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.035
0.000
0.282
NA
NA
0.024
0.0220
6.49
NA
0.0000
3.681
NA
8.37
NA
24.04
0.017
71.6
51.9
8.1
11.0
PIAMTB
31.1
0.016
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.021
NA
NA
NA
*
0.000
o.ooo
0.010
0.146
0.000
0.629
NA
NA
0.136
0.2930
24.39
NA
0.0000
12.41
NA
2.25
NA
69.6
0.014
49.8
161.3
9.7
11.9
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
0.000
0.008
9.68
8.60
0.033
0.014
I
0.000
0.970
0.210
0.000
0.0170
0.430
0.000
NA
NA
0.068
0.088
3.0
33.0
NA
NA
58.0
*
*
*
*
0.004
*
0.023
NA
NA
*
*
0.004
*
0.000
0.067
0.181
73.1
59.14
0.187
0.018
I
0.109
5.343
1.540
0.046
1.346
12.74
0.166
NA
NA
0.607
0.023
29.7
13.7
NA
NA
56.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
o.oo
0.00
o.ooo
0.000
0.013
15.40
15.00
0.010
0.017
I
0.000
1.330
0.350
0.000
0.0330
0.710
0.000
NA
NA
0.150
0.021
11.0
0.0
NA
NA
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.161
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.006
256.0
I
0.370
3.900
3.900
0.000
I
4.680
NA
0.0080
18.40
NA
NA
NA
14.80
0.000
104.0
29.0
5.8
5.8
PUNT A
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.057
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
o.ooo
0.010
253.0
I
0.540
7.20
4.900
0.000
I
8.64
NA
0.0150
32.90
NA
NA
NA
38.40
0.000
205.0
38.0
6.4
6.4
PIAWT C
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.033
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.008
318.0
I
0.430
2.100
2.100
0.000
I
6.85
NA
0.0060
29.40
NA
NA
NA
25.20
0.000
114.0
42.0
5.8
5.8
NA
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
i
0.103
0.026
0.000
0.103
NA
NA
0.000
0.2030
0.890
t
0.4930
1.897
0.000
NA
NA
0.063
NA
NA
29.5
8.0
11.5
NA
*
*
*
*
0.00
*
*
NA
NA
*
*
0.00
*
0.000
i
0.100
0.002
0.000
0.078
NA
NA
0.000
0.5860
0.685
1
0.2600
2.217
0.000
NA
WV
0.094
NA
NA
34.3
7.5
11.9
NA
*
*
*
*
0.00
*
0.00
NA
WY
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
i
0.124
0.026
0.000
0.120
NA
W\
0.000
0.4090
1.054
i
0.2600
1.435
0.000
NA
WV
0.059
MA
NA
28.7
7.5
12.0
I Intta.ftu.mioe
WV - Not Analyzed
* - <_ 0.01
i - Invalid Analysis
-------
Ul
fUtfTG
TfOX V-117
LOADINGS IN THE
COZ.NASH nawn1 WVSTS
mg/kg
PLANTS
HUVNT A
FtANT C
u
13
29
30
38
44
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
128
Flow (lAg)
Tenperature (Dag C)
1, 1, 1-TridiloroettMna
If l~DichliJi'ueU lans
1, 1-W.cMoroethylene
l,2-T*ans-dix*iloroethylene
Bthylbenaena
Methylene chlorida
Naphthalene
Renbachl0rc|jlii!iL>l
Bds(2--etnylhexyl) phthalate
DLethyl phthalat
Ttetrachlotoethylene
Tbluene
fridilaroethylene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cachdtn
Chraidun, Total
ChrcRiiun, Hssravalant
Ccgper
Cyanide, Tbtal
Cyanide, Am. to Chlor.
Lead
Mercury
Nkfcel
Seleniun
Silver
Zinc
Ahminun
Anmnia
Iron
.* , ._ .I,
nUViJBnSaa
Rienols, Tbtal
Oil 6 Qreaae
Tbtal Suspended Solids
pH, Hinlnun
pH, Maxiflun
0.194
29.9
0.001
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.007
NA
NA
NA
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.006
0.000
0.053
NA
NA
0.002
0.0040
0.471
NA
0.0000
0.711
NA
0.282
NA
3.417
0.003
8.02
4.189
8.9
11.4
0.224
30.3
0.001
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.025
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.008
0.000
0.063
NA
NA
0.005
0.0050
1.457
NA
0.0000
0.826
NA
1.878
NA
5.394
0.004
16.06
11.65
8.0
11.0
0.220
31.1
0.004
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.005
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.032
0.000
0.139
NA
NA
0.030
0.0650
5.373
NA
0.0000
2.734
NA
0.495
NA
15.33
0.003
10.97
35.53
9.7
11.9
0.575
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.005
5.571
4.949
0.019
0.008
I
0.000
0.5580
0.121
0.000
0.0100
0.247
0.000
NA
NA
0.039
0.051
1.726
18.99
NA
NA
0.295
58.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.001
0.00
0.007
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.001
0.00
0.000
0.020
0.053
21.58
17.45
0.055
0.005
I
0.003
1.576
0.454
0.013
0.3970
3.759
0.049
NA
NA
0.179
0.007
8.77
4.046
NA
NA
0.603
56.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
o.ooo
0.008
9.29
9.05
0.006
0.010
I
0.000
0.802
0.211
0.000
0.0200
0.428
0.000
NA
NA
0.090
0.013
6.64
0.000
NA
NA
0.085
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.014
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
21.81
I
0.032
0.332
0.332
0.000
I
0.399
NA
0.0010
1.567
NA
N&
NA
1.261
0.000
8.86
2.470
5.8
5.8
0.089
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.005
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
22.59
I
0.048
0.643
0.438
0.000
I
0.772
NA
0.0010
2.938
NA
NA
NA
3.429
0.000
18.31
3.393
6.4
6.4
0.090
34.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
NA
0.003
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.001
28.56
I
0.039
0.189
0.189
0.000
I
0.616
NA
0.0010
2.640
NA
NA
NA
2.263
0.000
12.03
3.772
5.8
5.8
1.495
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
0.152
0.038
0.000
0.153
NA
NA
0.000
0.3010
1.307
i
0.732
2.817
0.000
NA
NA
0.093
NA
NA
43.73
8.0
11.5
1.562
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0-00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
1
0.156
0.003
0.000
0.122
NA
NA
0.000
0.915
1.071
i
0.4061
3.463
0.000
NA
NA
0.146
NA
NA
53.62
7.5
11.9
1.904
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
I
0.221
0.046
0.000
0.217
NA
NA
0.000
0.736
0.902
1
0.4690
2.590
0.000
NA
NA
0.107
NA
NA
51.74
7.5
12.0
I - Interfarenas
NA - Not Analyzed
* - ฃ0.01
i - Invalid Analysis
-------
TABLE V-118
00
MINIMUM
Temperature (Deg C) 29.9
11.
13
29
30
38
44
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
128
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethylene
1 , 2-Trans-dichloroethy lene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Napthalene
Pen t ach lorophenol
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) pht ha late 0.011
Diethyl phthalate
Tetr ach loroethy lene
Tcluene
T r ich lor oethy lene
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Aluminum
Avmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Tctal Suspended Solids
pH, Miniiruir
pH, Maximum
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.010
0.014
2.100
0.000
0.0191
0.210
0.000
0.0000
0.430
0.000
1.46
NA
0.059
0.000
3.0
0.0
5.8
5.8
MAXIMUM
58
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
318
59
.0
.016
*
*
*
.004
*
.023
.00
.161
*
*
.004
.012
.000
.067
.181
.0
.14
0.629
7
4
0
5
24
0
1
32
0
.20
.900
.136
.343
.39
.046
.345
.90
.166
8.37
69
0
205
161
9
12
NA
.6
.088
.0
.3
.7
.0
MEAN MECIAN
32.3
0.002
*
*
*
0.001
*
0.004
0.00
0.069
*
*
0.001
0.001
0.000
0.007
0.047
77.1
9.19
0.254
2.208
3.633
0.015
1.019
4.967
0.015
0.2030
9.99
0.028
4.03
NA
15.89
0.020
72.2
40.3
7.5
9.7
34
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
3
0
0
2
*
*
*
*
.
.
*
.
.
*
*
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
0
00
00
00
046
00
000
000
010
913
000
229
059
900
000
4081
682
0.000
0
3
0
2
.
^
0160
675
000
25
f
VAL
8
9
4
4
3
1
4
5
0
6
6
2
1
8
0
1
12
12
3
12
6
3
4
9
12
1
9
12
1
3
1
ZEROS
0
3
2
2
3
5
8
1
2
0
0
4
5
4
12
8
0
0
6
0
0
0
8
0
0
2
3
0
5
0
t
PTS
8
12
6
6
6
6
12
6
2
6
6
6
6
12
12
9
12
12
9
12
6
3
12
9
12
3
12
12
6
3
NA
7
0
70
015
49.8
31
7
11
,
.
3
5
4
12
6
9
11
9
9
0
3
0
1
0
0
12
9
9
12
9
9
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-119
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) CF THE CELL HASH WASTE STREAMS
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 lrl-Dlchloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
11 Methylene chloride
55 Napthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chronrium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide
Cyanide
122 lead
123 Mercury
12
-------
TABLE V-120
POLLUTANT CONCENTPATICNS IN THE ELECTROLYTE
PREPARATION WASTE STREAM
irg/1
Temperature (Deg C) NA
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichlcroethylene 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
44 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene 0.00
61 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA
70 Diethyl phthalate 0.00
85 Tetrachlorcethylene 0.00
86 Tcluene 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
119 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic i
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 0.000
Chromiuir, Hexavalent 0.000
120 Ccpper 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA
122 Lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.0(100
124 Nickel 0.220
125 Selenium i
126 Silver 0.790
128 Zinc 19.20
Aluminum 0.000
Airmonia NA
Iron NA
Manganese 0.000
Phenols, Total NA
Cil 6 Grease NA
Total Suspended Solids 70.0
pR Minimum 12.8
pR Maximum 12.8
NA - Not Analyzed
i - Invalid Analysis
-------
TABLE V-121
POLLUTANT MASS LCACINGS IN THE ELECTROLYTE
PREPARATION HASTE STREAM
Flo* (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthaiate
70 Ciethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
mg/kg
0*365
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0*00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
i
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.0146
0.080
i
0.2884
7.01
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
25.55
12.8
12.8
NA - Kot Analyzed
i - Invalid Analysis
-------
TABLE V-122
POLLUTANT CONCENTPATIONS IN THE SIIVEP
ETCH HASTE STREAM
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 10,0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene *
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
44 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene 0.00
64 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA
70 Ciethyl phthalate 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00
86 Tcluene 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.040
119 Chromium, Total 0.009
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000
120 Copper 0.088
121 Cyanide, Total 0.010
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. 0.000
122 lead 0.047
123 Mercury 0.0090
124 Nickel 0.000
125 Selenium 0.000
126 Silver 36.30
128 Zinc 1.060
Aluminum 0.650
Ammonia 2.00
Iron NA
Manganese 0.013
Phenols, Total 0.011
Cil 6 Grease 0.000
Total Suspended Solids 7.0
pH, Miniirum 2.6
pH, Maxiirum 3.6
NA - Kot Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-123
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE
SILVER ETCH WASTE STREAM
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylfcenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthaiate
70 Diethyl phthalate
65 Tetrachlorcethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Armenia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Tctal Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
mg/kg
49.04
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
1.962
0.441
0.000
4.316
0.490
0.000
2.305
0.4414
0.000
0.000
1780.
51.99
31.88
98.1
NA
0.638
0.539
0.000
343.3
2.6
3.6
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-124
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE LAUNDRY HASH
AND EMPLOYEE SHCWER WASTE STREAMS
irg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 27.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane - *
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
44 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene *
64 Pentachloropheneol KA
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate KA
70 Diethyl phthalate *
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00
86 Toluene 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene *
114 Antimony NA
115 Arsenic KA
118 Cadmium KA
119 Chromium, Total NA
Chromium, Hexavalent NA
120 Copper NA
121 Cyanide, Total 0.030
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. I
122 Lead KA
123 Mercury KA
124 Nickel NA
125 Selenium NA
126 Silver KA
128 Zinc NA
Aluminum KA
Ammonia NA
Iron KA
Manganese NA
Phenols, Total 0.190
Cil S Grease 270.0
Total Suspended Solids 42.0
pH, Minimum 4.7
pH, Maximum 7.7
28.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
ซ
0.000
0.000
0.071
0.000
0.000
0.230
0.014
I
0.000
9.40
0.000
0.000
1.460
0.820
0.160
NA
NA
0.350
0.053
5.2
72.0
6.4
7.2
30.0
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
*
0.000
0.000
0.100
0.000
0.000
0.450
0.000
I
0.043
I
0.025
0.000
0.4300
1.220
0.160
NA
NA
0.400
0.084
14.0
23.0
5.5
6.9
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-125
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
MANDATORY EMPLOYEE HASH HASTE
STFEAM
Ul
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Dichloroethane
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichlorcethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium,
Chromiuir,
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn,
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
Zinc
Aluminuir
Airmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil G Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Miniir.um
pR, Maximum
Total
Hexavalent
to Chlor.
17.0
0.00
KA
KA
KA
NA
0.00
KA
0.00
*
KA
KA
KA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.027
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
KA
0.0000
0.100
KA
6.23
KA
0.230
0.022
8.3
133.3
NA
KA
mg/1
29.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
*
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.014
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
NA
0.0000
0.150
NA
0.73
NA
0.095
0.035
2.0
84.0
NA
NA
26.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
*
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.024
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
NA
0.0000
0.150
NA
0.13
NA
0.360
I
42.0
55.0
MA
NA
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-126
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN
THE MANDATORY EMPLOYEE NASH
WASTE STREAM
irg/kg
Flow (I/kg) 0.266
Temperature 17.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00
13 1,1-Dichloroethane NA
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene NA
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene NA
38 Ethylbenzene NA
44 Kethylene chloride 0.00
55 Naphthalene NA
64 Fentachlorophenol 0.00
66 Eis (2-ehtylhexyl)phthalate 0.00
70 Ciethyl phthalate NA
85 Tetrachloroethylene NA
86 Toluene NA
87 Trichloroethylene NA
114 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000
118 Cadiriunr 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 0.000
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000
120 copper 0.007
121 Cyanide, Total 0.000
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. 0.000
122 Lead 0.000
123 Kercury 0.0000
124 Nickel 0.000
125 Selenium NA
126 Silver 0.0000
128 Zinc 0.027
Alurinum NA
Ammonia 1.657
Iron NA
Kanganese 0.061
Phenols, Total 0.006
Cil 6 Grease 2.208
Total Suspended Solids 35.46
pH, Minimum NA
pH, Maximum NA
0.266
29.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
NA
0.0000
0.040
NA
0.194
NA
0.025
0.009
0.532
22.34
NA
NA
0.266
26.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.000
NA
0.0000
0.040
NA
0.035
NA
0.096
I
11.17
14.63
NA
NA
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-127
POLLOTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE REJECT CEIL
RANCLING HASTE STREAMS
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C) NA
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane KA
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane NA
29 1,1 - Dichloroethylene NA
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene NA
38 Ethylfcenzene NA
44 Netbylene chloride NA
55 Naphthalene NA
64 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate NA
70 Diethyl phthalate NA
85 Tetrachloroethylene NA
86 Toluene KA
87 Trlchloroethylene NA
114 Antimony KA
115 Arsenic NA
118 Cadmium 0.023
119 Chromium, Total 0.095
Chromium, flexavalent NA
120 Copper 5.460
121 Cyanide, Total NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA
122 Lead 0.341
123 Mercury 17.00
124 Nickel 0.571
125 Selenium NA
126 Silver 3.590
128 Zinc 156.0
Aluminum 106.0
Airmonia NA
Iron' 0.565
Manganese 0.175
Phenols, Total NA
Cil 6 Grease KA
Total suspended Solids NA
pH, Minimum NA
pB, Maximum NA
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-128
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE REJECT
CELL HANDLING WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Napthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Trichloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Rexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minirum
pR, maximum
18.0
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.038
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.100
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.076
0.096
0.008
0.057
0.4700
0.007
NA
0.0000
730.
NA
5.57
NA
0.021
0.000
13.3
762.
NA
NA
19.0
0.00
KA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.078
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.190
0.000
0.016
I
0.300
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.000
0.070
NA
0.0000
495.0
NA
8.89
NA
0.150
0.000
6.0
500.
NA
NA
18.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
*
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.150
0.000
0.009
0.000
0.320
0.069
0.000
0.000
0.3700
0.180
NA
0.0000
206.0
NA
1.370
NA
0.290
0.120
19.0
1310.
NA
NA
I - Interference
KA * Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-129
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE REJECT
CELL HANDING HASTE STREAMS
Flow (I/kg) 0.003
Temperature (Deg C) 18.0
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane 0.00
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane KA
29 1,1 - Oichloroethylene NA
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene NA
38 Ethylbenzene NA
49 Methylene chloride 0.00
55 Napthalene NA
64 Pentachlorophenol 0.00
66 Eis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 0.00
70 Diethyl phthalate NA
85 Tetrachloroethylene NA
66 Tcluene NA
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 0.000
Chromium, Rexavalent 0.000
120 Copper 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total 0.000
Cyanide, Amn, to Chlor. 0.000
122 lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.0010
124 Nickel 0.000
125 Selenium NA
126 Silver 0.0000
128 Zinc 1.995
Aluminum NA
Airmonia 0.015
Iron NA
Manganese 0.000
Phenols, Total 0.000
Oil 6 Grease 0.036
Total Suspended Solids 2.082
pB, irinimuir KA
pH, maximum NA
mg/kg
0.002
19.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
I
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0020
0.000
NA
0.0000
0.902
NA
0.016
NA
0.00
0.00
0.011
0.911
NA
NA
0.003
18.0
0.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.00
NA
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
NA
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0010
0.001
NA
0.0000
0.563
NA
O.OOU
NA
0.001
0.000
0.052
3.580
NA
NA
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-130
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
FLOOR WASH WASTE STREAM
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthaiate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Bexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Seleniuir
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluirirum
Airmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, iriniirum
pn, maximum
mg/1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.000
0.000
0.040
0.350
0.000
0.230
NA
NA
4.130
I
0.380
0.000
49.50
600.
5.830
120.0
NA
0.340
NA
NA
2800.
NA
NA
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-131
POLLUTANT MASS LOACINGS IN THE
FLOOR HASH HASTE STPEAM
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylfcenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethy Ihexyl) phthalate
70 Dlethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Airmonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, iriniiruir
pH, iraxirrum
mg/kg
0.296
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.000
0.000
0.012
0.103
0.000
0.068
NA
NA
1.221
I
0.112
0.000
14.64
177.4
1.724
35.48
NA
0.101
NA
NA
828.
NA
NA
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-132
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE EQUIPMENT WASH WASTE STREAMS
PLANT B PLANT A
mg/1
to
Temperature (Ceg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Dichloroethylene
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
11 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
61 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Dlethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Trichlorcethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadirium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromiuir, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
121 Nickel
125 Seleniuir
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminuir
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, iriniiruir
pH, maximum
18.8
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.006
0.188
0.000
0.000
0.005
NA
NA
0.005
0.1188
0.128
0.000
0.0311
8.03
0.121
NA
NA
0.020
NA
NA
51.5
12.0
12.2
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.100
0.015
0.000
I
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.1000
0.020
0.050
0.0000
0.660
NA
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
112.0
11.8
11.8
50.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.090
0.021
0.012
0.000
0.026
NA
NA
0.000
0.0380
0.038
0.070
0.3500
1.100
0.000
NA
NA
0.020
NA
NA
68.0
12.0
12.2
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.021
0.011
0.000
0.012
NA
NA
0.000
0.2200
0.100
0.000
0.960
1.790
0.000
NA
NA
0.072
NA
NA
98.0
5.6
6.5
I - Interference
KA - Net Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-133
POLLUTANT: MASS LOADINGS IN THE EQUIPMENT WASH WASTE STREAMS
PLANT B
PLANT A
mg/kg
11
13
29
30
38
4a
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
1,1,1 - Trlchloroethane
1,1 - Dichloroethane
1,1 - Cichloroethylene
1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
Ethylbenzene
Kethylene chloride
Naphthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Tcluene
Trichloroethylene
Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadirium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromiuir, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Ann. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Seleniuir
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminuir
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Tctal Suspended Solids
pH, iririir.uir
pH, iraximun;
I - Interference
KA - Not Analyzed
16.64
18.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.097
3.131
0.000
0.000
0.081
NA
NA
0.083
1.977
2.131
0.000
0.5730
133.7
2.057
NA
NA
0.337
NA
NA
856.
12.0
12.2
6.79
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.679
0.102
0.000
I
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.717
0.136
0.340
0.000
4.484
NA
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
761.
11.8
11.8
3.470
50.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.312
0.073
0.042
0.000
0.090
NA
NA
0.000
0.1320
0.132
0.243
1.214
4.857
0.000
NA
NA
0.069
NA
NA
235.9
12.0
12.2
5.090
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.122
0.056
0.000
0.211
NA
NA
0.000
1.120
0.509
0.000
4.887
9.111
0.000
NA
NA
0.366
NA
NA
498.8
5.6
6.5
-------
TABLE V- 134
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/1) OF THE EQUIPMENT WASH WASTE STPEAMS
11
13
29
30
38
44
55
64
66
70
85
86
87
Temperature (Deg C)
1,1,1 - Trichloroethane
1,1 - Dichloroethane
1,1 - Dichloroethylene
1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
Ethyltenzene
Kethylene chloride
Naphthalene
Pentachlorophenol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Ciethyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichlorcethylene
Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide f Total
Cyanide, Ann. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, minimum
pH, raximum
INI MUM
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.015
0.000
0.000
0.005
NA
NA
0.000
0.0380
0.020
0.000
0.0000
0.660
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
51.4
5.6
6.5
MAXIMUM
50.0
*
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
ซ
0.00
0.000
0.100
0.188
0.012
0.000
0.012
NA
NA
0.005
0.4000
0.128
0.070
0.960
8.03
0.124
NA
NA
0.072
NA
NA
112.0
12.0
12.2
1
MEAN MEDIAN VAL
19.3
*
*
0.00
0.00
*
*
*
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.049
0.062
0.006
0.000
0.024
NA
NA
0.002
0.1942
0.072
0.030
0.3361
2.971
0.041
NA
NA
0.028
NA
NA
82.4
10.3
10.7
18.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
*
0.00
*
0.00
0.000
0.048
0.023
0.006
0.000
0.026
NA
NA
0.000
0.1694
0.069
0.025
0.1922
1.595
0.000
NA
NA
0.020
NA
NA
83.0
11.9
12.0
3
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
3
0
3
0
0
3
4
2
0
3
1
4
4
2
3
4
1
3
4
4
4
1
ZEROS
0
3
3
0
4
3
3
3
1
a
1
4
4
1
0
2
3
0
2
0
0
2
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
f
PTS
3
4
4
4
4
4
a
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-135
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (mg/kg) CF THE EQUIPMENT WASH WASTE STREAMS
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
(J\
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1 - Trlchloroethane
13 1,1 - Dichloroethane
29 1,1 - Oichloroethylene
30 1,2 - Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Kethylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Els (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachlcrcethylene
86 Tcluene
87 Trichloroethylene
111 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Ccpper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, iriniirum
pH, maximum
3.470
10.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.073
0.000
0.000
0.084
NA
NA
0.000
0.1320
0.132
0.000
0.0000
4.484
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
235.9
5.6
6.5
16.64
50.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.679
3.131
0.056
0.000
0.214
NA
NA
0.083
2.717
2.131
0.340
4.887
133.7
2.057
NA
NA
0.366
NA
NA
856.
12.0
12.2
8.00
19.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.272
0.857
0.024
0.000
0.129
NA
NA
0.028
1.486
0.727
0.146
1.668
38.03
0.686
NA
NA
0.193
NA
NA
587.9
10.4
10.7
5.942
18.8
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.205
0.112
0.021
0.000
0.090
NA
NA
0.000
1.548
0.322
0.121
0-894
6.98
0.000
NA
NA
0.203
NA
NA
630.
11.9
12.0
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TABLE V-136
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE SILVER
PONDEF PRODUCTION ELEMENT
WASTE STREAMS
mg/1
Temperature (Deg C) 14.0 15.0 10.0
11 1,1, 1-1 rich lor oethane 0.00 0.00 0.00
13 1,1-Cichloroethane 0.00 0.00 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00 0.00 0.00
44 Methylene chloride * * *
55 Naphthalene 0.00 0.00 0.00
64 Pentachlorophenol NA NA NA
66 Bis (2~ethylhexyl) ph thai ate KA NA NA
70 Ciethyl phthalate 0.00 0.00 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
86 Tcluene 0.00 0.00 0.00
87 Trichloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
114 Antimony 0.000 0.000 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000 0.000 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.007 0.000
119 Chroirium, Total 0.700 1.520 0.580
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.000 0.000 0.000
120 Copper 4.350 10.50 4.370
121 Cyanide, Total NA NA NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA NA NA
122 Lead 0.160 0.280 0.000
123 Mercury 0.0080 0.0000 0.0000
124 Nickel 0.610 1.450 0.570
125 Selenium 0.000 0.000 0.000
126 Silver 12.00 24.10 13.90
128 Zinc 0.180 0.440 0.380
Aluminuir 3.400 12.00 0.480
Ammonia NA KA NA
Iron KA NA NA
Manganese 0.110 0.078 0.100
Phenols, Total NA NA NA
Cil 6 Grease KA NA NA
Total suspended Solids 27.0 23.0 13.0
pH, Minimum 2.0 2.2 2.1
pH, Maximum 2.6 2.5 2.5
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-137
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION ELEMENT
WASTE STREAMS
mg/kg
Flow (I/kg) 23.72 20.14 19.80
Temperature (Deg. C) 14.0 15.0 10.0
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.00 0.00 0.00
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00 0.00 0.00
29 1,1-Dichlcroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mil Methylene chloride 0.00 0.00 0.00
55 Naphthalene 0.00 0.00 0.00
61 Pentachlorophenol NA NA NA
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA NA NA
70 Dlethyl phthalate 0.00 0.00 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
86 Toluene 0.00 0.00 0.00
87 Trlchloroethylene 0.00 0.00 0.00
11ซ Antimony 0.000 0.000 0.000
115 Arsenic 0.000 0.000 0.000
118 Cadmium 0.000 0.141 0.000
119 Chromium, Total 16.60 30.61 11.48
Chromium, Ilexavalent 0.000 0.000 0.000
120 Copper 103.1 211.5 86.6
121 Cyanide, Total NA NA NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA NA NA
122 Lead 3.794 5.64 0.000
123 Mercury 0.1897 0.0000 0.0000
124 Kickel 14.46 29.20 11.29
125 Selenium 0.000 0.000 0.000
126 Silver 284.5 485.4 275.2
128 Zinc 4.268 8.86 7.52
Aluminum 80.6 241.7 9.50
Ammonia NA NA NA
Iron NA NA NA
Manganese 2.608 1.571 1.980
Phenols, Total NA NA NA
Cil 6 Grease NA NA NA
Total Suspended Solids 641. 463.3 257.4
pfl. Minimum 2.0 2.2 2.1
pH, Maximum 2.6 2.5 2.5
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
TAEIE V-138
POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN THE WASTE STREAMS
FROM SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION ELEMENT
rog/1
Temperature (Deg C) NA
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane *
13 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.00
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.00
30 1,2-Trans-dichlcroethylene 0.00
38 Ethylbenzene 0.00
1ซl Methylene chloride *
55 Naphthalene 0.00
61 Pentachlorophenol NA
66 Eis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate NA
70 Dlethyl phthalate 0.00
85 Tetrachloroethylene 0.00
86 Toluene 0.00
.^ 87 Trichloroethylene 0.00
^j 111 Antimony 0.000
oo 115 Arsenic 5.910
118 Cadmium 0.000
119 Chromium, lotal 0.090
Chromium, Hexavalent I
120 Ccpper 0.000
121 Cyanide, Total NA
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor. NA
122 Lead 0.000
123 Mercury 0.0370
121 Nickel 0.000
125 Selenium 4.800
126 Silver 0.770
128 Zinc 0.075
Aluminuir 0.000
Airmonia NA
Iron NA
Manganese 0.000
Phenols, Total NA
Gil 6 Grease NA
Tctal Suspended Solids 31.0
pH, Minimum 11.0
pH, Maximum 12.5
I - Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-139
POLLUTANT MASS LOADINGS IN THE HASTE STREAMS
FROM SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION ELEMENT
VO
Flow (I/kg)
Temperature (Deg C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dichloroethane
29 1,1-Dichloroethylene
30 1,2-Trana-dichIcroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Tcluene
67 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Seleniuir
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Phenols, Total
Cil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pB, Maximum
I - Interference
N* - Not Analyzed
mg/kg
14.28
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.043
0.00
NA
NA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
84.4
0.000
1.285
I
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
0.5284
0.000
68.5
11.00
1.071
0.000
NA
NA
0.000
NA
NA
442.7
11.0
12.5
-------
TABLE V-140
STATISTICAL ANALYSTS (mcj/1) OF THE
ZINC SUBCATEGOPY TOTAL RAW WASTE CONCENTRATIONS
Temperature (Oeq C)
11 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
13 1,1-Dirrhloroethane
29 1,1-Dichioroethylene
30 1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
38 Ethylbenzene
44 Methylene chloride
55 Naphthalene
64 Pentachlorophenol
66 Pis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
70 Diethyl phthalate
85 Tetrachloroethylene
86 Toluene
87 Trichloroethylene
114 Antimony
oo 115 Arsenic
O 118 Cadmium
119 Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
Cyanide, Amn. to Chlor.
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Aluminum
Ammonia
Iron
Manqanese
Phenols, Total
Oil 6 Grease
Total Suspended Solids
pH, Minimum
pH, Maximum
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEAN
MEDIAN
ซ
ZKPO!
7.1
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0007
0.000
0.000
0.0000
0.026
0.000
0.15
0.099
0.000
0.000
0.5
3.a
1.0
9.8
10.0
7.79
0.033
1.187
0.030
*
0.649
0.031
*
3.816
*
0.046
0.204
0.723
0.130
0.118
0.460
30.00
0.000
2.881
0. 106
0.005
0.196
29.98
20.29
0.012
12.20
156.9
2. 109
7.98
4.000
58.67
3.570
31,200
0160.
10. H
13.5
23.8
0. 340
0.002
0.079
0.002
*
0.023
*
*
0.632
*
0.003
0.014
0.032
0.006
0.034
0.064
2.901
0.000
0.464
0.011
0.002
0.031
3.409
2.300
0.001
1.B30
31.21
0.466
2.60
2.639
5.661
0.352
2230
636.
6. 7
11.9
10.8
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02B
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.004
0.014
0.036
0.000
0. 103
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.1035
0.064
0.000
0. 1243
13.30
0. 140
1. 10
3.819
0.069
0.016
13.9
00.2
7.9
12. 1
19
12
7
5
2
2
10
7
1
0
7
3
7
10
1
13
18
21
0
22
R
5
10
21
22
3
16
23
12
9
3
21
1r>
16
23
20
20
0
11
R
10
13
13
1 }
R
7
0
R
12
n
13
22
9
5
2
20
0
5
7
12
0
0
13
7
0
3
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
I
PTS
21
1r>
1
R
23
23
22
23
23
20
22
13
12
22
21
22
16
23
23
1S
9
3
23
1f>
Ifj
23
70
20
* - < 0.01
-------
TABLE V-141
TREATMENT IN-PLACE AT ZINC SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
PLANT ID TREATMENT IN-PLACE DISCHARGE I/
A Chemical reduction I
B pH adjust, settling, filtration D
C Settling, pH adjust, in-process Cdf I
Ni recovery
D Settling D
E Filtration, carbon adsorption, D
lagooning
F None Zero
G None Zero
H pH adjust, settling Zero 27
I pH adjust I
J Skimming, sand filter, amalgamation, I
^ carbon adsorption
ฃ2 K pH adjust, coagulant addition, sulfide I
precipitation, clarification
L pH adjust, coagulant addition, sulfide I
precipitation, clarification
M None I
N Settling, sand filtration, carbon I
adsorption
O Chemical reduction, settling I
P Chemical reduction, settling I
Q Settling (Upgraded to settling, I
filtration, ion exchange, metal
recovery)
!/ I = Indirect
D = Direct
1J Not presently active in this subcategory
-------
1ABU5 V-142
Pffcnces AND EFFJuair guKLny AT ZINC SUBCMSDOW HANTS &FUJB&
PIANT ID Treatment CdCrCuChR>HgNiAgZnNH3
A pH Adjust Settle- 0.8 0.04 1.3
Filter
B Settle 0.20 1.0 0.005 0.01 2.0 30. 6.0-9.5
C Settle 0.10 8. 0.01 0.8 0.16 0.02 274. 2.52 0.84
Filter-Carbon ND 10. 10. 0.0017 10. 10. .37 10. 0.50 10.
Adsorption
D SkdUir^lter-Carbon 0.0086 2.1 4.1 11.7
Adsorption
E pH Adjusb-Chem 0.20
Precipitation
Settle-Filter
F pH Adjust-Cham 0.10 0.01 0.70
Precipitation-Settle
G None 0.21 0.13 0.74 10. 2.9 92.
H Filter-Carbon 0.0005 ND 0.03
Adsorption
I flnalgaration-Settle 0.076 3.99
J AnalgaiBticn-Settle <0.005 0.047 0.011 0.33 0.005 1.24 0.291 8. 0.281 200. 11.2
K Settle 0.0403 0.006 0.19 <0.005 0-143 0.194 15. 0.235 8.2
ND - Not Detected
-------
TABLE V-143
PERFORMANCE OF SOLFIDE
PRECIPITATION ZINC SUBCATBGORY
oo
u>
Plant A
Pollutant or Day 1 Day 2
Pollutant Parameter (mg/1) (mg/1)
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
128
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH Minimum
pH Maximum
Raw
Waste
0.000
24.40
0.097
0.015
0.000
I
0.430
0.000
13.30
NA
1.500
31220.
1700.
7.8
9.8
Effluent
0.000
0.210
0.014
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.075
0.012
26.50
NA
1.890
7.0
5.0
6.8
6.9
Raw
Waste
0.000
30.00
0.500
0.000
0.000
0.2654
0.800
0.000
40.00
4.000
30.00
3340.
4600.
7.8
9.8
Effluent
0.000
1.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0197
0.000
0.000
7.00
2.000
0.900
14.0
26.0
7.0
7.0
Plant B
Zinc Combined Wastes
Subcat (including HgO)
Only Product in)
(mg/1) (mg/1)
Effluent
0.000
0.005
0.032
0.032
0.000
I
0.035
0.013
0.100
NA
0.760
2.9
26.0
6.8
7.3
Raw
Waste
0.160
2.130
0.078
0.000
0.000
110.0
0.000
0.088
21.00
2.06
0.450
6.7
270.
-
-
Effluent
0.000
0.000
0.047
0.053
0.000
0.060
0.000
0.000
0.226
62.8
0.377
380.
380.
-
-
I - Analytical Interference
NA - Not Analyzed
-------
POLLUTANTS
TABLE V-144
PERFORMANCE OP LIME, SETTLE, AND
FILTER - ZINC SUBCATBGORY
Concentrations (mg/1)
TREATMENT SYSTEM 1
TREATMENT SYSTEM II
00
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
128
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Oil 6 Grease
TSS
pH Minimum
pH Maximum
Day
Raw
Waste
0.026
0.000
NA
0.000
NA
0.000
59.0
NA
0.220
NA
NA
2.4
96.0
7.7
10.9
1
Effluent
0.490
0.000
NA
0.000
NA
0.000
1.760
NA
0.016
NA
NA
1.2
0.0
8.9
8.9
Day
Raw
Waste
0.004
0.000
NA
0.000
NA
0.000
1.960
NA
0.150
NA
NA
3.0
28.0
8.5
10.5
2
Effluent
0.140
0.000
NA
0.000
NA
0.000
0.800
NA
0.000
NA
NA
0.0
0.0
8.5
10.5
Day
Raw
Waste
2.040
0.081
NA
0.000
NA
100.0
1100.
NA
8.26
NA
NA
1.5
401.0
2.1
2.1
3
Effluent
0.067
0.006
NA
0.000
NA
0.000
0.500
NA
0.000
NA
NA
1.5
0.0
9.8
9.8
Day
Raw
Haste
0.071
0.025
0.300
NA
0.078
0.100
0.000
0.120
53.0
NA
0.010
NA
122.0
11.9
11.9
2
Effluent
0.012
0.014
0.081
NA
0.000
0.074
0.000
0.025
9.57
NA
0.210
NA
30.0
11.9
11.9
Day
Raw
Waste
0.058
0.059
0.610
NA
0.140
0.160
0.023
0.270
129.0
NA
0.006
NA
96.0
11.4
11.4
3
Effluent
0.004
0.018
0.200
NA
0.000
0.080
0.020
0.007
7.02
NA
0.000
NA
32.0
9.4
9.9
Pollutants
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium (Total)
120 Copper
121 Cyanide
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Oil fi Grease
TSS
pH Minimum
pR Maximum
TREATMENT SYSTEM III
TREATMENT SYSTEM IV
Day
Raw
Waste
0.000
0.700
4.35
NA
0.160
0.008
0.610
12.00
0.180
NA
0.110
NA
27.0
2.0
2.6
1
Effluent
0.029
0.020
26.8
NA
0.000
0.000
0.620
0.220
1.410
NA
0.160
NA
51.0
6.7
11.4
Day
Raw
Waste
0.007
1.520
10.50
NA
0.280
0.000
1.450
24.10
0.440
NA
0.078
NA
23.0
2.2
2.5
2
Effluent
0.008
0.059
29.90
NA
0.000
0.000
0.550
0.240
3.090
NA
0.010
NA
216.0
9.2
9.2
Day
Raw
Waste
0.000
0.580
4.370
NA
0.000
0.000
0.570
13.90
0.380
NA
0.100
NA
13.0
2.1
2.5
3
Effluent
0.011
0.018
15.30
NA
0.000
0.030
0.500
0.270
2.840
NA
0.090
NA
18.0
9.9
9.9
Raw
Waste
0.008
0.007
4.110
NA
0.200
0.009
0.050
0.320
29.40
NA
0.024
NA
86.0
11.8
11.8
Effluent
0.000
0.005
0.100
NA
0.000
0.008
0.130
0.042
1.180
NA
0.011
NA
17.0
9.2
9.2
-------
TABLE V-145
PERFORMANCE OF AMALGAMATION - ZINC SUBCA3EGOKY
Parameter
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
mg/1
Day 2
0.008
0.018
0.110
0
0.083
0.015
0
190.0
0.20
5.7
395.0
Plant A
Day 3
0.007
0.006
0.200
0.036
0.370
0.019
0
64.0
0.15
0
370.0
00
Ul
Plant B
Parameter
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
PH
Before Amalgamation
0.008
15.10
0.300
16.40
30000.
9.10
0.046
1200.
0.980
NA
11.0
1.0
After Amalgamation
0
15.60
0.720
7.88
2600.
7.30
0.120
870.
12.60
14.0
220.
1.6
NA - Not analyzed
-------
TABLE V-146
PERFORMANCE OF SKIftttNG, FILTRATION, AMALGAMATION,
AND CARBON ADSORPTION - ZINC SUBCATEGORY
CO
Parameter
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
126 Silver
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
Day 1
0.110
0.061
0.420
0
I
0.500
0
736.0
4.60
58.0
100.
12.8 - 13.6
mg/1
Day 2
0.078
Day 3
0.010
0.017
0.500
0
I
1.29
0
480.
9.60
69.0
9.0
0.004
0.330
0
I
0.82
0
455.
7.10
37.0
69.0
11.8 - 13.2
11.4 - 13.2
I - Analytical interference
-------
TABLE V-147
PERFORMANCE OF SETTLING, FILTRATION AND ION
EXCHANGE - ZINC SUBCATEGOFY
rog/1
Parameter Day 2 Day 3
118 Cadmium 0.026 0.024
119 Chromium 0.027 0.036
120 Copper 0.033 0.042
122 Lead 0 0
123 Mercury 0.021 0.059
124 Nickel 0 0
126 Silver 1.13 0.880
128 Zinc 0.94 0.59
Manganese 0.007 0.005
TSS 36.0 44.0
pH 12.1 12.6
-------
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The priority, nonconventional, and conventional pollutant parameters
that are to be examined for possible regulation were presented in
Section V. Data from plant sampling visits, and results of subsequent
chemical analysis were presented and discussed. Pollutant parameters
were selected for verification according to a specified rationale.
Each of the pollutant parameters selected for verification analysis is
discussed in detail. The selected priority pollutants are presented
in numerical order and are followed by nonconventional pollutants and
then conventional pollutants, both in alphabetical order. The final
part of this section sets forth the pollutants which are to be
considered for regulation in each subcategory. The rationale for that
final selection is included.
VERIFICATION PARAMETERS
Pollutant parameters selected for verification sampling and analysis
are listed in Table V-8 (Page 329) and the subcategory for each is
designated. The subsequent discussion is designed to provide
information about: where the pollutant comes from - whether it is a
naturally occurring element, processed metal, or manufactured
compound; general physical properties and the physical form of the
pollutant; toxic effects of the pollutant in humans and other animals;
and behavior of the pollutant in POTW at the concentrations that might
be expected from industrial dischargers.
1,1,1-frichloroethane(11). 1,1,1-Trichloroethane is one of the two
possible trichlorethanes. It is manufactured by hydrochlorinating
vinyl chloride to 1,1-dichloroethane which is then chlorinated to the
desired product. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane is a liquid at room
temperature with a vapor pressure of 96 mm Hg at 20ฐC and a boiling
point of 74ฐC. Its formula is CC13CH3. It is slightly soluble in
water (0.48 g/1) and is very soluble in organic solvents. U.S.
annual production is greater than one-third of a million tons. 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane is used as an industrial solvent and degreasing agent.
Most human toxicity data for 1,1,1-trichloroethane relates to
inhalation and dermal exposure routes. Limited data are available for
determining toxicity of ingested 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and those data
are all for the compound itself not solutions in water. No data are
available regarding its toxicity to fish and aquatic organisms. For
the protection of human health from the toxic properties of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane ingested through the consumption of water and fish,
489
-------
the ambient water criterion is 18.4 mg/1. The criterion is based on
bioassy for possible carcinogenicity.
No detailed study of 1,1,1-trichloroethane behavior in POTW is
available. However, it has been demonstrated that none of the organic
priority pollutants of this type can be broken down by biological
treatment processes as readily as fatty acids, carbohydrates, or
proteins.
Biochemical oxidation of many of the organic priority pollutants has
been investigated, at least in laboratory scale studies, at
concentrations higher than commonly expected in municipal wastewater.
General observations relating molecular structure to ease of
degradation have been developed for all of these pollutants. The
conclusion reached by study of the limited data is that biological
treatment produces a moderate degree of degradation of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane. No evidence is available for drawing conclusions
about its possible toxic or inhibitory effect on POTW operation.
However, for degradation to occur a fairly constant input of the
compound would be necessary.
Its water solubility would allow 1,1,1-trichloroethane, present in the
influent and not biodegradable, to pass through a POTW into the
effluent. One factor which has received some attention, but no
detailed study, is the volatilization of the lower molecular weight
organics from POTW. If 1,1,1-trichloroethane is not biodegraded, it
will volatilize during aeration processes in the POTW.
1,1-Dichloroethane(13). 1,1-Dichloroethane, also called ethylidene
dichloride and ethylidene chloride is a colorless liquid manufactured
by reacting hydrogen chloride with vinyl chloride in 1,1-dichloro-
ethane solution in the presence of a catalyst. However, it is
reportedly not manufactured commercially in the U.S. 1,1-
dichloroethane boils at 57ฐC and has a vapor pressure of 182 mm Hg at
20ฐC. It is slightly soluble in water (5.5 g/1 at 20ฐC) and very
soluble in organic solvents.
1,1-Dichloroethane is used as an extractant for heat-sensitive
substances and as a solvent for rubber and silicone grease.
1,1-Dichloroethane is less toxic than its isomer (1,2-dichloroethane)
but its use as an anesthetic has been discontinued because of marked
excitation of the heart. It causes central nervous system depression
in humans. There are insufficient data to derive water quality
criteria for 1,1-dichloroethane.
Data on the behavior of 1,1-dichloroethane in POTW are not available.
Many of the organic priority pollutants have been investigated, at
least in laboratory scale studies, at concentrations higher than those
490
-------
expected to be contained by most municipal wastewaters. General
observations have been developed relating molecular structure to ease
of degradation for all of the organic priority pollutants. The
conclusion reached by study of the limited data is that biological
treatment produces only a moderate removal of 1,1-dichloroethane in
POTW by degradation.
The high vapor pressure of 1,1-dichloroethane is expected to result in
volatilization of some of the compound from aerobic processes in POTW.
Its water solubility will result in some of the 1,1-dichloroethane
which enters the POTW leaving in the effluent from the POTW.
Chloroform(23). Chloroform is a colorless liquid manufactured
commercially by chlorination of methane. Careful control of
conditions maximizes chloroform production, but other products must be
separated. Chloroform boils at 61ฐC and has a vapor pressure of
200 mm Hg at 25ฐC. It is slightly soluble in water (8.22 g/1 at 20ฐC)
and readily soluble in organic solvents.
Chloroform is used as a solvent and to manufacture refrigerents,
Pharmaceuticals, plastics, and anesthetics. It is seldom used as an
anesthetic.
Toxic effects of chloroform on humans include central nervous system
depression, gastrointestinal irritation, liver and kidney damage and
possible cardiac sensitization to adrenalin. Carcinogenicity has been
demonstrated for chloroform on laboratory animals.
For the maximum protection of human health from the potential
carcinogenic effects of exposure to chloroform through ingestion of
water and contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration is zero based on the non-threshold assumption for this
chemical. However, zero level may not be attainable at the present
time. Therefore, the levels which may result in incremental increase
of cancer risk over the lifetime are estimated at 107, 10*, and 105.
The corresponding recommended criteria are 0.000019 mg/1, 0.00019
mg/1, and 0.0019 mg/1.
No data are available regarding the behavior of chloroform in a POTW.
However, the biochemical oxidation of this compound was studied in one
laboratory scale study at concentrations higher than these expected to
be contained by most municipal wastewaters. After 5, 10, and 20 days
no degradation of chloroform was observed. The conclusion reached is
that biological treatment produces little or no removal by degradation
of chloroform in POTW.
The high vapor pressure of chloroform is expected to result in
volatilization of the compound from aerobic treatment steps in POTW.
491
-------
Remaining chloroform is expected to pass through into the POTW
effluent.
1,l-Dichloroethylene(29). 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE), also called
vinylidene chloride, is a clear colorless liquid manufactured by
dehydrochlorination of 1,1,2-trichloroethane. 1,1-DCE has the formula
CC12CH2. It has a boiling point of 32ฐC, and a vapor pressure of 591
mm Hg at 25ฐC. 1,1-DCE is slightly soluble in water (2.5 mg/1) and is
soluble in many organic solvents. U.S. production is in the range of
a hundreds of thousands of tons annually.
1,1-DCE is used as a chemical intermediate and for copolymer coatings
or films. It may enter the wastewater of an industrial facility as
the result of decomposition of 1,1,1-trichloroethylene used in
degreasing operations, or by migration from vinylidene chloride
copolymers exposed to the process water.
Human toxicity of 1,1-DCE has not been demonstrated, however it is a
suspected human carcinogen. Mammalian toxicity studies have focused
on the liver and kidney damage produced by 1,1-DCE. Various changes
occur in those organs in rats and mice ingesting 1,1-DCE.
For the maximum protection of human health from the potential
carcinogenic effects due to exposure to 1,1-dichloroethylene through
ingestion of water and contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient
water concentration should be zero based on the non-theshold
assumption for this chemical. However, zero level may not be
attainable at the present time. Therefore, the levels which may
result in incremental increase of cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10-5, 10~* and 10~7. The corresponding recommended
criteria are 0.00033 mg/1, 0.000033 mg/1 and 0.0000033 mg/1.
Under laboratory conditions, dichloroethylenes have been shown to be
toxic to fish. The primary effect of acute toxicity of the
dichloroethylenes is depression of the central nervous system. The
octanol/water partition coefficient of 1,1-DCE indicates it should not
accumulate significantly in animals.
The behavior of 1,1-DCE in POTW has not been studied. However, its
very high vapor pressure is expected to result in release of
significant percentages of this material to the atmosphere in any
treatment involving aeration. Degradation of dichloroethylene in air
is reported to occur, with a half-life of 8 weeks.
Biochemical oxidation of many of the organic priority pollutants has
been investigated in laboratory-scale studies at concentrations higher
than would normally be expected in municipal wastewaters. General
observations relating molecular structure to ease of degradation have
been developed for all of these pollutants. The conclusion reached by
492
-------
study of the limited data is that biological treatment produces little
or no degradation of 1,1-dichloroethylene. No evidence is available
for drawing conclusions about the possible toxic or inhibitory effect
of 1,1-DCE on POTW operation. Because of water solubility, 1,1-DCE
which is not volatilized or degraded is expected to pass through POTW.
Very little 1,1-DCE is expected to be found in sludge from POTW.
1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene(30). 1,1-trans-Dichloroethylene (trans-
1,2-DCE) is a clear, colorless liquid with the formula CHC1CHC1.
Trans-1,2-DCE is produced in mixture with the cis-isomer by
chlorination of acetylene. The cis-isomer has distinctly different
physical properties. Industrially, the mixture is used rather than
the separate isomers. Trans-1,2-DCE has a boiling point of 48ฐC, and
a vapor pressure of 324 mm Hg at 25ฐC.
The principal use of 1,2-dichloroethylene (mixed isomers) is to
produce vinyl chloride. It is used as a lead scavenger in gasoline,
general solvent, and for synthesis of various other organic chemicals.
When it is used as a solvent trans-1,2-DCE can enter wastewater
streams.
Although trans-1,2-DCE is thought to produce fatty degeneration of
mammalian liver, there are insufficient data on which to base any
ambient water criterion.
In the one reported toxicity test of trans-1,2-DCE on aquatic life,
the compound appeared to be about half as toxic as the other
dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE) on the priority pollutants list.
The behavior of trans-1,2-DCE in POTW has not been studied. However,
its high vapor pressure is expected to result in release of
significant percentage of this compound to the atmosphere in any
treatment involving aeration. Degradation of the dichloroethylenes in
air is reported to occur, with a half-life of 8 weeks.
Biochemical oxidation of many of the organic priority pollutants has
been investigated in laboratory scale studies at concentrations higher
than would normally be expected in municipal wastewater. General
observations relating molecular structure to ease of degradation have
been developed for all of these pollutants. The conclusion reached by
the study of the limited data is that biochemical oxidation produces
little or no degradation of 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene. No evidence
is available for drawing conclusions about the possible toxic or
inhibitory effect of 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene on POTW operation. It
is expected that its low molecular weight and degree of water
solubility will result in trans-1,2-DCE passing through a POTW to the
effluent if it is not degraded or volatilized. Very little trans-1,2-
DCE is expected to be found in sludge from POTW.
493
-------
Ethylbenzene(38). Ethylbenzene is a colorless, flammable liquid
manufactured commercially from benzene and ethylene. Approximately
half of the benzene used in the U.S. goes into the manufacture of more
than three million tons of ethylbenzene annually. Ethylbenzene boils
at 136ฐC and has a vapor pressure of 7 mm Hg at 20ฐC. It is slightly
soluble in water (0.14 g/1 at 15ฐC) and is very soluble in organic
solvents.
About 98 percent of the ethylbenzene produced in the U.S. goes into
the production of styrene, much of which is used in the plastics and
synthetic rubber industries. Ethylbenzene is a consitutent of xylene
mixtures used as diluents in the paint industry, agricultural
insecticide sprays, and gasoline blends.
Although humans are exposed to ethylbenzene from a variety of sources
in the environment, little information on effects of ethylbenzene in
man or animals is available. Inhalation can irritate eyes, affect the
respiratory tract, or cause vertigo. In laboratory animals
ethylbenzene exhibited low toxicity. There are no data available on
teratogenicity, mutagenicity, or carcinogenicity of ethylbenzene.
Criteria are based on data derived from inhalation exposure limits.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
ethylbenzene ingested through water and contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is 1.4 mg/1.
The behavior of ethylbenzene in POTW has not been studied in detail.
Laboratory scale studies of the biochemical oxidation of ethylbenzene
at concentrations greater than would normally be found in municipal
wastewaters have demonstrated varying degrees of degradation. In one
study with phenol-acclimated seed cultures 27 percent degradation was
observed in a half day at 250 mg/1 ethylbezene. Another study at
unspecified conditions showed 32, 38, and 45 percent degradation after
5, 10, and 20 days, respectively. Based on these results and general
observations relating molecular structure to ease of degradation, the
conclusion is reached that biological treatment produces only a
moderate removal of ethylbenzene in POTW by degradation.
Other studies suggest that most of the ethylbenzene entering a POTW is
removed from the aqueous stream to the sludge. The ethylbenzene
contained in the sludge removed from the POTW may volatilize.
Methylene Chloride(44). Methylene chloride, also called
dichloromethane (CH2C12), is a colorless liquid manufactured by
chlorination of methane or methyl chloride followed by separation from
the higher chlorinated methanes formed as coproducts. Methylene
chloride boils at 40ฐC, and has a vapor pressure of 362 mm Hg at 20ฐC.
It is slightly soluble in water (20 g/1 at 20ฐC)/ and very soluble in
organic solvents. U.S. annual production is about 250,000 tons.
494
-------
Methylene chloride is a common industrial solvent found in
insecticides, metal cleaners, paint, and paint and varnish removers.
Methylene chloride is not generally regarded as highly toxic to
humans. Most human toxicity data are for exposure by inhalation.
Inhaled methylene chloride acts as a central nervous system
depressant. There is also evidence that the compound causes heart
failure when large amounts are inhaled.
Methylene chloride does produce mutation in tests for this effect. In
addition a bioassay recognized for its extermely high sensitivity to
strong and weak carcinogens produced results which were marginally
significant. Thus potential carcinogenic effects of methylene
chloride are not confirmed or denied, but are under continuous study.
Difficulty in conduting and interpreting the test results from the low
boiling point (40ฐC) of methylene chloride which increases the
difficulty of maintaining the compound in growth media during
incubation at 37ฐC; and from the difficulty of removing all
impurities, some of which might themselves be carcinogenic.
For the protection of human health from the potential concinogenic
effects due to exposure to methylene chloride through ingestion of
contaminated water and contaiminated aquatic organisms, the ambient
water concentration should be zero based on the non-threshold
assumption for this chemical. However, zero level may not be
attainable at the present time. Therefore, the levels which may
result in incremental increase of cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10~5, 10"* and 10"7. The corresponding recommended
criteria are 0.0019 mg/1, 0.00019 mg/1, and 0.000019 mg/1.
The behavior of methylene chloride in POTW has not been studied in any
detail. However, the biochemical oxidation of this compound was
studied in one laboratory scale study at concentrations higher than
those expected to be contained by most municipal wastewaters. After
five days no degradation of methylene chloride was observed. The
conclusion reached is that biological treatment produces litte or no
removal by degradation of methylene chloride in POTW.
The high vapor pressure of methylene chloride is expected to result in
volatilization of the compound from aerobic treatment steps in POTW.
It has been reported that methylene chloride inhibits anaerobic
processes in POTW. Methylene chloride that is not volatilized in the
POTW is expected to pass through into the effluent.
Naphthalene(55). Naphthalene is an aromatic hydrocarbon with two
orthocondensed benzene rings and a molecular formula of C10He. As
such it is properly classed as a polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
(PAH). Pure naphthalene is a white crystalline solid melting at 80ฐC.
For a solid, it has a relatively high vapor pressure (0.05 mm Hg at
495
-------
20ฐC), and moderate water solubility (It mg/1 at 20ฐC). Naphthalene
is the most abundant single component of coal tar. Production is more
than a third of a million tons annually in the U.S. About three
fourths of the production is used as feedstock for phthalic anhydride
manufacture. Most of the remaining production goes into manufacture
of insecticide, dyestuffs, pigments, and Pharmaceuticals. Chlorinated
and partially hydrogenated naphthalenes are used in some solvent
mixtures. Naphthalene is also used as a moth repellent.
Napthalene, ingested by humans, has reportedly caused vision loss
(cataracts), hemolytic anemia, and occasionally, renal disease. These
effects of naphthalene ingestion are confirmed by studies on
laboratory animals. No carcinogen!city studies are available which
can be used to demonstrate carcinogenic activity for naphthalene.
Naphthalene does bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms.
There are insufficient data on which to base any ambient water
criterion.
Only a limited number of studies have been conducted to determine the
effects of naphthalene on aquatic organisms. The data from those
studies show only moderate toxicity.
Naphthalene has been detected in sewage plant effluents at
concentrations up to .022 mg/1 in studies carried out by the U.S. EPA.
Influent levels were not reported. The behavior of naphthalene in
POTW has not been studied. However, recent studies have determined
that naphthalene will accumulate in sediments at 100 times the
concentration in overlying water. These results suggest that
naphthalene will be readily removed by primary and secondary settling
in POTW, if it is not biologically degraded.
Biochemical oxidation of many of the organic priority pollutants has
been investigated in laboratory-scale studies at concentrations higher
than would normally be expected in municipal wastewater. General
observations relating molecular structure to ease of degradation have
been developed for all of these pollutants. The conclusion reached by
study of the limited data is that biological treatment produces a high
removal by degradation of naphthalene. One recent study has shown
that microorganisms can degrade naphthalene, first to a dihydro
compound, and ultimately to carbon dioxide and water.
Pentachlorophenol(64). Pentachlorophenol (CซC1SOH) is a white
crystallinesolidproduced commercially by chlorination of phenol or
polychlorophenols. U.S. annual production is in excess of 20,000
tons. Pentachlorophenol melts at 190ปC and is slightly soluble in
water (14 mg/1). Pentachloropheivol is not detected by the 4-amino
antipyrene method.
496
-------
Pentachlorophenol is a bactericide and fungacide and is used for
preservation of wood and wood products. It is competative with
creosote in that application. It is also used as a preservative in
glues, starches, and photographic papers. It is an effective algicide
and herbicide.
Although data are available on ill* RIMMM* texicity effects of penta-
chlorophenol, interpretation of data is frequently uncertain.
Occupational exposure observations must be examined carefully because
exposure to pentachlorophenol is. frequently accompained by exposure to
other wood preservatives. Additionally, experimental results and
occupational exposure observations must be examined carefully to make
sure that observed effects are produced by the pentachlorophenol
itself and not by the by-products which usually contaminate
pentachlorophenol.
Acute and chronic toxic effects of pentachlorophenol in humans are
similar; muscle weakness, headache, loss of appetite, abdominal pain,
weight loss, and irritation of skin, eyes, and respiratory tract.
Available literature indicates that pentachlorophenol does not
accumulate in body tissues to any significant extent. Studies on
laboratory animals of distribution of the compound in body tissues
showed the highest levels of pentachlorophenol in liver, kidney, and
intestine, while the lowest levels were in brain, fat, muscle, and
bone.
Toxic effects of pentachlorophenol in aquatic organisms are much
greater at pH of 6 where this weak acid is predominantly in the
undissociated form than at pM of 9 where the ionic form predominates.
Similar results were observed in manonals where oral lethal doses of
pentachlorophenol were lower when the compound was administered in
hydrocarbon solvents (un-ionized form) than when it was administered
as the sodium salt (ionized form) in water.
There appear to be no significant teratogenic, mutagenic, or
carcinogenic effects of pentachlorophenol.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of penta-
chlorophenol ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined to be
1.01 mg/1.
Only limited data are available for reaching conclusions about the
behavior of pentachlorophenol in POTW. Pentachlorophenol has been
found in the influent to POTW. In a study of one POTW the mean
removal was 59 percent over a 7 day period. Trickling filters removed.
44 percent of the influent pentachlorophenol, suggesting that
biological degradation occurs. The same report compared removal of
pentachlorophenol of the same plant and two additional POTW on a later
497
-------
date and obtained values of 4.4, 19.5 and 28.6 percent removal, the
last value being for the plant which was 59 percent removal in the
original study. Influent concentrations of pentachloropehnol ranged
from 0.0014 to 0.0046 mg/1. Other studies, includng the general
review . of data relating molecular structure to biological oxidation,
indicate that pentachlorophenol is not removed by biological treatment
processes in POTW. Anaerobic digestion processes are inhibited by
0.4 mg/1 pentachlorophenol.
The low water solubility and low volatility of pentachlorophenol lead
to the expectation that most of the compund will remain in the sludge
in a POTW. The effect on plants grown on land treated with
pentachlorophenol - containing sludge is unpredicatable. Laboratory
studies show that this compound affects crop germination at 5.4 mg/1.
However, photodecomposition of pentachlorophenol occurs in sunlight.
The effects of the various breakdown products which may remain in the
soil was not found in the literature.
Phenol(65). Phenol, also called hydroxybenzene and carbolic acid, is
a clear, colorless, hygroscopic, deliquescent, crystalline solid at
room temperature. Its melting point is 43ฐC and its vapor pressure at
room temperature is 0.35 mm Hg. It is very soluble in water (67 gm/1
at 16ฐC) and can be dissolved in benzene, oils, and petroleum solids.
Its formula is CซH5OH.
Although a small percent of the annual production of phenol is derived
from coal tar as a naturally occuring product, most of the phenol is
synthesized. Two of the methods are fusion of benzene sulfonate with
sodium hydroxide, and oxidation of cumene followed by clevage with a
catalyst. Annual production in the U.S. is in excess of one million
tons. Phenol is generated during distillation of wood and the
microbiological decomposition of organic matter in the mammalian
intestinal tract.
Phenol is used as a disinfectant, in the manufacture of resins,
dyestuffs, and Pharmaceuticals, and in the photo processing industry.
In this discussion, phenol is the specific compound which is separated
by methylene chloride extraction of an acidified sample and identified
and quantified by GC/MS. Phenol also contributes to the "Total
Phenols", discussed elsewhere which are determined by the 4-AAP
colorinmetric method.
Phenol exhibits acute and sub-acute toxicity in humans and laboratory
animals. Acute oral doses of phenol in humans cause sudden collapse
and unconsciousness by its action on the central nervous system.
Death occurs by respiratory arrest. Sub-acute oral doses in mammals
are rapidly absorbed then quickly distributed to various organs, then
cleared from the body by urinary excretion and metabolism. Long term
exposure by drinking phenol contaminated water has resulted in
498
-------
statistically significant increase in reported cases of diarrhea,
mouth sores, and burning of the mouth. In laboratory animals long
term oral administration at low levels produced slight liver and
kidney damage. No reports were found regarding carcinogenicity of
phenol administered orally - all carcinogenicity studies were skin
tests.
For the protection of human health from phenol ingested through water
and through contaminated aquatic organisms the concentration in water
should not exceed 3.5 mg/1.
Fish and other aquatic organisms demonstrated a wide range of
sensitivities to phenol concentration. However, acute toxicity values
were at moderate levels when compared to other organic priority
pollutants.
Data have been developed on the behavior of phenol in POTW. Phenol is
biodegradable by biota present in POTW. The ability of a POTW to
treat phenol-bearing influents depends upon acclimation of the biota
and the constancy of the phenol concentration. It appears that an
induction period is required to build up the population of organisms
which can degrade phenol. Too large a concentration will result in
upset or pass through in the POTW, but the specific level causing
upset depends on the immediate past history of phenol concentrations
in the influent. Phenol levels as high as 200 mg/1 have been treated
with 95 percent removal in POTW, but more or less continuous presence
of phenol is necessary to maintain the population of microorganisms
that degrade phenol.
Phenol which is not degraded is expected to pass thorugh the POTW
because of its very high water solubility. However, in POTW where
chlorination is practiced for disinfection of the POTW effluent,
chlorination of phenol may occur. The products of that reaction may
be priority pollutants.
The EPA has developed data on influent and effluent concentrations of
total phenols in a study of 103 POTW. However, the analytical
procedure was the 4-AAP method mentioned earlier and not the GC/MS
method specifically for phenol. Discussion of the study, which of
course includes phenol, is presented under the pollutant heading
"Total Phenols."
Phthalate Esters (66-71). Phthalic acid, or 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic
acid, is one of three isomeric benzenedicarboxylic acids produced by
the chemical industry. The other two isomeric forms are called
isophthalic and terephthalic acids. The formula for all three acids
is CซH4(COOH)2. Some esters of phthalic acid are designated as
priority pollutants. They will be discussed as a group here, and
499
-------
specific properties of individual phthalate esters will be discussed
afterwards.
Phthalic acid esters are manufactured in the U.S. at an annual rate in
excess of 1 billion pounds. They are used as plasticizers - primarily
in the production of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) resins. The most widely
used phthalate plasticizer is bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (66) which
accounts for nearly one third of the phthalate esters produced. This
particular ester is commonly referred to as dioctyl phthalate (DOP)
and should not be confused with one of the less used esters, di-n-
octyl phthalate (69), which is also used as a plasticizer. In
addition to these two isomeric dioctyl phthalates, four other esters,
also used primarily as plasticizers, are designated as priority
pollutants. They are: butyl benzyl phthalate (67), di-n-butyl
phthalate (68), diethyl phthalate (70), and dimethyl phthalate (71).
Industrially, phthalate esters are prepared from phthalic anhydride
and the specific alcohol to form the ester. Some evidence is
available suggesting that phthalic acid esters also may be synthesized
by certain plant and animal tissues. The extent to which this occurs
in nature is not known.
Phthalate esters used as plasticizers can be present in concentrations
up to 60 percent of the total weight of the PVC plastic. The
plasticizer is not linked by primary chemical bonds to the PVC resin.
Rather, it is locked into the structure of intermeshing polymer
molecules and held by van der Waals forces. The result is that the
plasticizer is easily extracted. Plasticizers are responsible for the
odor associated with new plastic toys or flexible sheet that has been
contained in a sealed package.
Although the phthalate esters are not soluble or are only very
slightly soluble in water, they do migrate into aqueous solutions
placed in contact with the plastic. Thus industrial facilities with
tank linings, wire and cable coverings, tubing, and sheet flooring of
PVC are expected to discharge some phthalate esters in their raw
waste. In addition to their use as plasticizers, phthalate esters are
used in lubricating oils and pesticide carriers. These also can
contribute to industrial discharge of phthalate esters.
From the accumulated data on acute toxicity in animals, phthalate
esters may be considered as having a rather low order of toxicity.
Human toxicity data are limited. It is thought that the toxic effects
of the esters is most likely due to one of the metabolic products, in
particular the monoester. Oral acute toxicity in animals is greater
for the lower molecular weight esters than for the higher molecular
weight esters.
500
-------
Orally administered phthalate esters generally produced enlargeing of
liver and kidney, and atrophy of testes in laboratory animals.
Specific esters produced enlargement of heart and brain, spleenitis,
and degeneration of central nervous system tissue.
Subacute doses administered orally to laboratory animals produced some
decrease in growth and degeneration of the testes. Chronic studies in
animals showed similar effects to those found in acute and subacute
studies, but to a much lower degree. The same organs were enlarged,
but pathological changes were not usually detected.
A recent study of several phthalic esters produced suggestive but not
conclusive evidence that dimethyl and diethyl phthalates have a cancer
liability. Only four of the six priority pollutant esters were
included in the study. Phthalate esters do bioconcentrate in fish.
The factors, weighted for relative consumption of various aquatic and
marine food groups, are used to calculate ambient water quality
criteria for four phthalate esters. The values are included in the
discussion of the specific esters.
Studies of toxicity of phthalate esters in freshwater and salt water
organisms are scarce. Available data show that adverse effects on
freshwater aquatic life occur at phthalate ester concentrations as low
as 0.003 mg/1.
The behavior of phthalate esters in POTW has not been studied.
However, the biochemical oxidation of many of the organic priority
pollutants has been investigated in laboratory-scale studies at
concentrations higher than would normally be expected in municipal
wastewater. Three of the phthalate esters were studied. Bis(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate was found to be degraded slightly or not at all
and its removal by biological treatment in a POTW is expected to be
slight or zero. Di-n-butyl phthalate and diethyl phthalate were
degraded to a moderate degree and it is expected that they will be
biochemically oxidized to a lesser extent than domestic sewage by
biological treatment in POTW. On the same basis it is expected that
di-n-octyl phthalate will not be biochemically oxidized to a
significant extent by biological treatment in a POTW. An EPA study of
seven POTWs revealed that for all but di-n-octyl phthalate, which was
not studied, removals ranged from 62 to 87 percent.
No information was found on possible interference with POTW operation
or the possible effects on sludge by the phthalate esters. The water
insoluble phthalate esters - butylbenzyl and di-n-octyl phthalate -
would tend to remain in sludge, whereas the other four priority
pollutant phthalate esters with water solubilities ranging from 50
mg/1 to 4.5 mg/1 would probably pass through into the POTW effluent.
501
-------
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate(66). In addition to the general remarks
and discussion on phthalate esters, specific information on bis(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate is provided. Little information is available
about the physical properties of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate. It is a
liquid boiling at 387ฐC at 5mm Hg and is insoluble in water. Its
formula is CซH4(COOCeH17)2. This priority pollutant constitutes about
one third of the phthalate ester production in the U.S. It is
commonly referred to as dioctyl phthalate, or DOP, in the plastics
industry where it is the most extensively used compound for the
plasticization of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate has been approved by the FDA for use in plastics in contact
with food. Therefore, it may be found in wastewaters coming in
contact with discarded plastic food wrappers as well as the PVC films
and shapes normally found in industrial plants. This priority
pollutant is also a commonly used organic diffusion pump oil where its
low vapor pressure is an advantage.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of bis(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate ingested through water and through contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined
to be 15 mg/1. If contaminated aquatic organisms alone are consumed,
excluding the consumption of water, the ambient water criteria is
determined to be 50 mg/1.
Although the behavior of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in POTW has not
been studied, biochemical oxidation of this priority pollutant has
been studied on a laboratory scale at concentrations higher than would
normally be expected in municipal wastewater. In fresh water with a
non-acclimated seed culture no biochemical oxidation was observed
after 5, 10, and 20 days. However, with an acclimated seed culture,
biological oxidation occurred to the extents of 13, 0, 6, and 23 of
theoretical after 5, 10, 15 and 20 days, respectively. Bis(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate concentrations were 3 to 10 mg/1. Little or no
removal of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate by biological treatment in POTW
is expected.
Butyl benzyl phthalate(67). In addition to the general remarks and
discussion on phthalate esters, specific information on butyl benzyl
phthalate is provided. No information was found on the physical
properties of this compound.
Butyl benzyl phthalate is used as a plasticizer for PVC. Two special
applications differentiate it from other phthalate esters. It is
approved by the U.S. FDA for food contact in wrappers and containers;
and it is the industry standard for plasticization of vinyl flooring
because it provides stain resistance.
No ambient water quality criterion is proposed for butyl benzyl
phthalate.
502
-------
Butylbenzylphthalate removal in POTW by biological treatment in a POTW
is discussed in the general discussion of phthalate esters.
Di-n-butyl phthalate (68). In addition to the general remarks and
discussion on phthalate esters, specific information on di-n-butyl
phthalate (DBP) is provided. DBF is a colorless, oily liquid, boiling
at 340ฐC. Its water solubility at room temperature is reported to be
0.4 g/1 and 4.5g/l in two different chemistry handbooks. The formula
for DBP, C6H4(COOC4H9)2 is the same as for its isomer, di-isobutyl
phthalate. DBP production is one to two percent of total U.S.
phthalate ester production.
Dibutyl phthalate is used to a limited extent as a plasticizer for
polyvinylchloride (PVC). It is not approved for contact with food.
It is used in liquid lipsticks and as a diluent for polysulfide dental
impression materials. DBP is used as a plasticizer for nitrocellulose
in making gun powder, and as a fuel in solid propellants for rockets.
Further uses are insecticides, safety glass manufacture, textile
lubricating agents, printing inks, adhesives, paper coatings and resin
solvents.
For protection of human health from the toxic properties of dibutyl
phthalate ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined to be 34
mg/1. If contaminated aquatic organisms are consumed, excluding the
consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is 154 mg/1.
Although the behavior of di-n-butyl phthalate in POTW has not been
studied, biochemical oxidation of this priority pollutant has been
studied on a laboratory scale at concentrations higher than would
normally be expected in municipal wastewater. Biochemical oxidation
of 35, 43, and 45 percent of theoretical oxidation were obtained after
5, 10, and 20 days, respectively, using sewage microorganisms as an
unacclimated seed culture.
Based on these data it is expected that di-n-butyl phthalate will be
biochemically oxidized to a lesser extent than domestic sewage by
biological treatment in POTW.
Di-n-octyl phthalate(69). In addition to the general remarks and
discussion on phthalate esters, specific information on di-n-octyl
phthalate is provided. Di-n-octyl phthalate is not to be confused
with the isomeric bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate which is commonly
referred to in the plastics industry as DOP. Di-n-octyl phthalate is
a liquid which boils at 220ฐC at 5 mm Hg. It is insoluble in water.
Its molecular formula is C6H4(COOC8H17)2. Its production constitutes
about one percent of all phthalate ester production in the U.S.
503
-------
Industrially, di-n-octyl phthalate is used to plasticize polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) resins.
No ambient water quality criterion is proposed for di-n-octyl
phthalate.
Biological treatment in POTW is expected to lead to little or no
removal of di-n-octyl phthalate.
Diethyl phthalate (70). In addition to the general remarks and
discussion on phthalate esters, specific information on diethyl
phthalate is provided. Diethyl phthalate, or DEP, is a colorless
liquid boiling at 296ฐC, and is insoluble in water. Its molecular
formula is C6H4(COOC2H5)2. Production of diethyl phthalate
constitutes about 1.5 percent of phthalate ester production in the
U.S.
Diethyl phthalate is approved for use in plastic food containers by
the U.S. FDA. In addition to its use as a polyvinylchloride (PVC)
plasticizer, DEP is used to plasticize cellulose nitrate for gun
powder, to dilute polysulfide dental impression materials, and as an
accelerator for dying triacetate fibers. An additional use which
would contribute to its wide distribution in the environment is as an
approved special denaturant for ethyl alcohol. The alcohol-containing
products for which DEP is an approved denaturant include a wide range
of personal care items such as bath preparations, bay rum, colognes,
hair preparations, face and hand creams, perfumes and toilet soaps.
Additionally, this denaturant is approved for use in biocides,
cleaning solutions, disinfectants, insecticides, fungicides, and room
deodorants which have ethyl alcohol as part of the formulation. It is
expected, therefore, that people and buildings would have some surface
loading of this priority pollutant which would find its way into raw
wastewaters.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
diethyl phthalate ingested through water and through contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined
to be 350 mg/1. If contaminated aquatic organisms alone are consumed,
excluding the consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is
1800 mg/1.
Although the behavior of diethylphthalate in POTW has not been
studied, biochemical oxidation of this priority pollutant has been
studied on a laboratory scale at concentrations higher than would
normally be expected in municipal wastewater. Biochemical oxidation
of 79, 84, and 89 percent of theoretical was observed after 5, 5, and
20 days, respectively. Based on these data it is expected that
diethyl phthalate will be biochemically oxidized to a lesser extent
than domestic sewage by biological treatment in POTW.
504
-------
Dimethyl phthalate (71). In addition to the general remarks and dis-
cussion on phthalate esters, specific information on dimethyl
phthalate (DMP) is provided. DMP has the lowest .molecular weight of
the phthalate esters - N.W. ซ 194 compared to M.W. of 391 for bis(2-
ethylhexyDphthalate. DMP has a boiling point of 282ฐC. It is a
colorless liquid, soluble in water to the extent of 5 mg/1. Its
molecular formula is C6H4(COOCH3)2.
Dimethyl phthalate production in the U.S. is just under one percent of
total phthalate ester production. DMP is used to some extent as a
plasticizer in cellulosics. However, its principle specific use is
for dispersion of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). PVDF is resistant
to most chemicals and finds use as electrical insulation, chemical
process equipment (particularly pipe), and as a base for long-life
finishes for exterior metal siding. Coil coating techniques are used
to apply PVDF dispersions to aluminum or galvanized steel siding.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
dimethyl phthalate ingested through water and through contaminated
aquatic organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined
to be 313 mg/1. If contaminated aquatic organisms alone are consumed,
excluding the consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is
2900 mg/1.
Based in limited data and observations relating molecular structure to
ease of biochemical degredation of other organic pollutants, it is
expected that dimethyl phthalate will be biochemically oxidized to a
lesser extent than domestic sewage by biological treatment in POTW.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(72-84). The polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH) selected as priority pollutants are a group of 13
compounds consisting of substituted and unsubstituted polycyclic
aromatic rings. The general class of PAH includes hetrocyclics, but
none of those were selected as priority pollutants. PAH are formed as
the result of incomplete combustion when organic compounds are burned
with insufficient oxygen. PAH are found in coke oven emissions,
vehicular emissions, and volatile products of oil and gas burning.
The compounds chosen as priority pollutants are listed with their
structural formula and melting point (m.p.). All are insoluble in
water.
72 Benzo(a)anthrancene (1,2-benzanthracene)
m.p. 162<>c
73 Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
m.p. 176ฐC
505
-------
r ^^^ ^^ ^
OIOIO.
74 3,4-Benzofluoranthene
m.p. 168<>C
75 Benzo(k)fluoranthene (11,12-benzofluoranthene
m.p. 217ฐC
76 Chrysene (1,2-benzphenanthrene)
m.p. 255ฐC
77 Acenaphthylene
HOCh
m.p. 92ซC
78 Anthracene
m.p. 216<>C
79 Benzo(ghi)perylene (1,12-benzoperylene)
m.p. not reported
80 Fluorene (alpha-diphenylenemethane)
m.p. 116ฐC CO1~TO
81 Phenanthrene
m.p. 1010C
82 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzoanthracene)
m.p. 269ฐC
83 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (2,3-o-phenyleneperylene
m.p. not available
84 Pyrene
m.p. 156ฐC
HC = CH
506
-------
Some of these priority pollutants have commercial or industrial uses.
Benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, anthracene,
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, and pyrene are all used as antioxidants.
Chrysene, acenaphthylene, anthracene, fluorene, phenanthrene, and
pyrene are all used for synthesis of dyestuffs or other organic
chemicals. 3,4-Benzofluoranthrene, benzo(k)fluoranthene,
benzo(ghi)perylene, and indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene have no known
industrial uses, according to the results of a recent literature
search.
Several of the PAH priority pollutants are found in smoked meats, in
smoke flavoring mixtures, in vegetable oils, and in coffee. They are
found in soils and sediments in river beds. Consequently, they are
also found in many drinking water supplies. The wide distribution of
these pollutants in complex mixtures with the many other PAHs which
have not been designated as priority pollutants results in exposures
by humans that cannot be associated with specific individual
compounds.
The screening and verification analysis procedures used for the
organic priority pollutants are based on gas chromatography mass
spectrometry (GCMS). Three pairs of the PAH have identical elution
times on the column specified in the protocol, which means that the
parameters of the pair are not differentiated. For these three pairs
[anthracene (78) - phenanthrene (81); 3,4-benzofluoranthene (74) -
benzo(k)fluoranthene (75); and benzo(a)anthracene (72) - chrysene
(76)] results are obtained and reported as "either-or." Either both
are present in the combined concentration reported, or one is present
in the concentration reported. When detections below reportable
limits are recorded no further analysis is required. For samples
where, the concentrations of coeluting pairs have a significant value,
additional analyses are conducted, using different procedures that
resolve the particular pair.
There are no studies to document the possible carcinogenic risks to
humans by direct ingestion. Air pollution studies indicate an excess
of lung cancer mortality among workers exposed to large amounts of PAH
containing materials such as coal gas, tars, and coke-oven emissions.
However, no definite proof exists that the PAH present in these
materials are responsible for the cancers observed.
Animal studies have demonstrated the toxicity of PAH by oral and
dermal administration. The carcinogenicity of PAH has been traced to
formation of PAH metabolites which, in turn, lead to tumor formation.
Because the levels of PAH which induce cancer are very low, little
work has been done on other health hazards resulting from exposure.
It has been established in animal studies that tissue damage and
systemic toxicity can result from exposure to non-carcinogenic PAH
compounds.
507
-------
Because there were no studies available regarding chronic oral
exposures to PAH mixtures, proposed water quality criteria were
derived using data on exposure to a single compound. Two studies were
selected, one involving benzo(a)pyrene ingestion and one involving
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ingestion. Both are known animal carcinogens.
For the maximum protection of human health from the potential car-
cinogenic effects of exposure to polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH) through ingestion of water and contaminated aquatic organisms,
the ambient water concentration should be zero based on the
non-threshold assumption for these chemicals. However, zero level may
not be attainable at the present time. Therefore, the levels which
may result in incremental increase of cancer risk over the life time
are estimated at 10~5, 10-*, and 10~7 with corresponding recommended
criteria of 0.000028 mg/1, 0.0000028 mg/1, and 0.00000028 mg/1,
respectively.
No standard toxicity tests have been reported for freshwater or
saltwater organisms and any of the 13 PAH discussed here.
The behavior of PAH in POTW has received only a limited amount of
study. It is reported that up to 90 percent of PAH entering a POTW
will be retained in the sludge generated by conventional sewage
treatment processes. Some of the PAH can inhibit bacterial growth
when they are present at concentrations as low as 0.018 mg/1.
Biological treatment in activated sludge units has been shown to
reduce the concentration of phenanthrene and anthracene to some
extent. However, a study of biochemcial oxidation of fluorene on a
laboratory scale showed no degradation after 5, 10, and 20 days. On
the basis of that study and studies of other organic priority
pollutants, some general observations were made relating molecular
structure to ease of degradation. Those observations lead to the
conclusion that the 13 PAH selected to represent that group as
priority pollutants will be removed only slightly or not at all by
biological treatment methods in POTW. Based on their water
insolubility and tendency to attach to sediment particles very little
pass through of PAH to POTW effluent is expected.
No data are available at this time to support any conclusions about
contamination of land by PAH on which sewage sludge containing PAH is
spread.
Tetrachloroethylene(85). Tetrachloroethylene (CC12CC12), also called
perchloroethylene and PCE, is a colorless nonflammable liquid produced
mainly by two methods - chlorination and pyrolysis of ethane and
propane, and oxychlorination of dichloroethane. U.S. annual
production exceeds 300,000 tons. PCE boils at 121ฐC and has a vapor
pressure of 19 mm Hg at 20ฐC. It is insoluble in water but soluble in
organic solvents.
508
-------
Approximately two-thirds of the U.S. production of PCE is used for dry
cleaning. Textile processing and metal degreasing, in equal amounts
consume about one-quarter of the U.S. production.
The principal toxic effect of PCE on humans is central nervous system
depression when the compound is inhaled. Headache, fatigue,
sleepiness, dizziness and sensations of intoxication are reported.
Severity of effects increases with vapor concentration. High
integrated exposure (concentration times duration) produces kidney and
liver damage. Very limited data on PCE ingested by laboratory animals
indicate liver damage occurs when PCE is administered by that route.
PCE tends to distribute to fat in mammalian bodies.
One report found in the literature suggests, but does not conclude,
that PCE is teratogenic. PCE has been demonstrated to be a liver
carcinogen in B6C3-F1 mice.
For the maximum protection of human health from the potential
carcinogenic effects of exposure to tetrachloroethylene through
ingestion of water and contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient
water concentration should be zero based on the non-theshold
assumption for this chemical. However, zero level may not be
attainable at the present time. Therefore, the levels which may
result in incremental increase of cancer risk over the lifetime are
estimated at 10~5, 10-', and 10~7. The corresponding recommended
criteria are 0.008 mg/1, 0.0008 mg/1 and 0.00008 mg/1.
No data were found regarding the behavior of PCE in POTW. Many of the
organic priority pollutants have been investigated, at least in
laboratory scale studies, at concentrations higher than those expected
to be contained by most municipal wastewaters. General observations
have been developed relating molecular structure to ease of
degradation for all of the organic priority pollutants. The
conclusions reached by the study of the limited data is that
biological treatment produces a moderate removal of PCE in POTW by
degradation. No information was found to indicate that PCE
accumulates in the sludge, but some PCE is expected to be adsorbed
onto settling particles. Some PCE is expected to be volatilized in
aerobic treatment processes and little, if any, is expected to pass
through into the effluent from the POTW.
Toluene(86). Toluene is a clear, colorless liquid with a benzene like
odor. It is a naturally occuring compound derived primarily from
petroleum or petrochemical processes. Some toluene is obtained from
the manufacture of metallurgical coke. Toluene is also referred to as
totuol, methylbenzene, methacide, and phenymethane. It is an aromatic.
hydrocarbon with the formula C6H5CH3. It boils at 111ฐC and has a
vapor pressure of 30 mm Hg at room temperature. The water solubility
of toluene is 535 mg/1, and it is miscible with a variety of organic
509
-------
solvents. Annual production of toluene in the U.S. is greater than 2
million metric tons. Approximately two-thirds of the toluene is
converted to benzene and the remaining 30 percent is divided
approximately equally into chemical manufacture, and use as a paint
solvent and aviation gasoline additive. An estimated 5,000 metric
tons is discharged to the environment annually as a constituent in
wastewater.
Most data on the effects of toluene in human and other mammals have
been based on inhalation exposure or dermal contact studies. There
appear to be no reports of oral administration of toluene to human
subjects. A long term toxicity study on female rats revealed no
adverse effects on growth, mortality, appearance and behavior, organ
to body weight ratios, blood-urea nitrogen levels, bone marrow counts,
peripheral blood counts, or morphology of major organs. The effects
of inhaled toluene on the central nervous system, both at high and low
concentrations, have been studied in humans and animals. However,
ingested toluene is expected to be handled differently by the body
because it is absorbed more slowly and must first pass through the
liver before reaching the nervous system. Toluene is extensively and
rapidly metabolized in the liver. One of the principal metabolic
products of toluene is benzoic acid, which itself seems to have little
potential to produce tissue injury.
Toluene does not appear to be teratogenic in laboratory animals or
man. Nor is there any conclusive evidence that toluene is mutagenic.
Toluene has not been demonstrated to be positive in any jji vitro
mutagenicity or carcinogenicity bioassay system, nor to be
carcinogenic in animals or man.
Toluene has been found in fish caught in harbor waters in the vicinity
of petroleum and petrochemical plants. Bioconcentration studies have
not been conducted, but bioconcentration factors have been calculated
on the basis of the octanol-water partition coefficient.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
toluene ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion is determined to be 14.3 mg/1.
If contaminated aquatic organisms alone are consumed, excluding the
consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is 424 mg/1.
Available data show that adverse effects on aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 5 mg/1.
Acute toxicity tests have been conducted with toluene and a variety of
freshwater fish and Daphnia maqna. The latter appears to be
significantly more resistant than fish. No test results have been
reported for the chronic effects of toluene on freshwater fish or
invertebrate species.
510
-------
Only one study of toluene behavior in POTW is available. However, the
biochemical oxidation of many of the priority pollutants has been
investigated in laboratory scale studies at concentrations greater
than those expected to be contained by most municipal wastewaters. At
toluene concentrations ranging from 3 to 250 mg/1 biochemical
oxidation proceeded to fifty percent of theroetical or greater. The
time period varied from a few hours to 20 days depending on whether or
not the seed culture was acclimated. Phenol adapted acclimated seed
cultures gave the most rapid and extensive biochemical oxidation.
Based on study of the limited data, it is expected that toluene will
be biochemically oxidized to a lesser extent than domestic sewage by
biological treatment in POTW. The volatility and relatively low water
solubility of toluene lead to the expectation that aeration processes
will remove significant quantities of toluene from the POTW. The EPA
studied toluene removal in seven POTWs. The removals ranged from 40
to 100 percent. Sludge concentrations of toluene ranged from 54 x
10~3 to 1.85 mg/1.
Trichloroethylene(87). Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-trichloroethylene or
TCE) is a clear colorless liquid boiling at 87ฐC. It has a vapor
pressure of 77 mm Hg at room temperature and is slightly soluble in
water (1 g/1).. U.S. production is greater than 0.25 million metric
tons annually. It is produced from tetrachloroethane by treatment
with lime in the presence of water.
TCE is used for vapor phase degreasing of metal parts, cleaning and
drying electronic components, as a solvent for paints, as a
refrigerant, for extraction of oils, fats, and waxes, and for dry
cleaning. Its widespread use and relatively high volatility result in
detectable levels in many parts of the environment.
Data on the effects produced by ingested TCE are limted. Most studies
have been directed at inhalation exposure. Nervous system disorders
and liver damage are frequent results of inhalation exposure. In the
short term exposures, TCE acts as a central nervous system depressant
- it was used as an anesthetic before its other long term effects were
defined.
TCE has been shown to induce transformation in a highly sensitive in
vitro Fischer rat embryo cell system (F1706) that is used for
identifying carcinogens. Severe and persintant toxicity to the liver
was recently demonstrated when TCE was shown to produce carcinoma of
the liver in mouse strain B6C3F1. One systematic study of TCE
exposure and the incidence of human cancer was based on 518 men
exposed to TCE. The authors of that study concluded that although the
cancer risk to man cannot be ruled out, exposure to low levels of TCE
probably does not present a very serious and general cancer hazard.
511
-------
TCE is bioconcentrated in aquatic species, making the consumption of
such species by humans a significant source of TCE. For the
protection of human health from the potential carcinogenic effects of
exposure to trichloroethylene through ingestion of water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold assumption of this chemical.
However, zero level may not be attainable at the present time.
Therefore, the levels which may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the lifetime are estimated at 10-5, 10-* and 10-7.
The corresponding recommended criteria are 0.027 mg/1, 0.0027 mg/1 and
0.00027 mg/1.
Only a very limited amount of data on the effects of TCE on freshwater
aquatic life are available. One species of fish (fathead minnows)
showed a loss of equilibrium at concentrations below those resulting
in lethal effects. The limited data for aquatic life show that
adverse effects occur at concentrations high than those cited for
human health risks.
In laboratory scale studies of organic priority pollutants, TCE was
subjected to biochemical oxidation conditions. After 5, 10, and 20
days no biochemical oxidation occurred. On the basis of this study
and general observations relating molecular structure to ease of
degradation, the conclusion is reached that TCE would undergo little
or no biochemical oxidation by biological treatment in a POTW. The
volatility and relatively low water solubility of TCE is expected to
result in volatilization of some of the TCE in aeration steps in a
POTW.
Antimony(114). Antimony (chemical name - stibium, symbol Sb)
classified as a non-metal or metalloid, is a silvery white , brittle,
crystalline solid. Antimony is found in small ore bodies throughout
the world. Principal ores are oxides of mixed antimony valences, and
an oxysulfide ore. Complex ores with metals are important because the
antimony is recovered as a by-product. Antimony melts at 631ฐC, and
is a poor conductor of electricity and heat.
Annual U.S. consumption of primary antimony ranges from 10,000 to
20,000 tons. About half is consumed in metal products - mostly
antimonial lead for lead acid storage batteries, and about half in non
- metal products. A principal compound is antimony trioxide which is
used as a flame retardant in fabrics, and as an opacifier in glass,
ceramincs, and enamels. Several antimony compounds are used as
catalysts in organic chemicals synthesis, as fluorinating agents (the
antimony fluoride), as pigments, and in fireworks. Semiconductor
applications are economically significant.
Essentially no information on antimony - induced human health effects
has been derived from community epidemiology studies. The available
512
-------
data are in literature relating effects observed with therapeutic or
medicinal uses of antimony compounds and industrial exposure studies.
Large therapeutic doses of antimonial compounds, usually used to treat
schistisomiasis, have caused severe nausea, vomiting, convulsions,
irregular heart action, liver damage, and skin rashes. Studies of
acute industrial antimony poisoning have revealed loss of appetite,
diarrhea, headache, and dizziness in addition to the symptoms found in
studies of therapeutic doses of antimony.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
antimony ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms the ambient water criterion is determined to be 0.146 mg/1.
If contaminated aquatic organisms alone are consumed, excluding the
consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is determined to be
45 mg/1. Available data show that adverse effects on aquatic life
occur at concentrations higher than those cited for human health
risks.
Very little information is available regarding the behavior of
antimony in POTW. The limited solubility of most antimony compounds
expected in POTW, i.e. the oxides and sulfides, suggests that at least
part of the antimony entering a POTW will be precipitated and
incorporated into the sludge. However, some antimony is expected to
remain dissolved and pass through the POTW into the effluent.
Antimony compounds remaining in the sludge under anaerobic conditions
may be connected to stibine (SbH3), a very soluble and very toxic
compound. There are no data to show antimony inhibits any POTW
processes. Antimony is not known to be essential to the growth of
plants, and has been reported to be moderately toxic. Therefore,
sludge containing large amounts of antimony could be detrimental to
plants,if it is applied in large amounts to cropland.
Arsenic(115). Arsenic (chemical symbol As), is classified as a non-
metal or metalloid. Elemental arsenic normally exists in the alpha-
crystalline metallic form which is steel gray and brittle, and in the
beta form which is dark gray and amorphous. Arsenic sublimes at
615ฐC. Arsenic is widely distributed throughout the world in a large
number of minerals. The most important commercial source of arsenic
is as a by-product from treatment of copper, lead, cobalt, and gold
ores. Arsenic is usually marketed as the trioxide (As203). Annual
U.S. production of the trioxide approaches 40,000 tons.
The principal use of arsenic is in agricultural chemicals (herbicides)
for controlling weeds in cotton fields. Arsenicals have various
applications in medicinal and veterinary use, as wood preservatives,
and in semiconductors.
The effects of arsenic in humans were known by the ancient Greeks and
Romans. The principal toxic effects are gastrointestinal
513
-------
disturbances. Breakdown of red blood cells occurs. Symptoms of acute
poisoning include vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, lassitude,
dizziness, and headache. Longer exposure produced dry, falling hair,
brittle, loose nails, eczema, and exfoliation. Arsenicals also
exhibit teratogenic and mutagenic effects in humans. Oral
administration of arsenic compounds has been associated clinically
with skin cancer for nearly a hundred years. Since 1888 numerous
studies have linked occupational exposure to, and therapeutic
administration of arsenic compounds to increased incidence of
respiratory and skin cancer.
For the maximum protection of human health from the potential
carcinogenic effects due to exposure to arsenic through ingestion of
water and contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient water
concentration should be zero based on the non-threshold assumption of
this chemical. However, zero level may not be attainable at the
present time. Therefore, the levels which may result in incremental
increase of cancer risk over the lifetime are estimated at 10-5, 10-6
and 107. The corresponding recommended criteria are 2.2 x 10-7 mg/1,
2.2 x 10-6 mg/1, and 2.2 x 10-5 mg/1. If contaminated aquatic
organisms alone are consumed, excluding the consumption of water, the
water concentration should be less than 1.75 x 10-4 mg/1 to keep the
increased lifetime cancer risk below 10-5. Available data show that
adverse effects on aquatic life occur at concentrations higher than
those cited for human health risks.
A few studies have been made regarding the behavior of arsenic in
POTW. One EPA survey of 9 POTW reported influent concentrations
ranging from 0.0005 to 0.693 mg/1; effluents from 3 POTW having
biological treatment contained 0.0004 - 0.01 mg/1; 2 POTW showed
arsenic removal efficiencies of 50 and 71 percent in biological
treatment. Inhibition of treatment processes by sodium arsenate is
reported to occur at 0.1 mg/1 in activated sludge, and 1.6 mg/1 in
anaerobic digestion processes. In another study based on data from 60
POTW, arsenic in sludge ranged from 1.6 to 65.6 mg/kg and the median
value was 7.8 mg/kg. Arsenic in sludge spread on cropland may.be
taken up by plants grown on that land. Edible plants can take up
arsenic, but normally their growth is inhibited before the plants are
ready for harvest.
Asbestos(116). Asbestos is a generic term used to describe a group of
hydrated mineral silicates that can appear in a fibrous crystal form
(asbestiform) and, when crushed, can separate into flexible fibers.
The types of asbestos presently used commercially fall into two
mineral groups: the sepentine and amphibole groups. Asbestos is
minerologically stable and is not prone to significant chemical or
biological degradataion in the aquatic environment. In 1978, the
total consumption of asbestos in the U.S. was 583,000 metric tons.
Asbestos is an excellent insulating material and is used in a wide
514
-------
variety of products. Based on 1975 figures, the total annual
identifiable asbestos emissions are estimated at 243,527 metric tons.
Land discharges account for 98.3 percent of the emissions, air dis-
charges account for 1.5 percent, and water discharges account for 0.2
per cent.
Asbestos has been found to produce a significant incidence of disease
among workers occupationally exposed in mining and milling, in
manufacturing, and in the use of materials containing the fiber. The
predominant type of exposure has been inhalation, although some
asbestos may be swallowed directly or ingested after being
expectorated from the respiratory tract. Non-cancerous asbestos
disease has been found among people directly exposed to high levels of
asbestos as a result of excessive work exposure; much less frequently,
among those with lesser exposures although there is extensive evidence
of pulmonary disease among people exposed to airborne asbestos. There
is little evidence of disease among people exposed to waterborne
fibers.
Asbestos at the concentrations currently found in the aquatic environ-
ment does not appear to exert toxic effects on aquatic organisms. For
the maximum protection of human health from the potential carcinogenic
effects of exposure to asbestos through ingestion of water and
contaminated aquatic organisms, the ambient water concentration should
be zero based on the non-threshold assumption of this substance.
However, zero level may not be attainable at the present time.
Therefore the levels which may result in incremental increase of
cancer risk over the life time are estimated at 10-5, 10-6 and 10-7.
The corresponding recommended cirteria are 300,000 fibers/1 , 30,000
fibers/1, and 3,000 fibers/1.
The available data indicate that technologies used at POTW for
reducing levels of total suspended solids in wastewater also provide a
concomitant reduction in asbestos levels. Asbestos removal
efficiencies ranging from 80 precent to greater than 99 percent have
been reported following sedimentation of wastewater. Filtration and
sedimentation with chemical addition (i.e., lime and/or polymer) have
achieved even greater percentage removals.
Cadmium(118). Cadmium is a relatively rare metallic element that is
seldom found in sufficient quantities in a pure state to warrant
mining or extraction from the earth's surface. It is found in trace
amounts of about 1 ppm throughout the earth's crust. Cadmium is,
however, a valuable by-product of zinc production.
Cadmium is used primarily as an electroplated metal, and is found as
an impurity in the secondary refining of zinc, lead, and copper.
515
-------
Cadmium is an extremely dangerous cumulative toxicant, causing
progressive chronic poisoning in mammals, fish, and probably other
organisms.
Toxic effects of cadmium on man have been reported from throughout the
world. Cadmium may be a factor in the development of such human
pathological conditions as kidney disease, testicular tumors,
hypertension, arteriosclerosis, growth inhibition, chronic disease of
old age, and cancer. Cadmium is normally ingested by humans through
food and water as well as by breathing air contaminated by cadmium
dust. Cadmium is cumulative in the liver, kidney, pancreas, and
thyroid of humans and other animals. A severe bone and kidney
syndrome known as itai-itai disease has been documented in Japan as
caused by cadmium ingestion via drinking water and contaminated
irrigation water. Ingestion of as little as 0.6 mg/day has produced
the" disease. Cadmium acts synergistically with other metals. Copper
and zinc substantially increase its toxicity.
Cadmium is concentrated by marine organisms, particularly molluscs,
which accumulate cadmium in calcareous tissues and in the viscera. A
concentration factor of 1000 for cadmium in fish muscle has been
reported, as have concentration factors of 3000 in marine plants and
up to 29,600 in certain marine animals. The eggs and larvae of fish
are apparently more sensitive than adult fish to poisoning by cadmium,
and crustaceans appear to be more sensitive than fish eggs and larvae.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
cadmium ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion is determined to be 0.010 mg/1.
Cadmium is not destroyed when it is introduced into a POTW, and will
either pass through to the POTW effluent or be incorporated into the
POTW sludge. In addition, it can interfere with the POTW treatment
process.
In a study of 189 POTW, 75 percent of the primary plants, 57 percent
of the trickling filter plants, 66 percent of the activated sludge
plants and 62 percent of the biological plants allowed over 90 percent
of the influent cadmium to pass thorugh to the POTW effluent. Only 2
of the 189 POTW allowed less than 20 percent pass-through, and none
less than 10 percent pass-through. POTW effluent concentrations
ranged from 0.001 to 1.97 mg/1 (mean 0.028 mg/1, standard deviation
0.167 mg/1).
Cadmium not passed through the POTW will be retained in the sludge
where it is likely to build up in concentration. Cadmium
contamination of sewage sludge limits its use on land since it
increases the level of cadmium in the soil. Data show that cadmium
can be incorporated into crops, including vegetables and grains, from
516
-------
contaminated soils. Since the crops themselves show no adverse
effects from soils with levels up to 100 mg/kg cadmium, these
contaminated crops could have a significant impact on human health.
Two Federal agancies have already recognized the potential adverse
human health effects posed by the use of sludge on cropland. The FDA
recommends that sludge containing over 30 mg/kg of cadmium should not
be used on agricultured land. Sewage sludge contains 3 to 300 mg/kg
(dry basis) of cadmium (mean = 10 mg/kg). The USDA also recommends
placing limits on the total cadmium from sludge that may be applied to
land.
Chromium(119). Chromium is an elemental metal usually found as a
chromite (FeOซCr203). The metal is normally produced by reducing the
oxide with aluminum. A significant proportion of the chromium used is
in the form of compounds such as sodium dichromate (Na2Cr04), and
chromic acid (Cr03) - both are hexavalent chromium compounds.
Chromium is found as an alloying component of many steels and its
compounds are used in electroplating baths, and as corrosion
inhibitors for closed water circulation systems.
The two chromium forms most frequently found in industry wastewaters
are hexavalent and trivalent chromium. Hexavalent chromium is the
form used for metal treatments. Some of it is reduced to trivalent
chromium as part of the process reaction. The raw wastewater
containing both valence states is usually treated first to reduce
remaining hexavalent to trivalent chromium, and second to precipitate
the trivalent form as the hydroxide. The hexavalent form is not
removed by lime treatment.
Chromium, in its various valence states, is hazardous to man. It can
produce lung tumors when inhaled, and induces skin sensitizations.
Large doses of chromates have corrosive effects on the intestinal
tract and can cause inflammation of the kidneys. Hexavalent chromium
is a known human carcinogen. Levels of chromate ions that show no
effect in man appear to be so low as to prohibit determination, to
date.
The toxicity of chromium salts to fish and other aquatic life varies
widely with the species, temperature, pH, valence of the chromium, and
synergistic or antagonistic effects, especially the effect of water
hardness. Studies have shown that trivalent chromium is more toxic to
fish of some types than is hexavalent chromium. Hexavalent chromium
retards growth of one fish species at 0.0002 mg/1. Fish food
organisms and other lower forms of aquatic life are extremely
sensitive to chromium. Therefore, both hexavalent and trivalent
chromium must be considered harmful to particular fish or organisms.
517
-------
criterion to protect freshwater aquatic life is 5.6 x 10-3 mg/1 as a
24-hour average.
Copper salts cause undesirable color reactions in the food industry
and cause pitting when deposited on some other metals such as aluminum
and galvanized steel.
Irrigation water containing more than minute quantities of copper can
be detrimental to certain crops. Copper appears in all soils, and its
concentration ranges from 10 to 80 ppm. In soils, copper occurs in
association with hydrous oxides of manganese and iron, and also as
soluble and insoluble complexes with organic matter. Copper is
essential to the life of plants, and the normal range of concentration
in plant tissue is from 5 to 20 ppm. Copper concentrations in plants
normally do not build up to high levels when toxicity occurs. For
example, the concentrations of copper in snapbean leaves and pods was
less than 50 and 20 mg/kg, respectively, under conditions of severe
copper toxicity. Even under conditions of copper toxicity, most of
the excess copper accumulates in the roots; very little is moved to
the aerial part of the plant.
Copper is not destroyed when treated by a POTW, and will either pass
through to the POTW effluent or be retained in the POTW sludge. It
can interfere with the POTW treatment processes and can limit the
usefulness of municipal sludge.
The influent concentration of copper to POTW facilities has been
observed by the EPA to range from 0.01 to 1.97 mg/1, with a median
concentration of 0.12 mg/1. The copper that is removed from the
influent stream of a POTW is adsorbed on the sludge or appears in the
sludge as the hydroxide of the metal. Bench scale pilot studies have
shown that from about 25 percent to 75 percent of the copper passing
through the activated sludge process remains in solution in the final
effluent. Four-hour slug dosages of copper sulfate in concentrations
exceeding 50 mg/1 were reported to have severe effects on the removal
efficiency of an unacclimated system, with the system returning to
normal in about 100 hours. Slug dosages of copper in the form of
copper cyanide were observed to have much more severe effects on the
activated sludge system, but the total system returned to normal in 24
hours.
In a recent study of 268 POTW, the median pass-through was over 80
percent for primary plants and 40 to 50 percent for trickling filter,
activated sludge, and biological treatment plants. POTW effluent
concentrations of copper ranged from 0.003 to 1.8 mg/1 (mean 0.126,
standard deviation 0.242).
Copper which does not pass through the POTW will be retained in the
sludge where it will build up in concentration. The presence of
520
-------
oxidation processes can produce hexavalent chromium from lower valance
states. Hexavalent chromium is potentially more toxic than trivalent
chromium. In cases where high rates of chrome sludge application on
land are used, distinct growth inhibition and plant tissue uptake have
been noted.
Pretreatment of discharges substantially reduces the concentration of
chromium in sludge. In Buffalo, New York, pretreatment of
electroplating waste resulted in a decrease in chromium concentrations
in POTW sludge from 2,510 to 1,040 mg/kg. A similar reduction
occurred in Grand Rapids, Michigan, POTW where the chromium
concentration in sludge decreased from 11,000 to 2,700 mg/kg when
pretreatment was made a requirement.
Copper(120). Copper is a metallic element that sometimes is found
free, as the native metal, and is also found in minerals such as
cuprite (Cu20), malechite [CuCOjปCu(OH)2], azurite [2CuC03ซCu(OH)2],
chalcopyrite (CuFeS2)/ and bornite (Cu5FeS4). Copper is obtained from
these ores by smelting, leaching, and electrolysis. It is used in the
plating, electrical, plumbing, and heating equipment industries, as
well as in insecticides and fungicides.
Traces of copper are found in all forms of plant and animal life, and
the metal is an essential trace element for nutrition. Copper is not
considered to be a cumulative systemic poison for humans as it is
readily excreted by the body, but it can cause symptoms of
gastroenteritis, with nausea and intestinal irritations, at relatively
low dosages. The limiting factor in domestic water supplies is taste.
To prevent this adverse organoleptic effect of copper in water, a
criterion of 1 mg/1 has been established.
The toxicity of copper to aquatic organisms varies significantly, not
only with the species, but also with the physical and chemical
characteristics of the water, including temperature, hardness,
turbidity, and carbon dioxide content. In hard water, the toxicity of
copper salts may be reduced by the precipitation of copper carbonate
or other insoluble compounds. The sulfates of copper and zinc, and of
copper and calcium are synergistic in their toxic effect on fish.
Relatively high concentrations of copper may be tolerated by adult
fish for short periods of time; the critical effect of copper appears
to be its higher toxicity to young or juvenile fish. Concentrations
of 0.02 to 0.031 mg/1 have proved fatal to some common fish species.
In general the salmonoids are very sensitive and the sunfishes are
less sensitive to copper.
The recommended criterion to protect freshwater aquatic life is
0.0056 mg/1 as a 24-hour average, and 0.012 mg/1 maximum concentration
at a hardness of 50 mg/1 CaC03. For total recoverable copper the
519
-------
before the detoxifying reaction reduces the cyanide concentration to a
safe level.
Cyanides are more toxic to fish than to lower forms of aquatic
organisms such as midge larvae, crustaceans, and mussels. Toxicity to
fish is a function of chemical form and concentration, and is
influenced by the rate of metabolism (temperature), the level of
dissolved oxygen, and pH. In laboratory studies free cyanide
concentrations ranging from 0.05 to 0.15 mg/1 have been proven to be
fatal to sensitive fish species including trout, bluegill, and fathead
minnows. Levels above 0.2 mg/1 are rapidly fatal to most fish
species. Long term sublethal concentrations of cyanide as low as
0.01 mg/1 have been shown to affect the ability of fish to function
normally, e.g., reproduce, grow, and swim.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
cyanide ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water quality criterion is determined to be
0.200 mg/1.
Persistance of cyanide in water is highly variable and depends upon
the chemical form of cyanide in the water, the concentration of
cyanide, and the nature of other constituents. Cyanide may be
destroyed by strong oxidizing agents such as permanganate and
chlorine. Chlorine is commonly used to oxidize strong cyanide
solutions. Carbon dioxide and nitrogen are the products of complete
oxidation. But if the reaction is not complete, the very toxic
compound, cyanogen chloride, may remain in the treatment system and
subsequently be released to the environment. Partial chlorination may
occur as part of a POTW treatment, or during the disinfection
treatment of surface water for drinking water preparation.
Cyanides can interfere with treatment processes in POTW, or pass
through to ambient waters. At low concentrations and with acclimated
microflora, cyanide may be decomposed by microorganisms in anaerobic
and aerobic environments or waste treatment systems. However, data
indicate that much of the cyanide introduced passes through to the
POTW effluent. The mean pass-through of 14 biological plants was 71
percent. In a recent study of 41 POTW the effluent concentrations
ranged from 0.002 to 100 mg/1 (mean = 2.518, standard
deviation * 15.6). Cyanide also enhances the toxicity of metals
commonly found in POTW effluents, including the priority pollutants
cadmium, zinc, and copper.
Data for Grand Rapids, Michigan, showed a significant decline in
cyanide concentrations downstream from the POTW after pretreatment
regulations were put in force. Concentrations fell from 0.66 mg/1
before, to 0.01 mg/1 after pretreatment was required.
522
-------
excessive levels of copper in sludge may limit its use on cropland.
Sewage sludge contains up to 16,000 mg/kg of copper, with 730 mg/kg as
the mean value. These concentrations are significantly greater than
those normally found in soil, which usually range from 18 to 80 mg/kg.
Experimental data indicate that when dried sludge is spread over
tillable land, the copper tends to remain in place down to the depth
of tillage, except for copper which is taken up by plants grown in the
soil. Recent investigation has shown that the extractable copper
content of sludge-treated soil decreased with time, which suggests a
reversion of copper to less soluble forms was occurring.
Cyanide(121). Cyanides are among the most toxic of pollutants
commonly observed in industrial wastewaters. Introduction of cyanide
into industrial processes is usually by dissolution of potassium
cyanide (KCN) or sodium cyanide (NaCN) in process waters. However,
hydrogen cyanide (HCN) formed when the above salts are dissolved in
water, is probably the most acutely lethal compound.
The relationship of pH to hydrogen cyanide formation is very
important. As pH is lowered to below 7, more than 99 percent of the
cyanide is present as HCN and less than 1 percent as cyanide ions.
Thus, at neutral pH, that of most living organisms, the more toxic
form of cyanide prevails.
Cyanide ions combine with numerous heavy metal ions to form complexes.
The complexes are in equilibrium with HCN. Thus, the stability of the
metal-cyanide complex and the pH determine the concentration of HCN.
Stability of the metal-cyanide anion complexes is extremely variable.
Those formed with zinc, copper, and cadmium are not stable - they
rapidly dissociate, with production of HCN, in near neutral or acid
waters. Some of the complexes are extremely stable. Cobaltocyanide
is very resistant to acid distillation in the laboratory. Iron
cyanide complexes are also stable, but undergo photodecomposition to
give HCN upon exposure to sunlight. Synergistic effects have been
demonstrated for the metal cyanide complexes making zinc, copper, and
cadmium, cyanides more toxic than an equal concentration of sodium
cyanide.
The toxic mechanism of cyanide is essentially an inhibition of oxygen
metabolism, i.e., rendering the tissues incapable of exchanging
oxygen. The cyanogen compounds are true noncummulative protoplasmic
poisons. They arrest the activity of all forms of animal life.
Cyanide shows a very specific type of toxic action. It inhibits the
cytochrome oxidase system. This system is the one which facilitates
electron transfer from reduced metabolites to molecular oxygen. The
human body can convert cyanide to a non-toxic thiocyanate and
eliminate it. However, if the quantity of cyanide ingested is too
great at one time, the inhibition of oxygen utilization proves fatal
521
-------
pH (less than 5.5} and low concentrations of labile phosphorus, lead
solubility is increased and plants can accumulate lead.
Mercury. Mercury (123) is an elemental metal rarely found in nature
as the free metal. Mercury is unique among metals as it remains a
liquid down to about 39 degrees below zero. It is relatively inert
chemically and is insoluable in water. The principal ore is cinnabar
(HflS) .
Mercury is used industrially as the metal and as mercurous and
mercuric salts and compounds. Mercury is used in several types of
batteries. Mercury released to the aqueous environment is subject to
biomethylation - conversion to the extremely toxic methyl mercury.
Mercury can be introduced into the body through the skin and the
respiratory system as the elemental vapor. Mercuric salts are highly
toxic to humans and can be absorbed through the gastrointestinal
tract. Fatal doses can vary from 1 to 30 grams. Chronic toxicity of
methyl mercury is evidenced primarily by neurological symptoms. Some
mercuric salts cause death by kidney failure.
Mercuric salts are extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.
Mercuric chloride is more lethal than copper, hexavalent chromium,
zinc, nickel, and lead towards fish and aquatic life. In the food
cycle, algae containing mercury up to 100 times the concentration in
the surrounding sea water are eaten by fish which further concentrate
the mercury. Predators that eat the fish in turn concentrate the
mercury even further.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
mercury ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms the ambient water criterion is determined to be 0.000144
mg/1.
Mercury is not destroyed when treated by a POTW, and will either pass
through to the POTW effluent or be incorporated into the POTW sludge.
At low concentrations it may reduce POTW removal efficiencies, and at
high concentrations it may upset the POTW operation.
The influent concentrations of mercury to POTW have been observed by
the EPA to range from 0.0002 to 0.24 mg/1, with a median concentration
of 0.001 mg/1. Mercury has been reported in the literature to have
inhibiting effects upon an activated sludge POTW at levels as low as
0.1 mg/1. At 5 mg/1 of mercury, losses of COD removal efficiency of
14 to 40 percent have been reported, while at 10 mg/1 loss of removal
of 59 percent has been reported. Upset of an activated sludge POTW is
reported in the .literature to occur near 200 mg/1. The anaerobic
digestion process is much less affected by the presence of mercury,
with inhibitory effects being reported at 1365 mg/1.
524
-------
Lead (122). Lead is a soft, malleable, ductible, blueish-gray,
metallic element, usually obtained from the mineral galena (lead
sulfide, PbS), anglesite (lead sulfate, PbS04), or cerussite (lead
carbonate, PbC03). Because it is usually associated with minerals of
zinc, silver, copper, gold, cadmium, antimony, and arsenic, special
purification methods are frequently used before and after extraction
of the metal from the ore concentrate by smelting.
Lead is widely used for its corrosion resistance, sound and vibration
absorption, low melting point (solders), and . relatively high
imperviousness to various forms of radiation. Small amounts of
copper, antimony and other metals can be alloyed with lead to achieve
greater hardness, stiffness, or corrosion resistance than is afforded
by the pure metal. Lead compounds are used in glazes and paints.
About one third of U.S. lead consumption goes into storage batteries.
About half of U.S. lead consumption is from secondary lead recovery.
U.S. consumption of lead is in the range of one million tons annually.
Lead ingested by humans produces a variety of toxic effects including
impaired reproductive ability, disturbances in blood chemistry,
neurological disorders, kidney damage, and adverse cardiovascular
effects. Exposure to lead in the diet results in permanent increase
in lead levels in the body. Most of the lead entering the body
eventually becomes localized in the bones where it accumulates. Lead
is a carcinogen or cocarcinogen in some species of experimental
animals. Lead is teratogenic in experimental animals. Mutangenicity
data are not available for lead.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of lead
ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic organisms the
ambient water criterion is 0.050 mg/1. Available data show that
adverse effects on aquatic life occur at concentrations as low as 7.5
x 10-4 mg/1 of total recoverable lead as a 24-hour average with a
water hardness of 50 mg/1 as CaC03.
Lead is not destroyed in POTW, but is passed through to the effluent
or retained in the POTW-sludge; it can interfere with POTW treatment
processes and can limit the usefulness of POTW sludge for application
to agricultural croplands. Threshold concentration for inhibition of
the activated sludge process is 0.1 mg/1, and for the nitrification
process is 0.5 mg/1. In a study of 214 POTW, median pass through
values were over 80 percent for primary plants and over 60 percent for
trickling filter, activated sludge, and biological process plants.
Lead concentration in POTW effluents ranged from 0.003 to 1.8 mg/1
(means ซ 0.106 mg/1, standard deviation ซ 0.222).
Application of lead-containing sludge to cropland should not lead to
uptake by crops under most conditions because normally lead is
strongly bound by soil. However, under the unusual conditions of low
523
-------
and iron. Nickel is present in coastal and open ocean water at con-
centrations in the range of 0.0001 to 0.006 mg/1 although the most
common values are 0.002 - 0.003 mg/1. Marine animals contain up to
0.4 mg/1 and marine plants contain up to 3 mg/1. Higher nickel
concentrations have been reported to cause reduction in photosynthetic
activity of the giant kelp. A low concentration was found to kill
oyster eggs.
For the protection of human health based on the toxic properties of
nickel ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion is determined to be 0.0134
mg/1. If contaminated aquatic organisms are consumed, excluding
consumption of water, the ambient water criterion is determined to be
0.100 mg/1. Available data show that adverse effects on aquatic life
occur for total recoverable nickel concentrations as low as 0.0071
mg/1 as a 24-hour average.
Nickel is not destroyed when treated in a POTW, but will either pass
through to the POTW effluent or be retained in the POTW sludge. It
can interfere with POTW treatment processes and can also limit the
usefulness of municipal sludge.
Nickel salts have caused inhibition of the biochemical oxidation of
sewage in a POTW. In a pilot plant, slug doses of nickel
significantly reduced normal treatment efficiencies for a few hours,
but the plant acclimated itself somewhat to the slug dosage and
appeared to achieve normal treatment efficiencies within 40 hours. It
has been reported that the anaerobic digestion process is inhibited
only by high concentrations of nickel, while a low concentration of
nickel inhibits the nitrification process.
The influent concentration of nickel to POTW facilities has been
observed by the EPA to range from 0.01 to 3.19 mg/1, with a median of
0.33 mg/1. In a study of 190 POTW, nickel pass-through was greater
than 90 percent for 82 percent of the primary plants. Median pass-
through for trickling filter, activated sludge, and biological process
plants was greater than 80 percent. POTW effuent concentrations
ranged from 0.002 to 40 mg/1 (mean = 0.410, standard
deviation = 3.279).
Nickel not passed through the POTW will be incorporated into the
sludge. In a recent two-year study of eight cities, four of the
cities had median nickel concentrations of over 350 mg/kg, and two
were over 1,000 mg/kg. The maximum nickel concentration observed was
4,010 mg/kg.
Nickel is found in nearly all soils, plants, and waters. Nickel has
no known essential function in plants. In soils, nickel typically is
found in the range from 10 to 100 mg/kg. Various environmental
526
-------
In a study of 22 POTW having secondary treatment, the range of removal
of mercury from the influent to the POTW ranged from 4 to 99 percent
with median .removal of 41 percent. Thus significant pass through of
mercury may occur.
In sludges, mercury content may be high if industrial sources of
mercury contamination are present. Little is known about the form in
which mercury occurs in sludge. Mercury may undergo biological
methylation in sediments, but no methylation has been observed in
soils, mud, or sewage sludge.
The mercury content of soils not receiving additions of POTW sewage
sludge lie in the range from 0.01 to 0.5 mg/kg. In soils receiving
POTW sludges for protracted periods, the concentration of mercury has
been observed to approach 1.0 mg/kg. In the soil, mercury enters into
reactions with the exchange complex of clay and organic fractions,
forming both ionic and covalent bonds. Chemical and microbiological
degradation of mercurials can take place side by side in the soil, and
the products - ionic or molecular - are retained by organic matter and
clay or may be volatilized if gaseous. Because of the high affinity
between mercury and the solid soil surfaces, mercury persists in the
upper layer of soil.
Mercury can enter plants through the roots, it can readily move to
other parts of the plant, and it has been reported to cause injury to
plants. In many plants mercury concentrations range from
0.01 to 0.20 mg/kg, but when plants are supplied with high levels of
mercury, these concentrations can exceed 0.5 mg/kg. Bioconcentration
occurs in animals ingesting mercury in food.
NickelX124). Nickel is seldom found in nature as the pure elemental
metal. It is a relatively plentiful element and is widely distributed
throughout the earth's crust. It occurs in marine organisms and is
found in the oceans. The chief commercial ores for nickel are
pentlandite [(Fe,Ni)9SB], and a lateritic ore consisting of hydrated
nickel-iron-magnesium silicate.
Nickel has many and varied uses. It is used in alloys and as the pure
metal. Nickel salts are used for electroplating baths.
The toxicity of nickel to man is thought to be very low, and systemic
poisoning of human beings by nickel or nickel salts is almost unknown.
In non-human mammals nickel acts to inhibit insulin release, depress
growth, and reduce cholesterol. A high incidence of cancer of the
lung and nose has been reported in humans engaged in the refining of
nickel.
Nickel salts can kill fish at very low concentrations. However,
nickel has been found to be less toxic to some fish than copper, zinc,
525
-------
Very few data are available regarding the behavior of selenium in
POTW. One EPA survey of 103 POTW revealed one POTW using biological
treatment and having selenium in the influent. Influent concentration
was 0.0025 mg/1, effluent concentration was 0.0016 mg/1 giving a
removal of 37 percent. It is not known to be inhibitory to POTW
processes. In another study, sludge from POTW in 16 cities was found
to contain from 1.8 to 8.7 mg/kg selenium, compared to 0.01 to 2 mg/kg
in untreated soil. These concentrations of selenium in sludge present
a potential hazard for humans or other mammuals eating crops grown on
soil treated with selenium containing sludge.
Silver(126). Silver is a soft, lustrous, white metal that is
insoluble in water and alkali. In nature, silver is found in the
elemental state (native silver) and combined in ores such as argentite
(Ag2S), horn silver (AgCl), proustite (Ag3AsS3), and pyrargyrite
(Ag3SbS3). Silver is used extensively in several industries, among
them electroplating.
Metallic silver is not considered to be toxic, but most of its salts
are toxic to a large number of organisms. Upon ingestion by humans,
many silver salts are absorbed in the circulatory system and deposited
in various body tissues, resulting in generalized or sometimes
localized gray pigmentation of the skin and mucous membranes know as
argyria. There is no known method for removing silver from the
tissues once it is deposited, and the effect is cumulative.
Silver is recognized as a bactericide and doses from 0.000001 to
0.0005 mg/1 have been reported as sufficient to sterilize water. The
criterion for ambient water to protect human health from the toxic
properties of silver ingested through water and through contaminated
aquatic organisms is 0.050 mg/1.
The chronic toxic effects of silver on the aquatic environment have
not been given as much attention as many other heavy metals. Data
from existing literature support the fact that silver is very toxic to
aquatic organisms. Despite the fact that silver is nearly the most
toxic of the heavy metals, there are insufficient data to adequately
evaluate even the effects of hardness on silver toxicity. There are
no data available on the toxicity of different forms of silver.
There is no available literature on the incidental removal of silver
by POTW. An incidental removal of about 50 percent is assumed as
being representative. This is the highest average incidental removal
of any metal for which data are available. (Copper has been indicated
to have a median incidental removal rate of 49 percent).
Bioaccumulation and concentration of silver from sewage sludge has not
been studied to any great degree. There is some indication that
silver could be bioaccumulated in mushrooms to the extent that there
528
-------
exposures to nickel appear to correlate with increased incidence of
tumors in man. For example, cancer in the maxillary antrum of snuff
users may result from using plant material grown on soil high in
nickel.
Nickel toxicity may develop in plants from application of sewage
sludge on acid soils. Nickel has caused reduction of yields for a
variety of crops including oats, mustard, turnips, and cabbage. In
one study nickel decreased the yields of oats significantly at 100
mg/kg.
Whether nickel exerts a toxic effect on plants depends on several soil
factors, the amount of nickel applied, and the contents of other
metals in the sludge. Unlike copper and zinc, which are more
available from inorganic sources than from sludge, nickel uptake by
plants seems to be promoted by the presence of the organic matter in
sludge. Soil treatments, such as liming reduce the solubility of
nickel. Toxicity of nickel to plants is enhanced in acidic soils.
Selenium(125). Selenium (chemical symbol Se) is a non-metallic
element existing in several allotropic forms. Gray selenium, which
has a metallic appearance, is the stable form at ordinary temperatures
and melts at 220ฐC. Selenium is a major component of 38 minerals and
a minor component of 37 others found in various parts of the world.
Most selenium is obtained as a by-product of precious metals recovery
from electrolytic copper refinery slimes. U.S. annual production at
one time reached one million pounds.
Principal uses of selenium are in semi-conductors, pigments,
decoloring of glass, zerography, and metallurgy. It also is used to
produce ruby glass used in signal lights. Several selenium compounds
are important oxidizing agents in the synthesis of organic chemicals
and drug products.
While results of some studies suggest that selenium may be an
essential element in human nutrition, the toxic effects of selenium in
humans are well established. Lassitude, loss of hair, discoloration
and loss of fingernails are symptoms of selenium poisoning. In a
fatal case of ingestion of a larger dose of selenium acid, peripheral
vascular collapse, pulumonary edema, and coma occurred. Selenium
produces mutagenic and teratogenic effects, but it has not been
established as exhibiting carcinogenic activity.
For the protection of human health from the toxic properties of
selenium ingested through water and through contaminated aquatic
organisms, the ambient water criterion is determined to be 0.010 mg/1.
Available data show that adverse effects on aquatic life occur at
concentrations higher than that cited for human toxicity.
527
-------
Toxicities of zinc in nutrient solutions have been demonstrated for a
number of plants. A variety of fresh water plants tested manifested
harmful symptoms at concentrations of 10 mg/1. Zinc sulfate has also
been found to be lethal to many plants and it could impair
agricultural uses of the water.
Zinc is not destroyed when treated by POTW, but will either pass
through to the POTW effluent or be retained in the POTW sludge. It
can interfere with treatment processes in the POTW and can also limit
the uaefuleness of municipal sludge.
In slug doses, and particularly in the presence of copper, dissolved
zinc can interfere with or seriously disrupt the operation of POTW
biological processes by reducing overall removal efficiencies, largely
as a result of the toxicity of the metal to biological organisms.
However, zinc solids in the form of hydroxides or sulfides do not
appear to interfere with biological treatment processes, on the basis
of available data. Such solids accumulate in the sludge.
The influent concentrations of zinc to POTW facilities has been
observed by the EPA to range from 0.017 to 3.91 mg/1, with a median
concentration of 0.33 mg/1. Primary treatment is not efficient in
removing zinc; however, the microbial floe of secondary treatment
readily adsorbs zinc.
In a study of 258 POTW, the median pass-through values were 70 to 88
percent for primary plants, 50 to 60 percent for trickling filter and
biological process plants, and 30-40 percent for activated process
plants. POTW effluent concentrations of zinc ranged from 0.003 to
3.6 mg/1 (mean = 0.330, standard deviation = 0.464).
The zinc which does not pass through the POTW is retained in the
sludge. The presence of zinc in sludge may limit its use on cropland.
Sewage sludge contains 72 to over 30,000 mg/kg of zinc, with
3,366 mg/kg as the mean value. These concentrations are significantly
greater than those normally found in soil, which range from 0 to
195 mg/kg, with 94 mg/kg being a common level. Therefore, application
of sewage sludge to soil will generally increase the concentration of
zinc in the soil. Zinc can be toxic to plants, depending upon soil
pH. Lettuce, tomatoes, turnips, mustard, kale, and beets are
especially sensitive to zinc contamination.
Aluminum. Aluminum is a nonconventional pollutant. It is a silvery
white metal, very abundant in the earths crust (8.1 percent), but
never found free in nature. Its principal ore is bauxite. Alumina
(AljfOj) is extracted from the bauxite and dissolved in molten
cryolite. Aluminum is produced by electrolysis of this melt.
530
-------
could be adverse physiological effects on humans if they consumed
large quantites of mushrooms grown in silver enriched soil. The
effect, however, would tend to be unpleasant rather than fatal.
There is little summary data available on the quantity of silver
discharged to POTW. Presumably there would be a tendency to limit its
discharge from a manufacturing facility because of its high intrinsic
value.
Zinc(128). Zinc occurs abundantly in the earth's crust, concentrated
in ores. It is readily refined into the pure, stable, silvery-white
metal. In addition to its use in alloys, zinc is used as a protective
coating on steel. It is applied by hot dipping (i.e. dipping the
steel in molten zinc) or by electroplating.
Zinc can have^ an adverse effect on man and animals at high con-
centrations. Zinc at concentrations in excess of 5 mg/1 causes an
undesirable taste which persists through conventional treatment. For
the prevention of adverse effects due to these organoleptic properties
of zinc, concentrations in ambient water should not exceed 5 mg/1.
Available data show that adverse effects on aquatic life occur at
concentrations as low as 0.047 mg/1 as a 24-hour average.
Toxic concentrations of zinc compounds cause adverse changes in the
morphology and physiology of fish. Lethal concentrations in the range
of 0.1 mg/1 have been reported. Acutely toxic concentrations induce
cellular breakdown of the gills, and possibly the clogging of the
gills with mucous. Chronically toxic concentrations of zinc compounds
cause general enfeeblement and widespread histological changes to many
organs, but not to gills. Abnormal swimming behavior has been
reported at 0.04 mg/1. Growth and maturation are retarded by zinc.
It has been observed that the effects of zinc poisoning may not become
apparent immediately, so that fish removed from zinc-contaminated
water may die as long as 48 hours after removal.
In general, salmonoids are most sensitive to elemental zinc in soft
water; the rainbow trout is the most sensitive in hard waters. A
complex relationship exists between zinc concentration, dissolved zinc
concentration, pH, temperature, and calcium and magnesium
concentration. Prediction of harmful effects has been less than
reliable and controlled studies have not been extensively documented.
The major concern with zinc compounds in marine waters is not with
acute lethal effects, but rather with the long-term sublethal effects
of the metallic compounds and complexes. Zinc accumulates in some
marine species, and marine animals contain zinc in the range of 6 to
1500 mg/kg. From the point of view of acute lethal effects,
invertebrate marine animals seem to be the most sensitive organism
tested.
529
-------
The behavior of ammonia in POTW is well documented because it is a
natural component of domestic wastewaters. Only very high
concentrations of ammonia compounds could overload POTW. One study
has shown that concentrations of unionized ammonia greater than
90 mg/1 reduce gasification in anaerobic digesters and concentrations
of 140 mg/1 stop digestion competely. Corrosion of copper piping and
excessive consumption of chlorine also result from high ammonia
concentrations. Interference with aerobic nitrification processes can
occur when large concentrations of ammonia suppress dissolved oxygen.
Nitrites are then produced instead of nitrates. Elevated nitrite
concentrations in drinking water are known to cause infant
methemoglobinemia.
Cobalt. Cobalt is a non-conventional pollutant. It is a brittle,
hard, magnetic, gray metal with a reddish tinge. Cobalt ores are
usually the sulfide or arsenide [smaltite-(Co,Ni)As2; cobaltite-CoAsS]
and are sparingly distributed in the earth's crust. Cobalt is usually
produced as a by-product of mining copper, nickel, arsenic, iron,
manganese, or silver. Because of the variety of ores and the very low
concentrations of cobalt, recovery of the metal is accomplished by
several different processes. Most consumption of cobalt is for
alloys. Over two-thirds of U.S. production goes to heat resistant,
magnetic, and wear resistant alloys. Chemicals and color pigments
make up most of the rest of consumption.
Cobalt and many of its alloys are not corrosion resistant, therefore
minor corrosion of any of the tool alloys or electrical resistance
alloys can contribute to its presence in raw wastewater from a variety
of manufacturing facilities. Additionally, the use of cobalt soaps as
dryers to accelerate curing of unsaturated oils used in coatings may
be a general source of small quantities of the metal. Several cobalt
pigments are used in paints to produce yellows or blues.
Cobalt is an essential nutrient for humans and other mammals, and is
present at a fairly constant level of about 1.2 mg in the adult human
body. Mammals tolerate low levels of ingested water-soluble cobalt
salts without any toxic symptoms; safe dosage levels in man have been
stated to be 2-7 mg/kg body weight per day. A goitrogenic effect in
humans is observed after the systemic administration of 3-4 mg cobalt
as cobaltous chloride daily for three weeks. Fatal heart disease
among heavy beer drinkers was attributed to the cardiotoxic action of
cobalt salts which were formerly used as additives to improve foaming.
The carcinogenicity of cobalt in rats has been verified, however,
there is no evidence for the involvement of dietary cobalt in
carcinogenisis in mammals.
There are no data available on the behavior of cobalt in POTW. There
are no data to lead to an expectation of adverse effects of cobalt on
POTW operation or the utility of sludge from POTW for crop
532
-------
Aluminum is light, malleable, ductile, possesses high thermal and
electrical conductivity, and is non-magnetic. It can be formed,
machined or cast. Although aluminum is very reactive, it forms a
protective oxide film on the surface which prevents corrosion under
many conditions. In contact with other metals in presence of moisture
the protective film is destroyed and voluminous white corrosion
products form. Strong acids and strong alkali also break down the
protective film.
Aluminum is non-toxic and its salts are used as coagulants in water
treatment. Although some aluminum salts are soluble, alkaline
conditions cause precipitation of the aluminum as a hydroxide.
Aluminum is commonly used in cooking utensils. There are no reported
adverse physiological effects on man from low concentrations of
aluminum in drinking water.
Aluminum does not have any adverse effects on POTW operation at any
concentrations normally encountered.
Ammonia. Ammonia (chemical formula NH3) is a non-conventional
pollutant. It is a colorless gas with a very pungent odor, detectable
at concentrations of 20 ppm in air by the nose, and is very soluble in
water (570 gm/1 at 25ฐC). Ammonia is produced industrially in very
large quantities (nearly 20 millions tons annually in the U.S.). It
is converted to ammonium compounds or shipped in the liquid form (it
liquifies at -33ฐC). Ammonia also results from natural processes.
Bacterial action on nitrates or nitrites, as well as dead plant and
animal tissue and animal wastes produces ammonia. Typical domestic
wastewaters contain 12 to 50 mg/1 ammonia.
The principal use of ammonia and its compounds is as fertilizer. High
amounts are introduced into soils and the water runoff from
agricultural land by this use. Smaller quantities of ammonia are used
as a refrigerant. Aqueous ammonia (2 to 5 percent solution) is widely
used as a household cleaner. Ammonium compounds find a variety of
uses in various industries.
Ammonia is toxic to humans by inhalation of the gas or ingestion of
aqueous solutions. The ionized form (NH4+) is less toxic than the
unionized form. Ingestion of as little as one ounce of household
ammonia has been reported as a fatal dose. Whether inhaled or
ingested, ammonia acts distructively on mucous membrane with resulting
loss of function. Aside from breaks in liquid ammonia refrigeration
equipment, industrial hazard from ammonia exists where solutions of
ammonium compounds may be accidently treated with a strong alkali,
releasing ammonia gas. As little as 150 ppm ammonia in air is
reported to cause laryngeal spasm, and inhalation of 5000 ppm in air
is considered sufficient to result in death.
531
-------
not occur in nature, but must be produced by reduction of the oxide
with sodium, magnesium, or aluminum, or by electrolysis. The
principal ores are pyrolusite (Mn02) and psilomelane (a complex
mixture of Mn02 and oxides of potassium, barium and other alkali and
alkaline earth metals). The largest percentage of manganese used in
the U.S. is in ferro-manganese alloys. A small amount goes into dry
batteries and chemicals.
Manganese is not often present in natural surface waters because its
hydroxides and carbonates are only sparingly soluble.
Manganese is undesirable in domestic water supplies because it causes
unpleasant tastes, deposits on food during cooking, stains and
discolors laundry and plumbing fixtures, and fosters the growth of
some microorganisms in reservoirs, filters, and distribution systems.
Small concentratons of 0.2 to 0.3 mg/1 manganese may cause building of
heavy encrustations in piping. Excessive manganese is also
undesirable in water for use in many industries, including textiles,
dying, food processing, distilling, brewing, ice, and paper.
The recommended limitations for manganese in drinking water in the
U.S. is 0.05 mg/1. The limit appears to be based on aesthetic and
economic factors rather than physiological hazards. Most
investigators regard manganese to be of no toxicological significance
in drinking water at concentrations not causing unpleasant tastes.
However, cases of manganese poisoning have been reported in the
literature. A small outbreak of encephalitis - like disease, with
early symptoms of lethergy and edema, was traced to manganese in the
drinking water in a village near Tokyo. Three persons died as a
result of poisoning by well water contaminated by manganese derived
from dry-cell batteries buried nearby. Excess manganese in the
drinking water is also believed to be the cause of a rare disease
endemic in Northeastern China.
No data were found regarding the behavior of manganese in POTW.
However, one source reports that typical mineral pickup from domestic
water use results in an increase in manganese concentration of 0.2 to
0.4 mg/1 in a municipal sewage system. Therefore, it is expected that
interference in POTW, if it occurs, would not be noted until manganese
concentrations exceeded 0.4 mg/1.
Phenols(Total). "Total Phenols" is a nonconventional pollutant
parameter. Total phenols is the result of analysis using the 4-AAP
(4-aminoantipyrene) method. This analytical procedure measures the
color development of reaction products between 4-AAP and some phenols.
The results are reported as phenol. Thus "total phenol" is not total
phenols because many phenols (notably nitrophenols) do not react.
Also, since each reacting phenol contributes to the color development
534
-------
application. Cobalt which enters POTW is expected to pass through to
the effluent unless sufficient sulfide ion is present, or generated in
anaerobic processes in the POTW to cause precipitation of the very
insoluble cobalt sulfide.
Iron. Iron is a non-conventional polluant. It is an abundant metal
found at many places in the earth's crust. The most common iron ore
is hematite (Fe203) from which iron is obtained by reduction with
carbon. Other forms of commercial ores are magnetite (Fe304) and
taconite (FeSiO). Pure iron is not often found in commercial use, but
it is usually alloyed with other metals and minerals. The most common
of these is carbon.
Iron is the basic element in the production of steel. Iron with
carbon is used for casting of major parts of machines and it can be
machined, cast, formed, and welded. Ferrous iron is used in paints,
while powdered iron can be sintered and used in powder metallurgy.
Iron compounds are also used to precipitate other metals and
undesirable minerals from industrial wastewater streams.
Corrosion products of iron in water cause staining of porcelain
fixtures, and ferric iron combines with tannin to produce a dark
violet color. The presence of excessive iron in water discourages
cows from drinking and thus reduces milk production. High
concentrations of ferric and ferrous ions in water kill most fish
introduced to the solution within a few hours. The killing action is
attributed to coatings of iron hydroxide precipitates on the gills.
Iron oxidizing bacteria are dependent on iron in water for growth.
These bacteria form slimes that can affect the aesthetic values of
bodies of water and cause stoppage of flows in pipes.
Iron is an essential nutrient and micro-nutrient for all forms of
growth. Drinking water standards in the U.S. set a limit of 0.3 mg/1
of iron in domestic water supplies based on aesthetic and organoleptic
properties of iron in water.
High concentrations of iron do not pass through a POTW into the
effluent. In some POTW iron salts are added to coagulate precipitates
and suspended sediments into a sludge. In an EPA study of POTW the
concentration of iron in the effluent of 22 biological POTW meeting
secondary treatment performance levels ranged from 0.048 to 0.569 mg/1
with a median value of 0.25 mg/1. This represented removals of 76 to
97 percent with a median of 87 percent removal.
Iron in sewage sludge spread on land used for agricultural purposes is
not expcected to have a detrimental effect on crops grown on the land.
Manganese. Manganese is a nonconventional pollutant. It is a gray-
white metal resembling iron, but more brittle. The pure metal does
533
-------
administered, have retarded growth and caused rickets in laboratory
animals. Strontium is considered to be nontoxic or of very low
toxicity in humans. Specific involvement of strontium toxicity in
enzyme or biochemical systems is not known.
No reports were found regarding behavior of strontium in POTW. At the
low concentrations of strontium to be expected under normal
conditions, the strontium is expected to pass through into the POTW
effluent in the dissolved state.
Oil and Grease. Oil and grease are taken together as one pollutant
parameter. This is a conventional polluant and some of its components
are:
1. Light Hydrocarbons - These include light fuels such as gasoline,
kerosene, and jet fuel, and miscellaneous solvents used for
industrial processing, degreasing, or cleaning purposes. The
presence of these light hydrocarbons may make the removal of
other heavier oil wastes more difficult.
2. Heavy Hydrocarbons, Fuels, and Tars - These include the crude
oils, diesel oils, 16 fuel oil, residual oils, slop oils, and in
some cases, asphalt and road tar.
3. Lubricants and Cutting Fluids - These generally fall into two
classes: non-emulsifiable oils such as lubricating oils and
greases and emulsifiable oils such as water soluble oils, rolling
oils, cutting oils, and drawing compounds. Emulsifiable oils may
contain fat soap or various other additives.
4. Vegetable and Animal Fats and Oils - These originate primarily
from processing of foods and natural products.
These compounds can settle or float and may exist as solids or liquids
depending upon factors such as method of use, production process, and
temperature of wastewater.
Oil and grease even in small quantities cause troublesome taste and
odor problems. Scum lines from these agents are produced on water
treatment basin walls and other containers. Fish and water fowl are
adversely affected by oils in their habitat. Oil emulsions may adhere
to the gills of fish causing suffocation, and the flesh of fish is
tainted when microorganisms that were exposed to waste oil are eaten.
Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments of water can serve to
inhibit normal benthic growth. Oil and grease exhibit an oxygen
demand.
Many of the organic priority pollutants will be found distributed
between the oily phase and the aqueous phase in industrial
536
-------
to a different degree, and each phenol has a molecular weight
different from others and from phenol itself, analyses of several
mixtures containing the same total concentration in mg/1 of several
phenols will give different numbers depending on the proportions in
the particular mixture.
Despite these limitations of the analytical method, total phenols is a
useful parameter when the mix of phenols is relatively constant and an
inexpensive monitoring method is desired. In any given plant or even
in an industry subcategory, monitoring of "total phenols" provides an
indication of the concentration of this group of priority pollutants
as well as those phenols not selected as priority pollutants. A
further advantage is that the method is widely used in water quality
determinations.
In an EPA survey of 103 POTW the concentration of "total phenols"
ranged grom 0.0001 mg/1 to 0.176 mg/1 in the influent, with a median
concentration of 0.016 mg/1. Analysis of effluents from 22 of these
same POTW which had biological treatment meeting secondary treatment
performance levels showed "total phenols" concentrations ranging from
0 mg/1 to 0.203 mg/1 with a median of 0.007. Removals were 64 to 100
percent with a median of 78 percent.
It must be recognized, however, that six of the eleven priority
pollutant phenols could be present in high concentrations and not be
detected. Conversely, it is possible, but not probable, to have a
high "total phenol" concentration without any phenol itself or any of
the ten other priority pollutant phenols present. A characterization
of the phenol mixture to be monitored to establish constancy of
composition will allow "total phenols" to be used with confidence.
Strontium. Strontium, a nonconventional pollutant, is a hard silver-
white alkaline earth metal. The metal reacts readily with water and
moisture in the air. It does not occur as the free metal in nature.
Principal ores are strontianite (SrC03) and celestite (SrS04). The
metal is produced from the oxide by heating with aluminum, but no
commerical uses for the pure metal are known.
Small percentages of strontium are alloyed with the lead used to cast
grids for some maintenance free lead acid batteries. Strontium
compounds are used in limited quantites in special applications.
Strontium hydroxide [Sr(OH)2J import thermal and mechanical stability
and moisture resistance. The hydroxide is also used in preparation of
stabilizers for vinyl plastics. Several strontium compounds are used
in pyrotechnics.
Very few data are available regarding toxic effects of strontium in
humans. Some studies indicate that strontium may be essential to
growth in mammals. Large amounts of strontium compounds orally
535
-------
organic nature, solids use a portion or 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 effect attributable to substances leached out
by water, suspended solids may kill fish and shellfish by causing
abrasive injuries and by clogging the gills and respiratory passages
of various aquatic fauna. Indirectly, suspended solids are inimical
to aquatic life because they screen out light, and they promote and
maintain the development of noxious conditions through oxygen
depletion. This results in the killing of fish and fish food
organisms. Suspended solids also reduce the recreational value of the
water.
Total suspended solids is a traditional pollutant which is compatible
with a well-run POTW. This pollutant with the exception of those
components which are described elsewhere in this section, e.g., heavy
metal components, does not interfere with the operation of a POTW.
However, since a considerable portion of the innocuous TSS may be
inseparably bound to the constituents which do interfere with POTW
operation, or produce unusable sludge, or subsequently dissolve to
produce unacceptable POTW effluent, TSS may be considered a toxic
waste hazard.
pH. Although not a specific pollutant, pH is related to the acidity
or alkalinity of a wastewater stream. It is not, however, a measure
of either. The term pH is used to describe the hydrogen ion
concentration (or activity) present in a given solution. Values for
pH range from 0 to 14, and these numbers are the negative logarithms
of the hydrogen ion concentrations. A pH of 7 indicates neutrality.
Solutions with a pH above 7 are alkaline, while those solutions with a
pH below 7 are acidic. The relationship of pH and acidity and
alkalinity is not necessarily linear or direct. Knowledge of the
water pH is useful in determining necessary measures for corroison
control, sanitation, and disinfection. Its value is also necessary in
the treatment of industrial wastewaters to determine amounts of
chemcials required to remove pollutants and to measure their
effectiveness. Removal of pollutants, especially dissolved solids is
affected by the pH of the wastewater.
Waters with a pH below 6.0 are corrosive to water works structures,
distribution lines, and household plumbing fixtures and can thus add
constituents to drinking water such as iron, copper, zinc, cadmium,
and lead. The hydrogen ion concentration can affect the taste of the
water and at a low pH, water tastes sour. The bactericidal effect of
chlorine is weakened as the pH increases, and it is advantageous to
keep the pH close to 7.0. This is significant for providng safe
drinking water.
538
-------
wastewaters. The presence of phenols, PCBs, PAHs, and almost any
other organic pollutant in the oil and grease make characterization of
this parameter almost impossible. However, all of these other
organics add to the objectionable nature of the oil and grease.
Levels of oil and grease which are toxic to aquatic organisms vary
greatly, depending on the type and the species susceptibility.
However, it has been reported that crude oil in concentrations as low
as 0.3 mg/1 is extremely toxic to fresh-water fish. It has been
recommended that public water supply sources be essentially free from
oil and grease.
Oil and grease in quantities of 100 1/sq km show up as a sheen on the
surface of a body of water. The presence of oil slicks decreases the
aesthetic value of a waterway.
Oil and grease is compatible with a POTW activated sludge process in
limited quantity. However, slug loadings or high concentrations of
oil and grease interfere with biological treatment processes. The
oils coat surfaces and solid particles, preventing access of oxygen,
and sealing in some microorganisms. Land spreading of POTW sludge
containing oil and grease uncontaminated by toxic pollutants is not
expected to affect crops grown on the treated land, or animals eating
those crops.
Total Suspended Solids(TSS). Suspended solids include both organic
and inorganic materials. The inorganic compounds include sand, silt,
and clay. The organic fraction includes such materials as grease,
oil, tar, and animal and vegetable waste products. These solids may
settle out rapidly, and bottom deposits are often a mixture of both
organ-ic 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
discharged with man's wastes may be inert, slowly biodegradable
materials, or rapidly decomposable substances. While in suspension,
suspended solids increase the turbidity of the water, reduce light
penetration, and impair the photosynthetic activity of aquatic plants.
Supended solids in water interfere with many industrial processes and
cause foaming in boilers and incrustastions on equipment exposed to
such water, especially as the temperature rises. They are undesirable
in process water used in the manufacture of steel, in the textile
industry, in laundries, in dyeing, and in cooling systems.
Solids in suspension are aesthetically displeasing. When they settle
to form sludge deposits on the stream or lake bed, they are often
damaging to the life in the water. Solids, when transformed to sludge
deposit, may do a variety of damaging things, including blanketing the
stream or lake bed and thereby destroying the living spaces for those
benthic organisms that would otherwise occupy the habitat. When of an
537
-------
Cadmium concentrations appeared in 29 of 31 raw wastewater streams in
the cadmium subcategory Since it is a cell reactant in cadmium anodes,
it is involved in almost every step of the manufacturing process. The
maximum cadmium concentration was 365 mg/1. Cadmium was present at
levels that can be reduced by specific treatment methods. Therefore
cadmium is considered for specific regulation.
Chromium concentrations appeared in 21 of 31 raw wastewater streams in
the subcategory. The maximum concentration was 1.52 mg/1. Chromium
is removed by specific treatment methods to levels less than some of
the observed levels. Therefore chromium is considered for specific
regulation.
Cyanide was found in 23 of 27 raw wastewater streams in the cadmium
subcategory. The maximum concentration was 9.45 mg/1. Cyanide
concentrations can be lowered by available specific treatment methods,
and is therefore considered for regulation.
Lead concentrations appeared in 6 of 31 raw wastewater streams in the
cadmium subcategory with appreciable levels (greater than 0.1 mg/1)
observed from silver powder production. Since the maximum
concentration of 0.281 mg/1 can be reduced by specific treatment
methods, lead is considered for specific regulation.
Mercury concentrations appeared in 15 of 31 raw wastewater streams in
the cadmium subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.032 mg/1.
This priority pollutant is not an identified raw material in this
subcategory. Mercury can be removed to lower concentrations by use of
specific treatment methods. Accordingly, mercury is considered for
specific regulation.
Nickel concentrations appeared in 30 of 31 raw wastewater streams in
the cadmium subcategory. Since it is a cathode reactant and an
electrode support material in cadmium anodes, nickel is involved in
almost every step of the manufacturing process. The maximum nickel
concentration in raw wastewater was 514 mg/1. Nickel can be removed
by specific treatment methods and therefore is considered for specific
regulation.
Silver concentrations appeared in 4 of 4 raw wastewater streams in the
cadmium subcategory. All quantifiable concentrations were from silver
powder production where the maximum concentration was 24.1 mg/1.
Silver can be removed by specific treatment methods and is therefore
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Zinc concentrations appeared in 28 of 31 raw wastewater streams in the
cadmium subcategory. The maximum zinc concentration in raw wastewater
was 6,430 mg/1 - in the stream from cadmium powder production. Other
streams had concentrations of less than 13 mg/1. Zinc can be removed
540
-------
Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress conditions or kill
aquatic life outright. Even moderate changes from acceptable criteria
limits of pH are deleterious to some species. The relative toxicity
to aquatic life of many materials is increased by changes in the water
pH. For example, metallocyanide complexes can increase a thousand-
fold in toxicity with a drop of 1.5 pH units.
Because of the universal nature of pH and its effect on water quality
and treatment, it is selected as a pollutant parameter for many
industry categories. A neutral pH range (approximately 6-9) is
generally desired because either extreme beyond this range has a
deleterious effect on receiving waters or the pollutant nature of
other wastewater constituents.
Pretreatment for regulation of pH is covered by the "General
Pretreatment Regulations for Exisiting and New Sources of Pollution,"
40 CFR 403.5. This section prohibits the discharge to a POTW of
"pollutants which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW
but in no case discharges with pH lower than 5.0 unless the works is
specially designed to accommodate such discharges."
SPECIFIC POLLUTANTS CONSIDERED FOR REGULATION
For all subcategories except for the lead subcategory, discussion of
individual pollutant parameters selected or not selected for
consideration for specific regulation are based on concentrations
obtained from sampling analysis of total raw wastewater streams for
each battery manufacturing element. Depending on the specific
element, only one or many manufacturing wastewater streams may be
included in the total raw wastewater stream. Section V addressed each
element, the samples collected, and analysis of these samples. Tables
from the section are referenced where appropriate within each
subcategory.
Cadmium Subcateqory
Pollutant Parameters Selected for Regulation. Based on verification
sampling results of the manufacturing elements and wastewater sources
listed in Figure V-2 (Page 303), and a careful examination of the
cadmium subcategory manufacturing processes and raw materials, twelve
pollutant parameters were selected to be considered for regulation in
effluent limitations and standards for this subcategory. The twelve
are: cadmium, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, silver,
zinc, cobalt, oil and grease, total suspended solids, and pH. These
pollutants were observed at significant levels in raw wastewater
produced in this subcategory and are amenable to control by identified
wastewater treatment and control practices.
539
-------
quantifiable limit. Specific regulation of methylene chloride is not
considered further.
Trichloroethylene concentrations appeared in 12 of the 30 raw
wastewater streams from the cadmium subcategory. All values were
below the quantifiable limit, therefore, specific regulation of
trichloroethylene is not considered.
Ammonia concentrations appeared in 19 of 25 raw wastewater streams on
which analysis was performed for this pollutant parameter in the
cadmium subcategory. The maximum concentration was 86 mg/1. Other
concentrations were significantly less, and were below the level
achievable with available specific treatment methods. Most
concentrations were in the range of ammonia concentrations found in
typical domestic wasjtewater. Specific regulation of ammonia is
therefore not considered.
"Total phenols" concentrations appeared in 24 of 27 raw wastewater
streams analyzed. The maximum concentration was 0.086 mg/1. Some of
the priority pollutant phenols as well as many phenols which are not
priority pollutants contribute to "total phenols." Because
concentrations found in this subcategory are below the levels for
which practical specific treatment methods exist, and because some
plant inlet water samples showed total phenols as high as 0.020 mg/1,
specific regulation of "total phenols" is not considered.
Calcium Subcateqory
Parameters Selected For Specific Regulation. Based on the results of
verification sampling and analysis of the manufacturing elements and
wastewater sources listed in Figure V-8 (Page 269 ), and a careful
review of calcium subcategory raw materials, four pollutant parameters
were selected to be considered for specific regulation. These are
asbestos, chromium, TSS and pH. They were observed at significant
levels in raw wastewater produced in this subcategory, and are
amenable to control by identified wastewater treatment and control
practices.
Asbestos appeared in one of two process wastewater samples analyzed in
this subcategory and is known to be used as a raw material in the heat
paper production process element. Therefore, it is considered for
specific regulation.
Chromium appeared in both of the process wastewater samples analyzed
for verification. It is also used as a raw material in the heat paper
production process element. Chromium is removed by treatment to
levels less than those observed in raw wastewater samples. Therefore,
chromium is considered for specific regulation.
542
-------
by specific treatment methods to concentrations lower than those
measured in the raw wastewaters. Therefore zinc is considered for
specific regulation.
Cobalt concentrations appeared in the raw wastewater in 13 of 31
streams in the cadmium subcategory. Cobalt is added to some nickel
electrodes used in this subcategory. The maximum concentration was 5
mg/1. Because of its potentially toxic effect, and the fact that
cobalt can be removed by specific treatment methods, cobalt is
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Oil and grease, a conventional pollutant, appeared at concentrations
of up to 1960 mg/1 in raw wastewater streams from all process elements
in the cadmium subcategory. This pollutant can be removed by
conventional treatment methods, and is therefore considered for
regulation. Because it is present at raw waste concentrations greater
than the 100 mg/1 level considered acceptable for introduction into a
POTW, it is considered for regulation for both indirect and direct
discharges.
Suspended solids concentrations appeared in 27 of 30 raw wastewater
streams from the cadmium subcategory analyzed for TSS. The maximum
concentration was 2687 mg/1. Some of the TSS is comprised of
hydroxides of cadmium, nickel or zinc. Because this conventional
pollutant contains quantities of toxic metals, TSS requires
consideration for regulation, from both direct and indirect discharges
in this subcategory.
The pH of wastewater streams resulting from the manufacture of cadmium
anode batteries is observed to range from 1 to 14. Acid discharges
may be associated with electrodeposition, impregnation, and metal
recovery processes, and with the manufacture of cadmium powder.
Highly alkaline wastewaters result from electrolyte losses and from
rinses following precipitation of impregnated cadmium or nickel.
Since deleterious environmental effects may result from pH values
outside the range of 7.5 to 10.0, regulation of this parameter in the
cadmium subcategory effluents is clearly required. Further, pH must
be controlled for effective removal of other pollutants present in
these effluents.
Pollutant Parameters Not Selected for Specific Regulation. Four
pollutant parameters - methylene chloride, trichloroethylene, ammonia,
and total phenols - were included in verification sampling and
analysis, but were dropped from consideration for regulation in this
subcategory after careful examination of concentration levels and
manufacturing materials and processes.
Methylene chloride concentrations appeared in 6 of 30 raw wastewater
streams from the cadmium subcategory. All values were below the
541
-------
although the measured concentrations may exceed levels attainable by
specific treatment, specific regulation of bis (2- ethylhexyl)
phthalate is not considered.
Cadmium appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples analyzed in this
subcategory. The highest measured concentration is 0.002 mg/1 which
is below the level which can be achieved by specific treatment.
Therefore, cadmium is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Copper appeared at measurable levels in both samples analyzed in the
calcium subcategory. The maximum concentration found was 0.150 mg/1.
This concentration is lower than concentrations achieved by specific
treatment for this metal. Therefore, copper is not considered for
specific regulation.
Lead appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples from this subcategory. It
occurred at a maximum concentration of 0.044 mg/1. Since lower
concentrations are not achieved in treatment, specific regulation of
lead in calcium subcategory wastewater effluents is not considered.
Nickel appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples analyzed in this
subcategory. The highest measured concentration was 0.067 mg/1 which
is lower than concentrations achieved in specific treatment for this
parameter. Therefore, nickel is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Silver appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples analyzed in the calcium
subcategory. It is not used in the process and was measured at a
maximum concentration of only 0.012 mg/1. Since this is below the
concentration attained in treatment for this parameter, specific
regulation for silver is not considered.
Zinc appeared in both wastewater samples from the calcium subcategory.
The highest concentration measured was 0.110 mg/1. This is lower than
concentrations generally achieved in specific treatment for this
parameter. Therefore, zinc is not considered for specific regulation
in this subcategory.
Cobalt appeared in one wastewater sample in this subcategory but
occurred at a maximum concentration of only 0.006 mg/1. This is below
the concentations of this pollutant achievable by specific treatment.
Therefore, specific regulation of cobalt is not considered.
Iron appeared in both wastewater samples from the calcium subcategory.
The highest measured concentration was 0.52 mg/1 which is lower than
the concentrations achieved in specific treatment for this parameter.
Therefore, iron is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
544
-------
Suspended solids appeared in both of the process wastewater samples
analyzed for verification. Measured concentrations were up to 715
mg/1. Some of the TSS is comprised of asbestos and barium chromate.
Because this conventional pollutant contains quantities of priority
pollutants, TSS requires consideration for regulation in both direct
and indirect discharges from this subcategory.
The pH of wastewater streams resulting from the manufacture of calcium
anode batteries was observed to range from 2.9 to 6.2. Acidic
wastewater results from the use of acidic solutions in heat paper
manufacture. Since deleterious environmental effects may result from
pH values outside the range of 6.0 - 9.0. regulation of this parameter
in calcium subcategory effluents is clearly required. Further, pH
must be controlled for effective removal of chromium present in these
effluents.
Parameters Not Selected For Specific Regulation. Fourteen pollutant
parameters - 1,1,2-trichloroethane, chloroform, methylene chloride,
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, cadmium, copper, lead, nickel, silver,
zinc, cobalt, iron, manganese, and oil and grease - were included in
verification analyses but were dropped from consideration for
regulation in this subcategory after consideration of measured
concentration levels and manufacturing materials and processes.
1,1,2-trichloroethane appeared in 1 of 2 verification samples in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.013 mg/1, which
is below the level considered achievable by available treatment
methods. Therefore, 1,1,2-trichloroethane is not considered for
specific regulation in this subcategory.
Chloroform appeared in both wastewater samples analyzed in this
subcategory. It is not a specific raw material or part of any process
in the subcategory. The highest concentration observed was 0.038
mg/1. Specific treatment methods are not expected to reduce
chloroform below the levels observed in raw wastewater. Therefore,
chloroform is not considered for specific regulation in this sub-
category.
Methylene chloride appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples analyzed in
this subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.038 mg/1,
which is below the level generally achieved by available treatment
methods. Therefore, methylene chloride is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate appeared in 1 of 2 wastewater samples
analyzed in this subcategory. The maximum measured concentration was
0.024 mg/1. This ester is widely used as a plasticizer which would
result in its presence in plant piping and equipment. Its presence is
therefore not related to a specific process source. Therefore,
543
-------
charging operations and may be present in process equipment. It was
not a primary raw material in the sampled plants but may be introduced
into wastewaters by corrosion of equipment. All of the total raw
wastewater copper concentrations are greater than the levels which can
be achieved by specific treatment methods. Therefore, copper is
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Lead concentrations appeared in all total raw wastewater streams and
individual process raw wastewater samples from the five plants in the
lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was 45.9 mg/1 in the
total raw wastewater streams and as high as 6000 mg/1 in the pasting
raw wastewater samples. All concentrations were above the level which
can be achieved by specific treatment methods. Therefore, lead is
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Mercury concentrations appeared in 4 of 12 total raw wastewater
streams from the lead subcategory. Streams from only two plants
contained this pollutant. The maximum concentration was 0.065 mg/1
which was from the battery wash raw wastewater sample. Specific
treatment methods remove mercury to levels lower than some of those
found in these samples. Therefore, even though mercury is not a
primary raw material or a process addition, specific regulation of
mercury is considered in this subcategory.
Nickel concentrations appeared in 10 of 12 total raw wastewater
streams in the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was 2.8
mg/1 which appeared in the battery wash raw wastewater samples and a
maximum of 2.49 mg/1 was in the total raw wastewater streams. Some of
the concentrations were greater than the level which can be achieved
with specific treatment methods. Therefore, although nickel is not a
primary raw material, and is not a recognizable addition of any
process step, this priority pollutant parameter is considered for
specific regulation in this subcategory.
Silver concentrations appeared in 8 of 13 total raw wastewater streams
in the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration found was
0.03 mg/1 in the total wastewater streams and as high as .71 mg/1 in
the pasting raw wastewater samples. Silver can be removed to
concentrations below those found in some samples. Silver is not a
primary raw material, but may be present in trace quantities in the
lead used for grid in this subcategory. Silver is considered for
specific regulation in this subcategory.
Zinc concentrations appeared in all total raw wastewater streams from
the five plants in the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration
was 6.8 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams and as high as
9.87 mg/1 in the battery repair raw wastewater samples. Many
concentrations are above the level achievable with specific treatment
methods. Thus, even though zinc is not a primary raw material in this
546
-------
Oil and grease did not appear in wastewater samples from this
subcategory. Therefore, specific regulation of this parameter is not
considered.
Lead Subcategory
Parameters Selected for Specific Regulation. Analysis of pollutant
parameters in the lead subcategory included an evaluation of
concentration in total raw wastewater streams from five plants in the
subcategory (Table V-36, Page 362), an evaluation of concentrations in
samples of individual process element streams (Figure V-60, Page 397),
and an evaluation of the raw materials and the manufacturing processes
employed. This analysis led to the selection of thirteen pollutant
parameters considered for specific regulation. The parameters
selected are: antimony, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,
nickel, silver, zinc, iron, oil and grease, total suspended solids and
pH. Each has been found in raw wastewater from plants in this
subcategory at levels that are amenable to treatment and monitoring.
Antimony concentrations appeared in 4 of 13 total raw wastewater
streams from the lead subcategory. Antimony is used as an alloying
element in the lead grids used to make battery plates, therefore, its
presence is expected in raw wastewaters. The maximum concentration in
the total raw wastewater was 0.19 mg/1 and in the pasting raw
wastewater samples was as high as 3.67 mg/1. Since some measured raw
wastewater concentrations are above the level which can be achieved by
specific treatment methods, antimony is considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Cadmium concentration appeared in 10 of 13 total raw wasterwater
streams from the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was
0.03 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams and as high as 0.34 mg/1
in the battery repair raw wastewater samples. Since some of the
measured concentrations in raw wastewaters are above the concentration
level which can be achieve by specific treatment methods, cadmium is
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Chromium concentrations appeared in 12 of 12 total raw wastewater
streams in the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was
3.27 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams and as high as 3.67 mg/1
in the battery wash raw wastewater samples. Specific treatment
methods can reduce chromium below this level. Therefore, chromium is
considered for specific regulation.
Copper concentrations appeard in 12 of 12 total raw wastewater streams
and individual process raw wastewater samples from the lead
subcategory. The maximum concentration in the total raw wastewater
streams was 2.50 mg/1, and as high as 9.85 mg/1 in the battery repair
raw wastewater samples. Copper is used for electrical conductors in
545
-------
1,1,1-Trichloroethane concentrations appeared in all of the total raw
wastewater streams from plants in the lead subcategory. This priority
pollutant is an industrial solvent and degreasing agent which might
easily be present in any manufacturing plant. The maximum
concentration was 0.025 mg/1, which is below the level considered
achievable by available specific treatment methods. Therefore 1,1,1-
trichloroethane is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Chloroform concentrations appeared in 6 of 13 total raw wastewater
streams in the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.009
mg/1. Chloroform is not a specific raw material nor is it part of a
process in this subcategory. Specific treatment methods do not bring
chloroform concentrations down to the levels found in the raw
wastewater. Therefore, chloroform is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Methylene chloride concentrations appeared 8 of 13 total raw
wastewater streams in the lead subcategory. All concentrations were
below the quantifiable limit for organic priority pollutants.
Therefore methylene chloride is not considered for specific regulation
in this subcategory.
Naphthalene concentrations appeared in 10 of 13 total raw wastewater
streams from the lead subcategory. The maximum concentration was
0.01 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams and as high as
0.037 mg/1 in the battery wash raw wastewater samples. This priority
pollutant is not a raw material nor is it part of a process.
Concentrations were below the level considered to be achievable with
available specific treatment methods. Therefore, naphthalene is not
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Phenol concentrations appeared in only one of three total raw
wastewater streams from the lead subcategory which were subjected to
analysis for this priority pollutant. The concentration is below the
quantifiable limit. Therefore, phenol is not considered for specific
regulation.
Four priority pollutant phthalate ester streams concentrations
appeared in total raw wastewater streams from the lead subcategory.
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate concentrations appeared in all total raw
wastewater streams at concentrations up to 0.135 mg/1. The other four
esters - butyl benzyl phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, and di-n-octyl
phthalate were present in fewer samples and, with the exception of di-
n-octyl phthalate which had a maximum of 0.14 mg/1, were found at
lower concentrations. None of these esters are raw materials, nor are
they part of processes. All these esters are used as plasticizers
which would result in their presence in the plant equipment and
piping, and some have additional uses such as denaturant for alcohol
548
-------
subcategory, it is considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Iron concentrations appeared in all total raw wastewater streams that
were analyzed for iron in the lead subcategory. The maximum iron
concentration was 390 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams and all
concentrations were above 1 mg/1. Concentrations were as high as
460 mg/1 in the battery repair raw wastewater samples. Iron in these
raw wastewater streams is attributable to corrosion of process
equipment and charging racks by sulfuric acid. The levels of iron in
most of the sampled raw wastewater streams may produce undesirable
environmental effects. The concentrations were greater than those
which can be achieved by specific treatment methods. Therefore, iron
is considered for specific regulation.
Oil and grease concentrations appeared in all raw wastewater streams
and samples of the lead subcategory. Concentrations were as high as
49.0 mg/1 in the total raw waste streams and as high as 1620 mg/1 in
the pasting process raw wastewater samples. This pollutant can be
removed by conventional treatment methods. Therefore oil and grease
is considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Suspended solids appeared in all streams at concentrations as high as
1300 mg/1 in total raw wastewater streams at plants within the lead
subcategory. TSS (Total Suspended Solids) may be introduced into
wastewater at numerous points in the process, most notably in
electrode grid pasting processes where concentrations were as high as
42,300 mg/1, and are also produced by the treatment of wastewater for
precipitation of metal pollutants. The TSS generated in this
subcategory consists of large proportions of priority pollutants and
is treatable. Therefore TSS is considered for specific regulation.
Raw waste streams in the lead subcategory are predominantly acidic
because of contamination by sulfuric acid which is used as electrolyte
and in process steps. The pH of these wastewater samples range from
12 down to 1.8. Regulation of pH is considered in this subcategory to
maintain the pH within the 7.5 to 10.0 range.
Parameters Not Selected for Specific Regulation. A total of fifteen
pollutant parameters which were evaluated in verification analysis
were dropped from further consideration for specific regulation in the
lead subcategory. These parameters were found to be present in raw
wastewaters infrequently, or at concentration below those usually
achieved by specific treatment methods. The fifteen are: 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, chloroform, methylene chloride, napththalene, phenol,
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, butyl benzyl phthalate, di-n-butyl
phthalate, di-n-octyl phthalate, anthracene, phenanthrene, pyrene,
arsenic, strontium, and "total phenols."
547
-------
Leclanche Subcateqory
Pollutant Parameters Selected for Specific Regulation. The analysis
of raw wastewater samples from the manufacturing elements (including
the screening sample) and wastewater sources listed in Figure V-20
(Page 346), and an evaluation of raw materials and manufacturing
processes employed led to the selection of thirteen pollutant
parameters for consideration for specific regulation. The parameters
selected are: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,
nickel, selenium, zinc, manganese, oil and grease, total suspended
solids and pH. Each has been found in raw wastewaters from plants in
this subcategory at levels that are amenable to treatment and
monitoring.
Arsenic concentrations appeared 3 of 13 raw wastewater streams in the
Leclanche subcategory. All concentrations appeared in ancillary
operations from one plant on three sampling days. The concentration
ranged from 0.07 mg/1 to 0.64 mg/1. Arsenic has been determined to
have carcinogenic properties, and specific treatment methods for
removal of arsenic at the observed concentrations are available.
Therefore, arsenic is considered for specific regulation.
Cadmium concentrations appeared in all 13 raw wastewater streams from
the Leclanche subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.47 mg/1.
Cadmium is a toxic metal and can be removed by specific treatment
methods to concentrations below those found in most of the raw
wastewater streams. Therefore, cadmium is considered for specific
regulation.
Total chromium concentrations appeared in 7 of 13 raw wastewater
streams from the Leclanche subcategory. The maximum concentration was
2.88 mg/1. Chromium is a toxic metal which can be removed by specific
treatment methods. Therefore, it is considered for specific
regulation.
Copper concentrations appeared in all 13 raw wastewater streams from
the Leclanche subcategory at concentrations up to 3.22 mg/1. Copper
is not introduced as a raw material or as part of a process. However,
all concentrations are above the level which can be achieved by
specific treatment methods. Therefore, copper is considered for
specific regulation in this subcategory.
Lead concentrations appeared in 4 of 13 raw wastewater streams
sampled, and also from one analysis supplied by one plant in the
Leclanche subcategory. The concentrations ranged from 0.07 mg/1 to
0.94 mg/1 (verification sample) and the maximum concentration was
6.0 mg/1 (screening sample). All concentrations were greater than the
levels which can be obtained with specific treatment methods for lead
removal. Therefore, even though lead is not a raw material and is not
550
-------
in personal care items. Specific regulation of these four phthalate
esters in the lead subcategory is not considered because these unique
detections are not attributable to battery manufacturing waters.
Three PAH - anthracene, phenanthrene, and pyrene concentrations
appeared in total raw wastewater streams analyzed for these priority
pollutant parameters. The maximum concentration was 0.032 mg/1 for
anthracene and phenanthrene and all other values were below the
quantifiable limit, where only detections are recorded. None of these
compounds are used in processes or as raw materials in the lead,
subcategory, and only the greatest concentration (for anthracene and
phenathoene) measured is above the level which is considered to be
achievable by available specific treatment methods. Therefore, none
of these three PAH are considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Arsenic concentrations appeared in 4 of 12 total raw wastewater
streams from the lead subcategory. In the total raw wastewater
streams the maximum concentration was 0.12 mg/1 and as high as
0.13 mg/1 in a battery wash raw waster sample. Only two of the five
plants sampled had arsenic in the raw wastewater. Arsenic is an
additive of lead used in some battery plate grids. However,
concentration levels attainable by specific treatment methods are
several times higher than the maximum reported raw wastewater
concentration. Therefore, arsenic is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Strontium concentrations appeared in 5 of 12 total raw wastewater
streams analyzed for this pollutant parameter. Streams from three of
the five plants sampled in the lead subcategory contained strontium.
The maximum concentration of 0.039 mg/1 which appeared in the battery
wash raw wastewater samples is lower than the level that can be
achieved by available specific treatment methods. Therefore,
strontium is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
"Total phenols" concentrations appeared in 8 of 13 total raw
wastewater streams analyzed for this pollutant parameter in the lead
subcategory. The maximum concentration appeared in the battery repair
raw wastewater samples and was 0.174 mg/1. Concentrations ranged from
0.01 mg/1 to 0.05 mg/1 in the total raw wastewater streams which are
below those for which practical specific treatment methods exist.
Some phenols will be removed with oil and grease removal treatments.
Therefore, specific regulation of "total phenols" is not considered in
this subcategory.
549
-------
to remove oil and grease, therefore, this parameter is considered for
specific regulation.
Suspended solids were present in process wastewater streams from the
Leclanche subcategory at concentrations as high as 14,200 mg/1.
Additional suspended solids will result from chemical treatment of
these waste streams to precipitate metallic pollutants. Although TSS
is a conventional pollutant, the TSS generated in this subcategory
consists of large proportions of priority pollutants. Specific
treatment methods remove TSS below the levels which were found in most
samples. Therefore specific regulation of TSS must be considered in
this subcategory.
The pH of wastewater streams from the Leclanche subcategory was
observed to range between 5.1 and 10.4. Treatment of these waste
streams for removal of toxic metals may require adjustment of the pH
outside of the range acceptable for discharge to surface waters - pH
7.5 to 10. Therefore, pH requires specific regulation in process
wastewater effluents from this subcategory.
Pollutant Parameters Not Selected for Specific Regulation.
Three pollutant parameters included in verification sampling and
analysis - diethyl phthalate, antimony, and total phenols were not
selected for specific regulation. These parameters were present
infrequently, or at low concentrations, in raw wastewaters and are not
directly attributable to processes or raw materials used in this
subcategory.
Diethyl phthalate concentrations appeared in all raw wastewaters
streams in the Leclanche subcategory, but the maximum concentration
was only 0.016 mg/1. This priority pollutant is not a known component
of any raw material or process used in this subcategory. Because of
the widespread use of diethyl phthalate as a plasticizer, the compound
is found in many components of plant equipment and piping as well as
various consumer products used by employees. These are not process
specific sources. The concentrations are below the levels that
available specific treatment methods are expected to achieve.
Therefore, diethyl phthalate is not considered for specific
regulation.
Antimony concentrations appeared in only the screening raw wastewater
stream in the Leclanche subcategory. The detection is considered
unique because antimony is not used or introduced in the raw materials
of the battery manufacturing process in this subcategory. Therefore,
antimony is not considered for specific regulation.
The parameter designated "total phenols" had concentrations appearing
in 11 of 11 raw wastewater streams in this subcategory. The maximum
552
-------
introducted by an identified process in this subcategory it is
considered for specific regulation.
Mercury concentrations appeared in 10 of 12 sampled raw wastewater
streams in the Leclanche subcategory and concentrations were also
reported from dcp information for three plants. The maximum
concentration was 6.0 mg/1 from the sampling data and 117 mg/1 from
dcp data. Mercury is a toxic metal used as a raw material in this
subcategory. It can be removed from wastewaters by specific treatment
methods at the concentrations found. Mercury is considered for
specific regulation.
Nickel concentrations appeared in all 13 sampled raw wastewater
streams in the Leclanche subcategory and, also one chemical analysis
was supplied by one plant. The maximum concentration was 10.1 mg/1.
Nickel is a toxic metal and can be removed by specific treatment
methods. Therefore, nickel is considered for specific regulation.
Selenium concentrations appeared in the same 3 out of 13 raw waste-
water streams in which arsenic was found in the Leclanche subcategory.
The concentration range was 0.07 mg/1 to 0.6 mg/1. Although selenium
is not a recognized component of any of the raw materials used in this
subcategory, it was reported as present in one plant's wastewater by
dcp information. Because of its toxic nature and the fact that
specific treatment methods can remove this pollutant parameter,
selenium is considered for specific regulation.
Zinc concentrations appeared in all raw wastewater streams analyzed
for zinc in the Leclanche subcategory, and also from two chemical
analyses supplied by two plants. The maximum concentration from
sampling was 2000 mg/1 (screening) and 1640 mg/1 from plant data.
Zinc is a major raw material for this subcategory and can be removed
by specific treatment methods. Therefore, this priority pollutant is
considered for specific regulation.
Manganese concentrations appeared in all raw wastewater samples in the
Leclanche subcategory. The maximum concentration was 383 mg/1, and
six concentrations were 10 mg/1 or greater. Manganese dioxide is a
raw material for this subcategory and is generally regarded as
undesirable in water used for various processes as well as for
drinking water. Manganese can be removed by specific treatment
methods. Therefore, manganese is considered for specific regulation.
The oil and grease parameter concentrations appeared in all raw
wastewater streams, but the screening raw wastewater streams in the
Leclanche subcategory. The maximum concentration was 482 mg/1 and in
one other sample a concentration of 438 mg/1 was found. All other
concentrations were below 100 mg/1. Conventional methods can be used
551
-------
levels which can be achieved by treatment. Therefore zinc is
considered for specific regulation.
Cobalt appeared in 2 of 4 raw wastewater streams from the lithium
subcategory. The highest measured concentration is 0.176 mg/1. Since
the observed concentration is above levels which are achieved in
treatment, cobalt is considered for specific regulation.
Iron appeared in all wastewater streams in this subcategory. It was
measured at a maximum concentration of 54.9 mg/1. The measured
concentrations are substantially higher than those achieved in
treatment. Therefore iron is considered for specific regulation in
this subcategory.
Manganese appeared in all wastewater streams in the lithium
subcategory, with a maximum concentration of 1.60 mg/1. Manganese
concentrations in all other process waste streams are less than 0.04
mg/1. Specific treatment for the removal of manganese can achieve
concentrations substantially below 1.6 mg/1. Therefore manganese is
considered for specific regulation.
Suspended solids appeared in all of the process waste streams
characterized by sampling in this subcategory. The maximum
concentration was 715 mg/1. Suspended solids in process wastewater in
this subcategory contain asbestos, barium chromate, and metal
hydroxides. Specific treatment methods remove TSS below the levels
which were measured in all wastewater samples. Therefore specific
regulation of TSS in wastewater effluents from the lithium subcategory
is considered.
The pH of 4 raw wastewater samples in the lithium subcategory ranged
from 2.9 to 6.2. Acidic pH values result from the use of acidic
solutions in heat paper manufacture and from the iron disulfide
cathode manufacturing process. Deleterious environmental effects may
result from wastewater pH values outside the range of 6.0-9.0.
Further, pH must be controlled for effective removal of other
pollutants from these process waste streams. Therefore, pH is
considered for specific regulation.
Parameters Not Selected For Regulation. Ten pollutant parameters
which were evaluated in verification analysis were dropped from
further consideration for regulation in the lithium subcategory.
These parameters were found to be present in process wastewaters
infrequently, or at concentrations below those usually achieved by
specific treatment methods. Pollutants dropped from consideration
are: 1,1,2-trichloroethane, chloroform, methylene chloride, bis(2-
ethylhexyDphthalate, cadmium, copper, nickel, silver, lithium, and
oil and grease.
554
-------
concentration was 14.9 mg/1. All other values ranged from 0.009 to
0.253 mg/1. Phenols are not used in any process or as a raw material
in the Leclanche subcategory. However, the maximum value was from the
single sample from a wet pasting operation for which phenolic
compounds are commonly used as starch paste preservatives. This
operation has been discontinued since sampling the plant. Although
specific removal of phenols is possible, specific treatment is costly.
Many phenols are removed with oil and grease. Therefore, total
phenols is not considered for specific regulation.
Lithium Subcateqory
Parameters Selected For Specific Regulation. Based on the results of
sampling and analysis of the manufacturing elements and wastewater
sources listed in Figure V-21 (Page 282), and a careful examination of
raw materials, nine pollutant parameters were selected for
consideration for specific regulation. These parameters are asbestos,
chromium, lead, zinc, cobalt, iron, manganese, TSS, and pH. These
pollutants were found in process wastewater from this subcategory at
concentrations which are amenable to control by specific treatment
methods.
Asbestos appeared in 2 of 4 raw waste streams from this subcategory
which were characterized by sampling. The highest measured
concentration was 630 million fibers per liter. Asbestos in process
waste streams from the subcategory results primarily from its use in
heat paper manufacture. Therefore, asbestos is considered for
specific regulations.
Chromium appeared in all four sampled waste streams in the
subcategory. The highest concentration observed was 120 mg/1. This
concentration results from the use of barium chromate in heat paper
manufacture. Other process waste streams contain less than 0.02 mg/1
of total chromium. Since chromium is known to be a process raw
material in the subcategory, and it is found in process wastewater at
treatable concentrations, it is considered for specific regulation.
Lead appeared in 2 of 4 sampled wastewater streams in this subcategory
at concentrations of up to 4.94 mg/1. This concentration was observed
in the wastewater from iron disulfide cathode manufacture. Other
process waste streams contained less than 0.05 mg/1 of lead. The
highest concentrations of lead observed in sampling exceed the
concentrations which may be achieved by treatment. Therefore, lead is
considered for specific regulation.
Zinc appeared in all of the process wastewater streams from this
subcategory which were characterized by sampling. The maximum
observed concentration was 0.473 mg/1. This concentration exceeds
553
-------
Silver appeared in 2 of 4 sampled wastewater streams in the lithium
subcategory. The highest measured concentration was 0.006 mg/1. This
is lower than effluent concentrations achieved by available specific
treatment methods. Therefore silver is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Lithium appeared in 1 of 4 sampled wastewater streams in this
subcategory. The measured concentration in that sample (from lithium
scrap disposal) was 0.59 mg/1. Available specific treatment methods
will not reduce lithium .present in wastewater below this level.
Therefore, lithium is not selected for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Oil and grease appeared in only 1 of 4 wastewater streams in the
lithium subcategory. The measured concentration in that stream was
only 1 mg/1. This is lower than concentrations achieved by available
specific treatment methods. Therefore, oil and grease is not
considered for specific regulation.
Magnesium Subcateqory
Parameters Selected For Specific Regulation. Based on the results of
all sampling and analysis of the manufacturing elements and wastewater
sources listed in Figure V-23 (Page 284), and a careful review of
magnesium subcategory raw materials, seven pollutant parameters were
selected to be considered for specific regulation. These are
asbestos, chromium, lead, silver, TSS, COD and pH. They were observed
at significant levels in raw wasterwater produced in this subcategory,
and are amenable to control by identified wastewater treatment and
control practices.
Asbestos appeared in all process wastewater samples analyzed in this
subcategory. For the heat paper production process element asbestos
is used as a raw material. For the silver chloride process elements,
the presence of asbestos is attributable to plant influent and not to
the processes. Asbestos is therefore considered for specific
regulation.
Chromium appeared in two process wastewater samples analyzed for
verification for heat paper production, and also in one raw wastewater
sample for the silver chloride electrolytically oxidized cathode.
Chromium is removed by treatmetn to levels less than those observed in
raw wastewater samples. Therefore, chromium is considered for
regulation.
Lead appeared in 2 of 5 process wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration of 0.170 mg/1 can be reduced
by specific treatment. Therefore, lead is considered for regulation.
556
-------
1,1,2-trichloroethane appeared in 2 of 4 samples analyzed in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.013 mg/1.
Available specific treatment methods are not expected to reduce 1,1,2-
trichloroethane present in wastewater below this concentration.
Therefore, it is not considered for specific regulation in this sub-
category.
Chloroform concentrations appeared in all of the wastewater streams
analyzed in this subcategory. In two of these samples, however, it
was present below the analytical quantifiable limit. The maximum
reported concentration was 0.038 mg/1. This concentration is lower
than those generally achieved by available specific treatment methods.
Therefore, chloroform is not considered for specific regulation in the
lithium subcategory.
Methylene chloride appeared in only 2 of 4 raw wastewater streams in
this subcategory. The highest measured concentration was 0.016 mg/1.
Available specific treatment methods are not expected to remove
methylene chloride present in wastewater at the maximum concentration
found. Therefore, methylene chloride is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate appeared in 2 of 4 raw wastewater streams
in this subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.024
mg/1. This pollutants is not a raw material or process chemical in
this battery manufacturing subcategory and is found widely distributed
in industrial environments as a result of its use as a plasticizer.
Therefore, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Cadmium appeared in 2 of 4 sampled wastewater streams in the lithium
subcategory. The highest measured concentration was 0.025 mg/1. This
concentration is below levels achievable by available specific
treatment methods. Therefore, cadmium is not considered for specific
regulation.
Copper appeared in all four wastewater streams characterized by
sampling in this subcategory. The maximum measured concentration was
0.15 mg/1. Since this concentration is below the levels achieved by
available specific treatment methods, copper is not considered for
specific regulation in the lithium subcategory.
Nickel appeared in 3 of 4 wastewater streams in the lithium
subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.235 mg/1.
Available specific treatment methods are not expected to achieve lower
concentrations. Therefore, nickel is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
555
-------
Methylene chloride appeared in 2 of 5 samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.038 mg/1, which
is below the level generally achieved by available treatment methods.
Therefore, methylene chloride is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Dichlorobromomethane appeared in 1 of 3 wastewater samples considered
in this subcategory. The concentration observed was 0.026 mg/1, which
is below the level generally achieved by available treatment methods.
Therefore, this pollutant is not considered for specific regulation in
this subcategory.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate appeared in 2 of 5 wastewater samples
considered in this subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.024
mg/1. This ester is widely used as a plasticizer which would result
in its presence in plant piping and equipment, and its presence cannot
be related to a specific process source in this battery manufacturing
subcategory. Therefore, although the measured concentration may
exceed the level attainable by specific treatment, regulation of bis-
(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate is not considered.
Di-n-octyl phthalate appeared in 1 of 3 wastewater samples considered
in this subcategory. The concentration observed, 0.051 mg/1, is
treatable, however, the pollutant cannot be related to a specific
process source in this battery manufacturing subcategory and also does
not have ambient water criteria concentrations proposed. Therefore,
regulation of di-n-ocytl phthalate is not considered.
Cadmium appeared in 1 of 5 wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The measured concentration was 0.002 mg/1, which is
below the level which can be achieved by specific treatment.
Therefore, cadmium is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Copper appeared in all process wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.150 mg/1. This
concentration is lower than concentrations achieved by specific
treatment for the metal. Therefore, copper is not considered for
specific regulation.
Mercury appeared in one process wastewater sample considered in this
subcategory. Since the concentration observed is below specific
treatment methods and since it is not known to result from the
process, this pollutant is not considered for specific regulation.
Nickel appeared in 2 of 5 process wastewater samples considered in
this subcategory. The highest measured concentration was 0.067 mg/1
which is lower than concentrations achieved in specific treatment for
558
-------
Silver appeared in all but one process wastewater sample considered in
this subcategory. Two samples from the silver chloride process were
at concentrations that could be treated, and also silver is a raw
material for this process. Therefore, silver is considered for
specific regulation.
Suspended solids appeared in all process wastewater samples considered
measured concentrations were up to 715 mg/1, which was from heat paper
production. Some of the TSS is comprised of asbestos and barium
chromate. Because this conventional pollutant contains quantities of
priority pollutants, TSS requires consideration for regulation in both
direct and indirect discharges from this subcategory.
COD was analyzed only for samples taken in the silver chloride surface
reduced cathode process element. This was done because phenolic
compounds are used in the process and because of the limitations of
4AAP total phenol analysis. COD appeared at 140 mg/1 for the total
process, but was as high as 4100 mg/1 in the developer solution.
Therefore, COD is considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
The pH of wastewater streams in this subcategory was observed to range
from 1.0 to 10.6. Since deleterious environmental effects may result
from pH values outside the range of 6.0 to 9.0, regulation of this
parameter is required.
Parameters Not Selected For Specific Regulation. Sixteen pollutant
parameters - 1,1,2-trichloroethane, chloroform, methylene chloride,
dichlorobromomethane, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, di-n-octyl
phthalate, toluene, cadmium, copper, mercury, nickel, zinc, cobalt
iron, manganese, and oil and grease - are not considered for
regulation. They were included in verification analyses for heat
paper production or detected in the silver chloride analyses, but were
dropped after consideration of measured concentration levels and
manufacturing materials and processes.
1,1,2-trichloroethane appeared in 1 of 5 samples considered in this
subcategory. The concentration of 0.013 mg/1, is below the level
considered achievable by available treatment methods. Therefore, the
pollutant is not considered for specific regulation in this
subcategory.
Chloroform appeared in all wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration observed was 0.155 mg/1.
Since both influent water samples paired with the process wastewater
samples contained higher concentrations than the process water, the
pollutant is not attributable to the process and is not considered for
regulation.
557
-------
from nickel impregnated cathodes, and 5.99 mg/1 from silver peroxide
raw wastewater streams. All other values were less than 0.2 mg/1.
Cadmium can be removed by specific treatment methods to concentrations
lower than those reported for many of the samples. Therefore, cadmium
is considered for specific regulation.
Total chromium concentrations appeared in 56 of 70 raw wastewater
streams from the zinc subcategory. Three samples from the cell wash
operation at one plant contained 253 to 318 mg/1 total chromium.
Other raw wastewater streams ranged from 73.1 mg/1 down to 0.002 mg/1.
Many of the observed concentrations are greater than the level that
can be achieved with specific treatment methods. Therefore, total
chromium is considered for specific regulation.
Copper concentrations appeared in 48 of 58 raw wastewater streams from
the zinc subcategory. Copper is used for electrode supports in cells.
It is also used as an electrical conductor in process equipment. The
maximum concentration was 10.5 mg/1. Copper can be removed by
specific treatment methods to levels lower than many of the observed
values. Therefore, copper is considered for specific regulation in
the zinc subcategory.
Total cyanide concentrations appeared in 28 of 38 raw wastewater
streams. The maximum concentrations were observed in the cell wash
stream from one plant where the range was 2.1 to 7.2 mg/1. Most raw
wastewater streams contained less than 0.1 mg/1. However, the
wastewater streams contain levels that can be treated by specific
methods to achieve lower concentrations. Therefore, cyanide is
considered for specific regulation.
Lead concentrations appeared in 21 of 68 raw wastewater streams in the
zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.82 mg/1. Although
lead is not a raw material and is not part of a process, it was
present in various raw wastewater streams at seven of the eight
sampled plants in this subcategory. Lead can be removed by specific
treatment methods to achieve lower concentrations than most of those
found. Therefore, lead is considered for specific regulation in the
zinc subcategory.
Mercury concentrations appeared in 45 of 57 raw wastewater samples
from the zinc subcategory. This priority pollutant is used to
amalgamate zinc anodes and therefore is expected in raw wastewaters.
The maximum concentration was 30.78 mg/1. Specific treatment methods
can achieve mercury concentrations lower than most of the reported raw
wastewater values. Therefore, mercury is considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Nickel concentrations appeared in 46 of 70 raw wastewater streams from
the zinc subcategory. Nickel is the primary raw material for
560
-------
this parameter. Therefore, nickel is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Zinc appeared in all process wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.130 mg/1. This is lower
than concentrations generally achieved in specific treatment for this
parameter. Therefore zinc is not considered for specific regulation
in this subcategory.
Cobalt appeared in 1 of 5 wastewater samples considered in the
magnesium subcategory. The concentration was 0.006 mg/1 which is
below the concentrations achievable by treatment. Therefore, specific
regulation is not considered.
Iron appeared in 4 of 5 wastewater samples considered in this
subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.56 mg/1 which is lower
than concentrations generally achieved by treatment for this
parameter. Therefore, iron is not considered for regulation in this
subcategory.
Oil and grease did not appear in quantifiable concentrations for any
samples considered in this subcategory. Therefore, regulation is not
considered.
Zinc Subcateqory
Parameters Selected for Regulation. Based on verification sampling
results and a careful examination of the zinc subcategory
manufacturing elements and wastewater sources listed in Figure V-25
(Page 286), manufacturing processes and raw materials, seventeen
pollutant parameters were selected for consideration for specific
regulation in effluent limitations and standards for this subcategory.
The seventeen are: arsenic, cadmium, total chromium, copper, total
cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, zinc, aluminum,
iron, manganese, oil and grease, total suspended solids, and pH.
These pollutants were found in raw wastewaters from this subcategory
at levels that are amenable to control by specific treatment methods.
Arsenic concentrations appeared in 26 of 59 raw wastewater streams
from the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 5.9 mg/1.
Ten values were greater than 1 mg/1. Arsenic is not a raw material
and is not associated with any process used in the subcategory. The
arsenic probably is a contaminant in one of the raw materials.
Specific treatment methods achieve lower concentrations than were
found in many samples, therefore, arsenic is considered for specific
regulation.
Cadmium concentrations appeared in 50 of 70 raw wastewater streams
from the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentrations were 79.2 mg/1
559
-------
Phenols (total) concentrations appeared in 30 of 43 raw wastewater
streams from the zinc subcategory. The maximum value was 0.12 mg/1 in
one raw wastewater stream. Several element streams and total plant
raw wastewater streams contain treatable wastewaters, however, the
concentrations detected are not environmentally significant, and only
some of the concentrations detected are treatable. Therefore, total
phenols is not considered for specific regulation.
Oil and grease concentrations appeared in 42 of 43 raw wastewater
streams in the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 205
mg/1, and half the samples contained more than 10 mg/1. Oil and
grease can enter the raw wastewater from cell washing operations and
from production machinery. Many oil and grease concentrations
reported in this subcategory can be reduced by specific treatment
methods. Some of the concentrations found are greater than are
acceptable by POTW. Therefore, oil and grease are considered for
specific regulation in this subcategory.
Suspended solids concentrations appeared in 66 of 68 raw wastewater
samples in the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration of total
suspended solids (TSS) was 2,800 mg/1. About half the sample
contained greater than 50 mg/1 TSS. TSS consists of a variety of
metal powders and oxides from raw materials and processes. In
addition, TSS is generated by chemical precipitation methods used to
remove some other pollutants. Specific treatment methods remove TSS
to levels below those found in many samples. Therefore, TSS is
considered for specific regulation in the zinc subcategory.
The pH of 43 raw wastewater samples in the zinc subcategory ranged
from 1.0 to 13.5. Alkaline values predominated because the
electrolytes in the cells in this subcategory are alkaline. Treatment
of raw wastewaters for removal of other pollutant parameters can
result in pH values outside the acceptable 7.5 to 10.0 range.
Specific treatment methods can readily bring pH values within the
prescribed limits. Therefore, pH is considered for specific
regulation in the zinc subcategory.
Parameters Not Selected for Specific Regulation. Sixteen pollutant
parameters which were evaluated in verification analysis were dropped
from further consideration for specific regulation in the zinc
subcategory. These parameters were found to be present in raw
wastewaters infrequently, or at concentrations below those usually
achieved by specific treatment methods. The sixteen were: 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethylene, 1,2-trans-
dichloroethylene, ethylbenzene, methylene chloride, naphthalene,
pentachlorophenol, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, diethyl phthalate,
tetrachloroethylene, toluene, trichloroethylene, antimony, ammonia,
and total phenols.
562
-------
impregnated nickel cathodes in this subcategory, but it also appeared
in various raw wastewater streams from all plants sampled. The
maximum concentrations were 514 mg/1 from the nickel cathode streams
and 24.4 mg/1 from cell wash streams. Nickel is considered for
regulation in the zinc subcategory.
Selenium concentrations appeared in 12 of 39 raw wastewater streams
from the zinc subcategory. The measured concentrations ranged from
0.046 to 4.8 mg/1. Most concentrations are above the level which can
be achieved by specific treatment methods. Selenium is not a raw
material nor is it a process material in this subcategory. Its
presence is probably associated with the use of silver or other raw
material with a high selenium content. This priority pollutant is
considered for specific regulation in the zinc subcategory.
Silver concentrations appeared in 42 of 60 raw wastewater streams in
the zinc subcategory. Silver is the raw material for silver oxide
cathodes used in some of the batteries in this subcategory. The
maximum concentration was 71 mg/1. Silver can be removed by specific
treatment methods to give concentrations lower than many of the
reported values. Silver is considered for specific regulation in the
zinc subcategory.
Zinc, is a principal raw material in the zinc subcategory. Zinc
concentrations appeared in 67 of 69 raw wastewater streams. The two
streams showing zero concentrations of zinc were from two streams for
silver cathodes. Nearly half of the samples contained more than 10
mg/1 zinc, and the maximum concentration was 1,100 mg/1. All of those
concentrations are greater than those that can be achieved by specific
treatment methods. Therefore, zinc is considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Aluminum concentrations appeared in 15 of 38 raw wastewater streams in
the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 106 mg/1 from
reject cell wastewater samples. Aluminum can be removed by specific
treatment methods to levels less than those found in several of the
samples. Therefore, aluminum is considered for specific regulation.
Iron concentrations appeared in two of two raw wastewater streams
sampled. The maximum concentration was 0.57 mg/1. This concentration
is treatable and iron is therefore considered for regulation.
Manganese concentrations appeared in 47 of 60 raw wastewater streams
from the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 69.6 mg/1.
Manganese dioxide is a raw material for plants that make alkaline
manganese cells in this subcategory. Some of the concentrations are
above the level which can be achieved by specific treatment methods.
Therefore, manganese is considered for specific regulation.
561
-------
Pentachlorophenol concentrations appeared in 1 of 14 raw wastewater
streams in the zinc subcategory. The concentration was 0.042 mg/1.
Available specific treatment methods are considered capable of
achieving lower concentrations of this priority pollutant than the
observed value. However, because pentachlorophenol was detected only
once, this priority pollutant is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate concentrations appeared in all 21 raw
wastewater streams analyzed for this priority pollutant. The maximum
concentration was 0.161 mg/1. Available specific treatment methods
are considered capable of achieving lower concentrations of this
priority pollutant than many of those reported. This priority
pollutant is not a raw material or process chemical and is found
distributed widely in industrial environments as a plasticizer.
Therefore, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Diethyl phthalate concentrations appeared in 14 of 37 raw wastewater
streams in the zinc subcategory. All concentrations were less than
the quantifiable limit. Therefore, diethyl phthalate is not
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Tetrachloroethylene concentrations appeared in 5 of 38 raw wastewater
streams in the zinc subcategory. All of the concentrations were less
than the quantifiable limit. Therefore, tetrachloroethylene is not
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Toluene concentrations appeared in 10 of 67 raw wastewater streams in
the zinc subcategory. All concentrations were less than the
quantifiable limit. Therefore, toluene is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Trichloroethylene was found in 17 of 51 raw wastewater samples in the
zinc subcategory. The only value greater than the quantifiable limit
was 0.012 mg/1. Available specific treatment methods are not expected
to remove trichloroethylene present in raw wastewaters at the maximum
concentration found. Therefore, trichloroethylene is not considered
for regulation in this subcategory.
Antimony concentrations did not appear in any of the 56 raw wastewater
streams from the zinc subcategory. Antimony was included in
verification sampling for this subcategory on the basis of dcp reports
that antimony was present in the raw wastewaters. Antimony is not
considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
Ammonia concentrations appeared in 31 of 31 raw wastewater streams
analyzed for this pollutant in the zinc subcategory. Maximum
concentrations for each element stream ranged from 0.84 to 120 mg/1.
564
-------
1,1,1-trichloroethane concentrations appeared in 22 of 57 raw
wastewater streams analyzed for this priority pollutant parameter in
the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.025 mg/1. All
but one other concentration were less than the quantifiable limit.
Available specific treatment methods are not expected to remove 1,1,1-
trichloroethane present in wastewater at this concentration.
Therefore, this priority pollutant is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
1,1-Dichloroethane concentrations appeared in 12 of 34 raw wastewater
streams analyzed for this priority pollutant in the zinc subcategory.
The maximum concentration was 0.03 mg/1. All other concentrations
were less than the quantifiable limit. Available specific treatment
methods are not expected to remove 1,1-dichloroethane present in
wastewaters at this concentration. Therefore, this priority pollutant
is not considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
1,1-Dichloroethylene concentrations appeared in 12 of 36 raw
wastewater streams analyzed for this priority pollutant in the zinc
subcategory. All concentrations were less than the quantifiable
limit. Therefore, 1,1-dichloroethylene is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene concentrations appeared in only 4 of 36 raw
wastewater streams in the zinc subcategory. All concentrations were
less than the quantifiable limit. Therefore, 1,2-trans-
dichloroethylene is not considered for regulation in this subcategory.
Ethylbenzene was detected in only 2 of 32 raw wastewater samples in
the zinc subcategory. The concentrations were below the quantifiable
limit. Therefore, ethylbenzene is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Methylene chloride concentrations appeared in 18 of 67 raw wastewater
streams in the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.023
mg/1. All other concentrations were below the quantifiable limit.
Available specific treatment methods are not expected to remove
methylene chloride present in wastewater at the maximum concentration
found. Therefore, methylene chloride is not considered for specific
regulation in this subcategory.
Naphthalene concentrations appeared in 16 of 37 raw wastewater streams
in the zinc subcategory. The maximum concentration was 0.02 mg/1.
All concentrations were less than the quantifiable limit. Available
treatment methods are not expected to remove napthalene present in the
wastewater at the maximum concentration found. Therefore, naphthalene
is not considered for specific regulation in this subcategory.
563
-------
TABLE VI-1
PRIORITY POLLUTANT DISPOSITION
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
Pollutant
Subcategory
Cadmium Calcium Lead Leclanche Lithium Magnesium Zinc
001 Acenaphthene
002 Acrolein
003 Acrylonitrile
004 Benzene
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon tetrachloride
(tetrachloromethane)
007 Chlorobenzene
008 1,2,4-trichloro-
benzene
009 Hexachlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1- trichlorethane
012 Hexachloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
014 1,1,2-trichloroethane
015 1,1,2,2-tetra-
chloroethane
016 Chloroethane
017 Bis (chloromethyl)
ether
018 Bis (2-chloroethyl)
ether
019 2-chloroethyl vinyl
ether (mixed)
020 2-chloronaphthalene
0 21 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometa cresol
023 Chloroform (trichloro-
methane)
024 2-chlorophenol
025 1,2-d ichlorobenzene
0 26 1,3-d ichlorobenzene
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
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
NT
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SU
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
NT
NQ
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
SU
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SU
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
SU
NQ
ND
ND
LEGEND:
ND = NOT DETECTED
NQ = NOT QUANTIFIABLE
SU = SMALL, UNIQUE SOURCES
NT = NOT TREATABLE
REG = REGULATION CONSIDERED
566
-------
The maximum concentration in total plant raw wastewater streams was
8.0 mg/1. Available specific treatment methods are not expected to
remove ammonia present in total raw wastewaters at the maximum level
found. Therefore, ammonia is not considered for specific regulation
in this subcategory.
Summary
Table VI-1, (Page 566) presents the selection of priority pollutant
parameters considered for regulation for each subcategory. The
selection is based on all sampling results. The "Not Detected"
notation includes pollutants which were not detected and not selected
during screening analysis of total plant raw wastewater, and those
that were selected at screening, but not detected during verification
analysis of process raw wastewater streams within the subcategories.
"Not Quantifiable" includes those pollutants which were at or below
the quantifiable limits in influent, raw or effluent waters and not
selected at screening, and those not quantifiable for all verification
raw wastewater stream analysis within each subcategory. "Small Unique
Sources" for both screening and verification includes those pollutants
which were present only in small amounts and includes those samples
which were detected at higher concentrations in the influent or
effluent than in the raw process wastewater, were detected at only one
plant, or were detected and could not be attributed to this point
source category. "Not Treatable" means that concentrations were lower
than the level achievable with the specific treatment methods
considered in Section VII. The "Regulation" notation includes those
pollutants which are considered for regulation. Table VI-2 (page xxx)
summarizes the selection of nonconventional and conventional pollutant
parameters for consideration for specific regulation by each
subcategory.
565
-------
TABLE VI-1
PRIORITY POLLUTANT DISPOSITION
BATTER* MANUFACTURING
Subcategory
Pollutant Cadmium Calcii
057 2-nitrophenol ND ND
058 4-nitrophenol ND ND
059 2,4-dinitrophenol ND ND
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol ND ND
061 N-nitrosodimethyl-
amine ND ND
062 N-nitrosodipheyl-
amine ND ND
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propyl-
amine ND ND
064 Pentachlorophenol ND NQ
065 Phenol ND ND
066 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate) NQ SU
067 Butyl benzyl-
phthalate ND ND
068 Di-N-Butyl Phthalate ND NQ
069 Di-n-octyl phthalate ND ND
070 Diethyl phthalate ND ND
071 Dimethyl phthalate ND ND
072 1,2-benzanthracene
(benzo( a)anthracene) ND ND
073 Benzo( a) pyrene (3,4-
benzopyrene) ND ND
074 3,4-Benzof luoranthene
(benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND
075 11,12-benzofluoranthene
(benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND
076 Chrysene ND ND
077 Acenaphthylene ND ND
078 Anthracene ND ND
079 1,12-benzoperylene
(benzo(ghi)perylene) ND ND
080 Fluorene ND ND
081 Phenanthrene ND ND
082 1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene
dibenzo( ,h) anthracene ND ND
083 Indeno(l,2,3-cd) pyrene
(2,3-o-pheynylene
pyrene) ND ND
084 Pyrene ND ND
085 Tetrachlcroethylene ND ND
Lead
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
SU
SU
SU
SU
ND
ND
NQ
NQ
NQ
NQ
NQ
ND
SU
ND
NQ
SU
ND
ND
NQ
ND
Leclanche
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
NQ
NQ
NQ
NQ
NT
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
SU
NQ
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
SU
ND
NQ
SU
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SU
SU
SU
NQ
NQ
ND
NQ
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
ND
ND
NQ
NQ
ND
Ng
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
568
-------
TABLE VI-1
PRIORITY POLLUTANT DISPOSITION
BATTER* MANUFACTURING
Subcategory
Pollutant Cadmii
027 1,4-dichlorobenzene ND
0 28 3,3-dicnlorobenz idine ND
029 1,1-dichloroethylene ND
030 1,2-trans-dichloro-
ethylene ND
031 2,4-dichlorcphenol ND
032 1,2-dichloropropane ND
033 1,2-dichlorcpropylene
(1,3-dichlorcpropene) ND
034 2,4-dimethylphenol ND
035 2,4-dinitrotoluene ND
036 2,6-dinitrotoluene ND
037 1,2-diphenylhydrazine ND
038 Ethylbenzene ND
039 Fluoranthene ND
040 4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether ND
041 4-bromopehnyl phenyl
ether ND
042 Bis (2-chloroisopropyl)
ether ND
043 Bis(2-chloroethoxyl)
methane ND
044 Methylene chloride
(d ichloromethane) NQ
045 Methyl chloride
(dichloromethane) ND
046 Methyl bromide
(bromomethane) ND
047 Bromoform (tribromo-
methane) ND
048 Dichlorobromomethane NQ
049 Trichloroflaorometliane ND
050 Dichlorcdi fluorcroe thane ND
051 Chlorodibromomethane ND
052 Hexachlorobutadiene ND
053 Hexachloromyclopenta-
diene ND
054 Isophorone ND
055 Naphthalene ND
056 Nitrobenzene ND
Calcium
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Lead
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
Leclanche
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
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
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NQ
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NT
ND
567
-------
TABLE VI-1
PRIORITY POLLUTANT DISPOSITION
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
Subcategory
Pollutant Cadmium Calcium T>ad Leclanche Lithium Magnesium Zinc
122 Lead REG NT REG REG REG REG REG
123 Mercury REG NQ REG REG NQ RT REG
124 Nickel REG NT REG REG NT NT REG
125 Selenium ND NQ ND REG NQ NQ REG
126 Silver Reg -NQd) NT REG NQ NT REG REG
127 Thallium ND NQ ND ND NQ NQ ND
128 Zinc REG NT REG REG REG NT REG
129 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
(1) For all subcategory elements except silver cathodes and related processes
570
-------
TABLE VI-1
PRIORITY POLLUTANT DISPOSITION
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
Subcategoty
Pollutant Carmuun
086 Toluene SU
087 Trichloroethylene NQ
088 Vinyl chloride
(chloroethylene) ND
089 Aldrin ND
090 Dieldrin ND
091 Chlordane (technical
mixture and
metabolites) ND
092 4,4-DDT ND
093 4,4-DDE (p,p-DDX) ND
094 4,4-DDD (pfp-
-------
-------
Aluminum
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Oil & Grease
01 TSS
PH
COD
TABLE VI-2
Other Pollutants Considered for Regulation
Subcategory
Cadmium Calcium Lead Leclanche Lithium Magnesium Zinc
X
X
X
X
X
X
X XXX
X X
XXX X
XXX X XX
XXX X XX
X
-------
MAJOR TECHNOLOGIES
In Sections IX, X, XI, and XII the rationale for selecting treatment
systems is discussed. The individual technologies used in the system
are described here. The major end-of-pipe technologies for treating
battery manufacturing wastewaters are: chemical precipitation of
dissolved metals, chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium, cyanide
precipitation, granular bed filtration, pressure filtration, settling
of suspended solids, and skimming of oil. In practice, precipitation
of metals and settling of the resulting precipitates is often a
unified two-step operation. Suspended solids originally present in
raw wastewaters are not appreciably affected by the precipitation
operation and are removed with the precipitated metals in the settling
operations. Settling operations can be evaluated independently of
hydroxide or other chemical precipitation operations, but hydroxide
and other chemical precipitation operations can only be evaluated in
combination with a solids removal operation.
1. Chemical Precipitation
Dissolved toxic metal ions and certain anions may be chemically
precipitated for removal by physical means such as sedimentation,
filtration, or centrifugation. Several reagents are commonly used to
effect this precipitation.
1) Alkaline compounds such as lime or sodium hydroxide may be used
to precipitate many toxic metal ions as metal hydroxides. Lime
also may precipitate phosphates as insoluble calcium phosphate
and fluorides as calcium fluoride.
2) Both "soluble" sulfides such as hydrogen sulfide or sodium
sulfide and "insoluble" sulfides such as ferrous sulfide may be
used to precipitate many heavy metal ions as insoluble metal
sulfides.
3) Ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate or both (as is required) may be
used to precipitate cyanide as a ferro or zinc ferricyanide
complex.
4) Carbonate precipitates may be used to remove metals either by
direct precipitation using a carbonate reagent such as calcium
carbonate or by converting hydroxides into carbonates using
carbon dioxide.
These treatment chemicals may be added to a flash mixer or rapid mix
tank, to a presettling tank, or directly to a clarifier or other
settling device. Because metal hydroxides tend to be colloidal in
nature, coagulating agents may also be added to facilitate settling.
After the solids have been removed, final pH adjustment may be
574
-------
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
This section describes the treatment techniques currently used or
available to remove or recover wastewater pollutants normally
generated by the battery manufacturing industrial point source
category. Included are discussions of individual end-of-pipe
treatment technologies and in-plant technologies. These treatment
technologies are widely used in many industrial categories, and data
and information to support their effectiveness has been drawn from a
similarly wide range of sources and data bases.
END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Individual recovery and treatment technologies are described which are
used or are suitable for use in treating wastewater discharges from
battery manufacturing plants. Each description includes a functional
description and discussion of application and performance, advantages
and limitations, operational factors (reliability, maintainability,
solid waste aspects), and demonstration status. The treatment
processes described include both technologies presently demonstrated
within the battery manufacturing category, and technologies
demonstrated in treatment of similar wastes in other industries.
Battery manufacturing wastewaters characteristically may be acid or
alkaline; may contain substantial levels of dissolved or particulate
metals including cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, silver,
zinc and manganese; contain only small or trace amounts of toxic
organics; and are generally free from strong chelating agents. The
toxic inorganic pollutants constitute the most significant wastewater
pollutants in this category.
In general, these pollutants are removed by chemical precipitation and
sedimentation or filtration. Most of them may be effectively removed
by precipitation of metal hydroxides or carbonates utilizing the
reaction with lime, sodium hydroxide, or sodium carbonate. For some,
improved removals are provided by the use of sodium sulfide or ferrous
sulfide to precipitate the pollutants as sulfide compounds with very
low solubilities.
Discussion of end-of-pipe treatment technologies is divided into three
parts: the major technologies; the effectiveness of major
technologies; and minor end-of-pipe technologies.
573
-------
VII-2 (page 683). Figure VII-2 was obtained from Development Document
for the Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New Source
Performance Standards for the Zinc Segment ot_ Nonferrous Metals
Manufacturing Point Source Category, U.S. E.P.A., EPA 440/1-74/033,
November, 1974. Figure VII-2 was plotted from the sampling data from
several facilities with metal finishing operations. It is partially
illustrated by data obtained from 3 consecutive days of sampling at
one metal processing plant (47432) as displayed in Table VII-1. Flow
through this system is approximately 49, 263 1/h (13,000 gal/hr).
TABLE VII-1
pH CONTROL EFFECT ON METALS REMOVAL
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
In Out in Out IJT Out
pH Range 2.4-3.4 8.5-8.7 1.0-3.0 5.0-6.0 2.0-5.0 6.5-8.1
(mg/1)
TSS 39 8 16 19 16 7
Copper 312 0.22 120 5.12 107 0.66
Zinc 250 0.31 32.5 25.0 43.8 0.66
This treatment system uses lime precipitation (pH adjustment) followed
by coagulant addition and sedimentation. Samples were taken before
(in) and after (out) the treatment system. The best treatment for
removal of copper and zinc was achieved on day one, when the pH was
maintained at a satisfactory level. The poorest treatment was found
on the second day, when the pH slipped to an unacceptably low level;
intermediate values were achieved on the third day, when pH values
were less than desirable but in between those for the first and second
days.
Sodium hydroxide is used by one facility (plant 439) for pH adjustment
and chemical precipitation, followed by settling (sedimentation and a
polishing lagoon) of precipitated solids. Samples were taken prior to
caustic addition and following the polishing lagoon. Flow through the
system is approximately 23,000 1/hr. (6,000 gal/hr).
TABLE VII-2
Effectiveness of Sodium Hydroxide for Metals Removal
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
In Out In Out In Out
pH Range 2.1-2.9 9.0-9.3 2.0-2.4 8.7-9.1 2.0-2.4 8.6-9.1
(mg/1)
Cr 0.097 0.0 0.057 0.005 0.068 0.005
576
-------
required to reduce the high pH created by the alkaline treatment
chemicals.
Chemical precipitation as a mechanism for removing metals from
wastewater is a complex process of at least two steps - precipitation
of the unwanted metals and removal of the precipitate. Some very
small amount of metal will remain dissolved in the wastewater after
complete precipitation. The amount of residual dissolved metal
depends on the treatment chemicals used and related factors. The
effectiveness of this method of removing any specific metal depends on
the fraction of the specific metal in the raw waste (and hence in the
precipitate) and the effectiveness of suspended solids removal. In
specific instances, a sacrifical ion such as iron or aluminum may be
added to aid in the precipitation process and reduce the fraction of a
specific metal in the precipitate.
Application and Performance. Chemical precipitation is used in
battery manufacturing for precipitation of dissolved metals. It can
be used to remove metal ions such as aluminum, antimony, arsenic,
beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese,
mercury, molybdenum, tin and zinc. The process is also applicable to
any substance that can be transformed into an insoluble form such as
fluorides, phosphates, soaps, sulfides and others. Because it is
simple and effective, chemical precipitation is extensively used for
industrial waste treatment.
The performance of chemical precipitation depends on several
variables. The more important factors affecting precipitation
effectiveness are:
1. Maintenance of an alkaline pH throughout the precipitation
reaction and subsequent settling;
2. Addition of a sufficient excess of treatment ions to drive
the precipitation reaction to completion;
3. Addition of an adequate supply of sacrifical ions (such as
iron or aluminum) to ensure precipitation and removal of
specific target ions; and
4. Effective removal of precipitated solids (see appropriate
technologies discussed under "Solids Removal").
Control of. pH. Irrespective of the solids removal technology
employed, proper control of pH is absolutely essential for favorable
performance of precipitation-sedimentation technologies. This is
clearly illustrated by solubility curves for selected metals
hydroxides and sulfides shown in Figure VII-1 (page 682), and by
plotting effluent zinc concentrations against pH as shown in Figure
575
-------
At this plant, effluent TSS levels were below 15 mg/1 on each day,
despite average raw waste TSS concentrations of over 3500 mg/1.
Effluent pH was maintained at approximately 8, lime addition was suf-
ficient to precipitate the dissolved metal ions, and the flocculant
addition and clarifier retention served to remove effectively the
precipitated solids.
Sulfide precipitation is sometimes used to precipitate metals
resulting in improved metals removals. Most metal sulfides are less
soluble than hydroxides, and the precipitates are frequently more
dependably removed from water. Solubilities for selected metal
hydroxide, carbonate and sulfide precipitates are shown in Table
VII-4. (Source: Lange's Handbook of Chemistry). Sulfide
precipitation is particularly effective in removing specific metals
such as silver and mercury. Sampling data from three industrial
plants using sulfide precipitation appear in Table VII-5.
TABLE VII-4
THEORETICAL SOLUBILITIES OF HYDROXIDES AND SULFIDES
OF SELECTED METALS IN PURE WATER
Metal
Cadmium (Cd++)
Chromium (Cr+++)
Cobalt (Co++)
Copper (Cu++)
Iron (Fe++)
Lead (Pb++)
Manganese (Mn++)
Mercury (Hg++)
Nickel (Ni++)
Silver (Ag+)
Tin (Sn++)
Zinc (Zn++)
Solubility of metal ion, mq/1
As Hydroxide
2.3 x 10-5
8.4 x 10-4
2.2 x 10-i
2.2 x lO-2
8.9 x 10-i
2.1
1 .2
3.9 x 10-4
6.9 x 10-'
13.3
1.1 x 10-4
1 .1
As Carbonate
1.0 x 10-4
7.0 x 10-3
3.9 x lO-2
1.9 x 10-i
2.1 x 10-i
7.0 x 10-4
As Sulfide
6.7 x 10-io
No precipitate
1.0 x 10-8
5.8 x 10-iซ
3.4 x 10-s
3.8 x 10-*
2.1 x lO-3
9.0 x 10-20
6.9 x 10-8
7.4 x 10-12
3.8 x lO-8
2.3 x 10-7
578
-------
Cu 0.063 0.018 0.078 0.014 0.053 0.019
Fe 9.24 0.76 15.5 0.92 9.41 0.95
Pb 1.0 0.11 1.36 0.13 1.45 0.11
Mn 0.11 0.06 0.12 0.044 0.11 0.044
Ni 0.077 0.011 0.036 0.009 0.069 0.011
Zn .054 0.0 0.12 0.0 0.19 0.037
TSS 13 11 11
These data indicate that the system was operated efficiently. Ef-
fluent pH was controlled within the range of 8.6 to 9.3, and, while
raw waste loadings were not unusually high, most toxic metals were
removed to very low concentrations.
Lime and sodium hydroxide (combined) are sometimes used to precipitate
metals. Data developed from plant 40063, a facility with a metal
bearing wastewater, exemplify efficient operation of a chemical
precipitation and settling system. Table VI1-3 shows sampling data
from this system, which uses lime and sodium hydroxide for pH
.adjustment, chemical precipitation, polyelectrolyte flocculant
addition, and sedimentation. Samples were taken of the raw waste
influent to the system and of the clarifier effluent. Flow through
the system is approximately 19,000 1/hr (5,000 gal/hr).
TABLE VII-3
Effectiveness of Lime and Sodium Hydroxide for Metals Removal
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
In Out In Out In Out
pH Range 9.2-9.6 8.3-9.8 9.2 7.6-8.1 9.6 7.8-8.2
(mg/1)
Al 37.3 0.35 38.1 0.35 29.9 0.35
Co 3.92 0.0 4.65 0.0 4.37 0.0
Cu 0.65 0.003 0.63 0.003 0.72 0.003
Fe 137 0.49 110 0.57 208 0.58
Mn 175 0.12 205 0.012 245 0.12
Ni 6.86 0.0 5.84 0.0 5.63 0.0
Se 28.6 0.0 30.2 0.0 27.4 0.0
Ti 143 0.0 125 0.0 115 0.0
Zn 18.5 0.027 16.2 0.044 17.0 0.01
TSS 4390 9 3595 13 2805 13
577
-------
Of particular interest is the ability of sulfide to precipitate
hexavalent chromium (Cr+6) without prior reduction to the tri-valent
state as is required in the hydroxide process. When ferrous sulfide
is used as the precipitant, iron and sulfide act as reducing agents
for the hexavalent chromium according to the reaction:
Cr03+ FeS + 3H20 > Fe(OH)3 + Cr(OH)3 + S
The sludge produced in this reaction consists mainly of ferric hy-
droxides, chromic hydroxides, and various metallic sulfides. Some
excess hydroxyl ions are generated in this process, possibly requiring
a downward re-adjustment of pH.
Based on the available data, Table VII-6 shows the minimum reliably
attainable effluent concentrations for sulfide precipitation-
sedimentation systems. These values are used to calculate performance
predictions of sulfide precipitation-sedimentation systems.
TABLE VII-6
SULFIDE PRECIPITATION-SEDIMENTATION PERFORMANCE
Parameter Treated Effluent (mg/1)
Cd 0.01
CrT 0.05
Cu 0.05
Pb 0.01
Hg 0.03
Ni 0.05
Ag 0.05
Zn 0.01
Table VII-6 is based on two reports:
Summary Report, Control and Treatment Technology for the Metal
Finishing Industry; Sulfide Precipitation, USEPA, EPA No.
625/8/80-003, 1979.
Addendum to development Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards, Major Inorganic
Products Segment of Inorganics Point Source Category, USEPA, EPA
Contract No. EPA-68-01-3281 (Task 7), June, 1978.
Carbonate precipitation is sometimes used to precipitate metals,
especially where precipitated metals values are to be recovered. The
solubility of most metal carbonates is intermediate between hydroxide
and sulfide solubilities; in addition, carbonates form easily filtered
precipitates.
580
-------
TABLE VI1-5
SAMPLING DATA FROM SULFIDE
PRECIPITATION-SEDIMENTATION SYSTEMS
Treatment
pH
(mg/1
Cr + 6
Cr
Cu
Fe
Ni
Zn
Lime, FeS, Poly-
electrolyte,
Settle, Filter
Lime, FeS, Poly-
electrolyte,
Settle, Filter
NaOH, Ferric
Chloride, Na2S
Clarify (1 stage)
In
5.0-6.
25.6
32.3
Out
8 8-9
<0.014
<0.04
In
Out
In
Out
7.7
7.38
0.022 <0.020
2.4 <0.1
11.45 <.005
18.35 <.005
0.029 0.003
0.52
39.5
0.10
<0.07
108
0.68
33.9
0.6
0.060
0.009
NOTE: These data are from three sources:
Summary Report, Control and Treatment Technology for
the Metal Finishing Industry; Sulfide Precipitation, USEPA,
EPA No. 625/8/80-003, 1979.
Industrial Finishing, Vol. 35, No. 11, November, 1979.
Electroplating sampling data from plant 27045.
In all cases except iron, effluent concentrations are below 0.1
and in many cases below 0.01 mg/1 for the three plants studied.
mg/1
Sampling data from several chlorine-caustic manufacturing plants using
sulfide precipitation demonstrate effluent mercury concentrations
varying between 0.009 and 0.03 mg/1. As shown in Figure VII-1, the
solubilities of PbS and Ag2S are lower at alkaline pH levels than
either the corresponding hydroxides or other sulfide compounds. This
implies that removal performance for lead and silver sulfides should
be comparable to or better than that for the metal hydroxides. Bench
scale tests on several types of metal finishing and manufacturing
wastewater indicate that metals removal to levels of less than 0.05
mg/1 and in some cases less than 0.01 mg/1 are common in systems using
sulfide precipitation followed by clarification. Some of the bench
scale data, particularly in the case of lead, do not support such low
effluent concentrations. However, lead is consistently removed to
very low levels (less than 0.02 mg/1) in systems using hydroxide and
carbonate precipitation and sedimentation.
579
-------
Table VII-7
FERRITE CO-PRECIPITATION PERFORMANCE
Metal Influent(mg/1) Effluent(mg/1)
Mercury 7.4 0.001
Cadmium 240 0.008
Copper 10 0.010
Zinc 18 0.016
Chromium 10 <.010
Manganese 12 0.007
Nickel 1,000 O.JOO
Iron 600 0.06
Bismuth 240 0.100
Lead 475 0.010
NOTE: These data are from:
Sources and Treatment of Wastewater in the Nonferrous
Metals Industry, USEPA, EPA No. 600/2-80-074, 1980.
Advantages and Limitations. Chemical precipitation has proved to be
an effective technique for removing many pollutants from industrial
wastewater. It operates at ambient conditions and is well suited to
automatic control. The use of chemical precipitation may be limited
because of interference by chelating agents, because of possible
chemical interference with mixed wastewaters and treatment chemicals,
or because of the potentially hazardous situation involved with the
storage and handling of those chemicals. Lime is usually added as a
slurry when used in hydroxide precipitation. The slurry must be kept
well mixed and the addition lines periodically checked to prevent
blocking of the lines, which may result from a buildup of solids.
Also, hydroxide precipitation usually makes recovery of the
precipitated metals difficult, because of the heterogeneous nature of
most hydroxide sludges.
The major advantage of the sulfide precipitation process is that the
extremely low solubility of most metal sulfides promotes very high
metal removal efficiencies; the sulfide process also has the ability
to remove chromates and dichromates without preliminary reduction of
the chromium to its trivalent state. In addition, sulfide can
precipitate metals complexed with most complexing agents. The process
demands care, however, in maintaining the pH of the solution at
approximately 10 in order to restrict the generation of toxic hydrogen
sulfide gas. For this reason, ventilation of the treatment tanks may
582
-------
Carbonate ions appear to be particularly useful in precipitating lead
and antimony. Sodium carbonate has been observed being added at
treatment to improve lead precipitation and removal in some industrial
plants. The lead hydroxide and lead carbonate solubility curves
displayed in Figure VII-3 (page 684 ) ("Heavy Metals Removal," by
Kenneth Lanovette, Chemical Enqineering/Deskbook Issue, October 17,
1977) explain this phenomenon.
Co-precipitation With Iron - The presence of substantial quantites of
iron in metal bearing wastewaters before treatment has been shown to
improve the removal of toxic metals. In some cases this iron is an
integral part of the industrial wastewater; in other cases iron is
deliberately added as a pre or first step of treatment. The iron
functions to improve toxic metal removal by three mechanisms: the iron
co-precipitates with toxic metals forming a stable precipitate which
desolubilizes the toxic metal; the iron improves the settleability of
the precipitate; and the large amount of iron reduces the fraction of
toxic metal in the precipitate. Co-precipitation with iron has been
practiced for many years incidentally when iron was a substantial
consitutent of raw wastewater and intentionally when iron salts were
added as a coagulant aid. Aluminum or mixed iron-aluminum salt also
have been used.
Co-precipitation using large amounts of ferrous iron salts is known as
ferrite co-precipitation because magnetic iron oxide or ferrite is
formed. The addition of ferrous salts (sulfate) is followed by alkali
precipitation and air oxidation. The resultant precipitate is easily
removed by filtration and may be removed magnetically. Data
illustrating the performance of ferrite co-precipitation is shown in
Table VII-7.
581
-------
Use in Battery Manufacturing Plants. Chemical precipitation is used
at 76 battery manufacturing plants. The quality of treatment
provided, however, is variable. A review of collected data and on-
site observations reveals that control of system parameters is often
poor. Where precipitates are removed by clarification, retention
times are likely to be short and cleaning and maintenance
questionable. Similarly, pH control is frequently inadequate. As a
result of these factors, effluent performance at battery plants
nominally practicing the same wastewater treatment is observed to vary
widely.
2. Chemical Reduction of_ Chromium
Description of_ the Process. Reduction is a chemical reaction in which
electrons are transferred to the chemical being reduced from the
chemical initiating the transfer (the reducing agent). Sulfur
dioxide, sodium bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite, and ferrous sulfate
form strong reducing agents in aqueous solution and are often used in
industrial waste treatment facilities for the reduction of hexavalent
chromium to the trivalent form. The reduction allows removal of
chromium from solution in conjunction with other metallic salts by
alkaline precipitation. Hexavalent chromium is not precipitated as
the hydroxide.
Gaseous sulfur dioxide is a widely used reducing agent and provides a
good example of the chemical reduction process. Reduction using other
reagents is chemically similar. The reactions involved may be
illustrated as follows:
3 S02 + 3 H20 > 3 H2S03
3 H2S03 + 2H2Cr04 > Cr2(S04)3 + 5 H20
The above reaction is favored by low pH. A pH of from 2 to 3 is
normal for situations requiring complete reduction. At pH levels
above 5, the reduction rate is slow. Oxidizing agents such as
dissolved oxygen and ferric iron interfere with the reduction process
by consuming the reducing agent.
A typical treatment consists of 45 minutes retention in a reaction
tank. The reaction tank has an electronic recorder-controller device
to control process conditions with respect to pH and oxidation
reduction potential (ORP). Gaseous sulfur dioxide is metered to the
reaction tank to maintain the ORP within the range of 250 to 300
millivolts. Sulfuric acid is added to maintain a pH level of from 1.8
to 2.0. The reaction tank is equipped with a propeller agitator
designed to provide approximately one turnover per minute. Figure
VII-4 (Page 685) shows a continuous chromium reduction system.
584
-------
be a necessary precaution in most installations. The use of insoluble
sulfides reduces the problem of hydrogen sulfide evolution. As with
hydroxide precipitation, excess sulfide ion must be present to drive
the precipitation reaction to completion. Since the sulfide ion
itself is toxic, sulfide addition must be carefully controlled to
maximize heavy metals precipitation with a minimum of excess sulfide
to avoid the necessity of post treatment. At very high excess sulfide
levels and high pH, soluble mercury-sulfide compounds may also be
formed. Where excess sulfide is present, aeration of the effluent
stream can aid in oxidizing residual sulfide to the less harmful
sodium sulfate (Na2S04). The cost of sulfide precipitants is high in
comparison to hydroxide precipitants, and disposal of metallic sulfide
sludges may pose problems. An essential element in effective sulfide
precipitation is the removal of precipitated solids from the
wastewater and proper disposal in an appropriate site. Sulfide
precipitation will also generate a higher volume of sludge than
hydroxide precipitation, resulting in higher disposal and dewatering
costs. This is especially true when ferrous sulfide is used as the
precipitant.
Sulfide precipitation may be used as a polishing treatment after
hydroxide precipitation-sedimentation. This treatment configuration
may provide the better treatment effectiveness of sulfide
precipitation while minimizing the variability caused by changes in
raw waste and reducing the amount of sulfide precipitant required.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Alkaline chemical precipitation is
highly reliable, although proper monitoring and control are required.
Sulfide precipitation systems provide similar reliability.
Maintainability: The major maintenance needs involve periodic upkeep
of monitoring equipment, automatic feeding equipment, mixing
equipment, and other hardware. Removal of accumulated sludge is
necessary for efficient operation of precipitation-sedimentation
systems.
Solid Waste Aspects: Solids which precipitate out are removed in a
subsequent treatment step. Ultimately, these solids require proper
disposal.
Demonstration Status. Chemical precipitation of metal hydroxides is a
classic waste treatment technology used by most industrial waste
treatment systems. Chemical precipitation of metals in the carbonate
form alone has been found to be feasible and is commercially used to
permit metals recovery and water reuse. Full scale commercial sulfide
precipitation units are in operation at numerous installations,
including several plants in the battery manufacturing category. As
noted earlier, sedimentation to remove precipitates is discussed
separately.
583
-------
sunlight, the cyanide complexes can break down and form free cyanide.
For this reason, the sludge from this treatment method must be
disposed of carefully.
Cyanide may be precipitated and settled out of wastewaters by the
addition of zinc sulfate or ferrous sulfate. In the presence of iron,
cyanide will form extremely stable cyanide complexes. The addition of
zinc sulfate or ferrous sulfate forms zinc ferrocyanide or ferro
ferricyanide complexes.
Adequate removal of the precipitated cyanide requires that the pH must
be kept at 9.0 and an appropriate retention time be maintained. A
study has shown that the formation of the complex is very dependent on
pH. At a pH of either 8 or 10, the residual cyanide concentration
measured is twice that of the same reaction carried out at a pH of 9.
Removal efficiencies also depend heavily on the retention time
allowed. The formation of the complexes takes place rather slowly.
Depending upon the excess amount of zinc sulfate or ferrous sulfate
added, at least a 30 minute retention time should be allowed for the
formation of the cyanide complex before continuing on to the
clarification stage.
One experiment with an initial concentration of 10 mg/1 of cyanide
showed that (98%) of the cyanide was complexed ten minutes after the
addition of ferrous sulfate at twice the theoretical amount necessary.
Interference from other metal ions, such as cadmium, might result in
the need for longer retention times.
Table VII-8 presents data from three coil coating plants. A fourth
plant was visited for the purpose of observing plant testing of the
cyanide- precipitation system. Specific data from this facility are
not included because: (1) the pH was usually well below the optimum
level of 9.0; (2) the historical treatment data were not obtained
using the standard cyanide analysis procedure; and (3) matched input-
output data were not made available by the plant. Scanning the
available data indicates that the raw waste CN level was in the range
of 25.0; the pH 7.5; and treated CN level was from 0.1 to 0.2.
586
-------
Application and Performance. Chromium reduction is used in battery
manufacturing for treating chromium containing cell wash solutions and
heat paper production wastewater. Chromium reduction is most usually
required to treat electroplating and metal surfacing rinse waters, but
may also be required in battery manufacturing plants. A study of an
operational waste treatment facility chemically reducing hexavalent
chromium has shown that a 99.7 percent reduction efficiency is easily
achieved. Final concentrations of 0.05 mg/1 are readily attained, and
concentrations of 0.01 mg/1 are considered to be attainable by
properly maintained and operated equipment.
Advantages and Limitations. The major advantage of chemical reduction
to reduce hexavalent chromium is that it is a fully proven technology
based on many years of experience. Operation at ambient conditions
results in minimal energy consumption, and the process, especially
when using sulfur dioxide, is well suited to automatic control.
Furthermore, the equipment is readily obtainable from many suppliers,
and operation is straightforward.
One limitation of chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium is that
for high concentrations of chromium, the cost of treatment chemicals
may be prohibitive. When this situation occurs, other treatment
techniques are likely to be more economical. Chemical interference by
oxidizing agents is possible in the treatment of mixed wastes, and the
treatment itself may introduce pollutants if not properly controlled.
Storage and handling of sulfur dioxide is somewhat hazardous.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Maintenance consists of periodic
removal of sludge, the frequency of removal depends on the input
concentrations of detrimental constituents.
Solid Waste Aspects: Pretreatment to eliminate substances which will
interfere with the process may often be necessary. This process
produces trivalent chromium which can be controlled by further
treatment. However, small amounts of sludge may be collected as the
result of minor shifts in the solubility of the contaminants. This
sludge can be processed by the main sludge treatment equipment.
Demonstration Status. The reduction of chromium waste by sulfur
dioxide or sodium bisulfite is a classic process and is used by
numerous plants which have hexavalent chromium compounds in
wastewaters from operations such as electroplating and noncontact
cooling.
3. Cyanide Precipitation
Cyanide precipitation, although a method for treating cyanide in
wastewaters, does not destroy cyanide. The cyanide is retained in the
sludge that is formed. Reports indicate that during exposure to
585
-------
therefore relatively infrequent. The filter is often cleaned by
scraping off the inlet face (top) of the sand bed. In the higher rate
filters, cleaning is frequent and is accomplished by a periodic
backwash, opposite to the direction of normal flow.
A filter may use a single medium such as sand or diatomaceous earth,
but dual and mixed (multiple) media filters allow higher flow rates
and efficiencies. The dual media filter usually consists of a fine
bed of sand under a coarser bed of anthracite coal. The coarse coal
removes most of the influent solids, while the fine sand performs a
polishing function. At the end of the backwash, the fine sand settles
to the bottom because it is denser than the coal, and the filter is
ready for normal operation. The mixed media filter operates on the
same principle, with the finer, denser media at the bottom and the
coarser, less dense media at the top. The usual arrangement is garnet
at the bottom (outlet end) of the bed, sand in the middle, and
anthracite coal at the top. Some mixing of these layers occurs and
is, in fact, desirable.
The flow pattern is usually top-to-bottom, but other patterns are
sometimes used. Upflow filters are sometimes used, and in a
horizontal filter the flow is horizontal. In a biflow filter, the
influent enters both the top and the bottom and exits laterally. The
advantage of an upflow filter is that with an upflow backwash, the
particles of a single filter medium are distributed and maintained in
the desired coarse-to-fine (bottom-to-top) arrangement. The
disadvantage is that the bed tends to become fluidized, which ruins
filtration efficiency. The biflow design is an attempt to overcome
this problem.
The classic granular bed filter operates by gravity flow; however,
pressure filters are fairly widely used. They permit higher solids
loadings before cleaning and are advantageous when the filter effluent
must be pressurized for further downstream treatment. In addition,
pressure filter systems are often less costly for low to moderate flow
rates.
Figure VII-5 (page 686) depicts a high rate, dual media, gravity
downflow granular bed filter, with self-stored backwash. Both
filtrate and backwash are piped around the bed in an arrangement that
permits gravity upflow of the backwash, with the stored filtrate
serving as backwash. Addition of the indicated coagulant and
polyelectrolyte usually results in a substantial improvement in filter
performance.
Auxilliary filter cleaning is sometimes employed in the upper few
inches of filter beds. This is conventionally referred to as surface
wash and is accomplished by water jets just below the surface of the
588
-------
expanded bed during the backwash cycle. These jets enhance the
scouring action in the bed by increasing the agitation.
An important feature for successful filtration and backwashing is the
underdrain. This is the support structure for the bed. The
underdrain provides an area for collection of the filtered water
without clogging from either the filtered solids or the media grains.
In addition, the underdrain prevents loss of the media with the water,
and during the backwash cycle it provides even flow distribution over
the bed. Failure to dissipate the velocity head during the filter or
backwash cycle will result in bed upset and the need for major
repairs.
Several standard approaches are employed for filter underdrains. The
simplest one consists of a parallel porous pipe imbedded under a layer
of coarse gravel and manifolded to a header pipe for effluent removal.
Other approaches to the underdrain system are known as the Leopold and
Wheeler filter bottoms. Both of these incorporate false concrete
bottoms with specific porosity configurations to provide drainage and
velocity head dissipation.
Filter system operation may be manual or automatic. The filter
backwash cycle may be on a timed basis, a pressure drop basis with a
terminal value which triggers backwash, or a solids carryover basis
from turbidity monitoring of the outlet stream. All of these schemes
have been used successfully.
Application and Performance. Wastewater treatment plants often use
granular bed filters for polishing after clarification, sedimentation,
or other similar operations. Granular bed filtration thus has
potential application to nearly all industrial plants. Chemical
additives which enhance the upstream treatment equipment may or may
not be compatible with or enhance the filtration process. Normal
operating flow rates for various types of filters are:
Slow Sand 2.04 - 5.30 1/sq m-hr
Rapid Sand 40.74 - 51.48 1/sq m-hr
High Rate Mixed Media 81.48 - 122.22 1/sq m-hr
Suspended solids are commonly removed from wastewater streams by
filtering through a deep 0.3-0.9 m (1-3 feet) granular filter bed.
The porous bed formed by the granular media can be designed to remove
practically all suspended particles. Even colloidal suspensions
(roughly 1 to 100 microns) are adsorbed on the surface of the media
grains as they pass in close proximity in the narrow bed passages.
Properly operated filters following some pretreatment to reduce
suspended solids below 200 mg/1 should produce water with less than 10
589
-------
mg/1 TSS. For example, multimedia filters produced the effluent
qualities shown in Table VII-9 below.
Table VII-9
Multimedia Filter Performance
TSS Effluent Concentration, mq/1
Plant ID I
06097
13924
18538
30172
36048
mean
0.0, 0.0, 0.5
1.8, 2.2, 5.6, 4.0, 4.0, 3.0, 2.2, 2.8
3.0, 2.0, 5.6, 3.6, 2.4, 3.4
1 .0
1.4, 7.0, V.O
2.1, 2.6, 1.5
2.61
Advantages and Limitations. The principal advantages of granular bed
filtration are its comparatively (to other filters) low initial and
operating costs, reduced land requirements over other methods to
achieve the same level of solids removal, and elimination of chemical
additions to the discharge stream. However, the filter may require
pretreatment if the solids level is high (over 100 mg/1). Operator
training must be somewhat extensive due to the controls and periodic
backwashing involved, and backwash must be stored and dewatered for
economical disposal.
Operational Factors. Reliability: The recent improvements in filter
technology have significantly improved filtration reliability.
Control systems, improved designs, and good operating procedures have
made filtration a highly reliable method of water treatment.
Maintainability: Deep bed filters may be operated with either manual
or automatic backwash. In either case, they must be periodically
inspected for media attrition, partial plugging, and leakage. Where
backwashing is not used, collected solids must be removed by
shoveling, and filter media must be at least partially replaced.
Solid Waste Aspects: Filter backwash is generally recycled within the
wastewater treatment system, so that the solids ultimately appear in
the clarifier sludge stream for subsequent dewatering. Alternatively,
the backwash stream may be dewatered directly or
backwash, the collected solids may be disposed of
if there is no
in a suitable
landfill. In either of these situations there is a solids disposal
problem similar to that of clarifiers.
590
-------
Demonstration Status. Deep bed filters are in common use in municipal
treatment plants. Their use in polishing industrial clarifier
effluent is increasing, and the technology is proven and conventional.
Granular bed filtration is used in several battery manufacturing
plants. As noted previously, however, little data is available
characterizing the effectiveness of filters presently in use within
the industry.
5. Pressure Filtration
Pressure filtration works by pumping the liquid through a filter
material which is impenetrable to the solid phase. The positive
pressure exerted by the feed pumps or other mechanical means provides
the pressure differential which is the principal driving force.
Figure VII-6 (page 687) represents the operation of one type of
pressure filter.
A typical pressure filtration unit consists of a number of plates or
trays which are held rigidly in a frame to ensure alignment and which
are pressed together between a fixed end and a traveling end. On the
surface of each plate, a filter made of cloth or synthetic fiber is
mounted. The feed stream is pumped into the unit and passes through
holes in the trays along the length of the press until the cavities or
chambers between the trays are completely filled. The solids are then
entrapped, and a cake begins to form on the surface of the filter
material. The water passes through the fibers, and the solids are
retained.
At the bottom of the trays are drainage ports. The filtrate is
collected and discharged to a common drain. As the filter medium
becomes coated with sludge, the flow of filtrate through the filter
drops sharply, indicating that the capacity of the filter has been
exhausted. The unit must then be cleaned of the sludge. After the
cleaning or replacement of the filter media, the unit is again ready
for operation.
Application and Performance. Pressure filtration is used in battery
manufacturing for sludge dewatering and also for direct removal of
precipitated and other suspended solids from wastewater.
Because dewatering is such a common operation in treatment systems,
pressure filtration is a technique which can be found in many
industries concerned with removing solids from their waste stream.
In a typical pressure filter, chemically preconditioned sludge
detained in the unit for one to three hours under pressures varying
from 5 to 13 atmospheres exhibited final solids content between 25 and
50 percent.
591
-------
Advantages and Limitations. The pressures which may be applied to a
sludge for removal of water by filter presses that are currently
available range from 5 to 13 atmospheres. As a result, pressure
filtration may reduce the amount of chemical pretreatment required for
sludge dewatering. Sludge retained in the form of the filter cake has
a higher percentage of solids than that from centrifuge or vacuum
filter. Thus, it can be easily accommodated by materials handling
systems.
As a primary solids removal technique, pressure filtration requires
less space than clarification and is well suited to streams with high
solids loadings. The sludge produced may be disposed without further
dewatering, but the amount of sludge is increased by the use of filter
precoat materials (usually diatomaceous earth). Also, cloth pressure
filters often do not achieve as high a degree of effluent
clarification as clarifiers or granular media filters.
Two disadvantages associated with pressure filtration in the past have
been the short life of the filter cloths and lack of automation. New
synthetic fibers have largely offset the first of these problems.
Also, units with automatic feeding and pressing cycles are now avail-
able.
For larger operations, the relatively high space requirements, as
compared to those of a centrifuge, could be prohibitive in some
situations.
Operational Factors. Reliability: With proper pretreatment, design,
and control, pressure filtration is a highly dependable system.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists of periodic cleaning or
replacement of the filter media, drainage grids, drainage piping,
filter pans, and other parts of the system. If the removal of the
sludge cake is not automated, additional time is required for this
operation.
Solid Waste Aspects: Because it is generally drier than other types
of sludges, the filter sludge cake can be handled with relative ease.
The accumulated sludge may be disposed by any of the accepted
procedures depending on its chemical composition. The levels of toxic
metals present in sludge from treating battery wastewater necessitate
proper disposal.
Demonstration Status. Pressure filtration is a commonly used
technology in a great many commercial applications. Pressure
filtration is used in six battery manufacturing plants.
592
-------
6. Settling
Settling is a process which removes solid particles from a liquid
matrix by gravitational force. This is done by reducing the velocity
of the feed stream in a large volume tank or lagoon so that
gravitational settling can occur. Figure VII-7 (page 688) shows two
typical settling devices.
Settling is often preceded by chemical precipitation which converts
dissolved pollutants to solid form and by coagulation which enhances
settling by coagulating suspended precipitates into larger, faster
settling particles.
If no chemical pretreatment is used, the wastewater is fed into a tank
or lagoon where it loses velocity and the suspended solids are allowed
to settle out. Long retention times are generally required.
Accumulated sludge can be collected either periodically or
continuously and either manually or mechanically. Simple settling,
however, may require excessively large catchments, and long retention
times (days as compared with hours) to achieve high removal
efficiencies. Because of this, addition of settling aids such as alum
or polymeric flocculants is often economically attractive.
In practice, chemical precipitation often precedes settling, and
inorganic coagulants or polyelectrolytic flocculants are usually added
as well. Common coagulants include sodium sulfate, sodium aluminate,
ferrous or ferric sulfate, and ferric chloride. Organic
polyelectrolytes vary in structure, but all usually form larger floe
particles than coagulants used alone.
Following this pretreatment, the wastewater can be fed into a holding
tank or lagoon for settling, but is more often piped into a clarifier
for the same purpose. A clarifier reduces space requirements, reduces
retention time, and increases solids removal efficiency. Conventional
clarifiers generally consist of a circular or rectangular tank with a
mechanical sludge collecting device or with a sloping funnel-shaped
bottom designed for sludge collection. In advanced settling devices,
inclined plates, slanted tubes, or a lamellar network may be included
within the clarifier tank in order to increase the effective settling
area, increasing capacity. A fraction of the sludge stream is often
recirculated to the inlet, promoting formation of a denser sludge.
Application and Performance. Settling and clarification are used in
the battery manufacturing category to remove precipitated metals.
Settling can be used to remove most suspended solids in a particular
waste stream; thus it is used extensively by many different industrial
waste treatment facilities. Because most metal ion pollutants are
readily converted to solid metal hydroxide precipitates, settling is
of particular use in those industries associated with metal
593
-------
production, metal finishing, metal working, and any other industry
with high concentrations of metal ions in their wastewaters. In
addition to toxic metals, suitably precipitated materials effectively
removed by settling include aluminum, iron, manganese, cobalt,
antimony, beryllium, molybdenum, fluoride, phosphate, and many others.
A properly operating settling system can efficiently remove suspended
solids, precipitated metal hydroxides, and other impurities from
wastewater. The performance of the process depends on a variety of
factors, including the density and particle size of the solids, the
effective charge on the suspended particles, and the types of
chemicals used in pretreatment. The site of flocculant or coagulant
addition also may significantly influence the effectiveness of
clarification. If the flocculant is subjected to too much mixing
before entering the clarifier, the complexes may be sheared and the
settling effectiveness diminished. At the same time, the flocculant
must have sufficient mixing and reaction time in order for effective
set-up and settling to occur. Plant personnel have observed that the
line or trough leading into the clarifier is often the most efficient
site for flocculant addition. The performance of simple settling is a
function of the retention time, particle size and density, and the
surface area of the basin.
The data displayed in Table VII-10 indicate suspended
efficiencies in settling systems.
solids removal
TABLE VII-10
PERFORMANCE OF SAMPLED SETTLING SYSTEMS
PLANT ID
01057
09025
11058
12075
19019
33617
40063
44062
46050
SETTLING
DEVICE
Lagoon
Clarifier
Settling
Ponds
Clarifier
Settling
Pond
Settling
Tank
Clarifier
Lagoon
Clarifier
Clarifier
Settling
Tank
SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION (mg/1)
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3
In
Out In
Out In
Out
54
1100
451
284
170
4390
182
295
17
6
1
9
13
10
56
1900
242
50
1662
3595
118
42
6
12
10
1
16
12
14
10
50
1620
502
1298
2805
174
153
14
13
23
8
594
-------
The mean effluent TSS concentration obtained by the plants shown in
Table VII-10 is 10.1 mg/1. Influent concentrations averaged 838 mg/1.
The maximum effluent TSS value reported is 23 mg/1. These plants all
use alkaline pH adjustment to precipitate metal hydroxides, and most
add a coagulant or flocculant prior to settling.
Advantages and Limitations. The major advantage of simple settling is
its simplicity as demonstrated by the gravitational settling of solid
particulate waste in a holding tank or lagoon. The major problem with
simple settling is the long retention time necessary to achieve
complete settling, especially if the specific gravity of the suspended
matter is close to that of water. Some materials cannot be
practically removed by simple settling alone.
Settling performed in a clarifier is effective in removing slow-
settling suspended matter in a shorter time and in less space than a
simple settling system. Also, effluent quality is often better from a
clarifier. The cost of installing and maintaining a clarifier,
however, is substantially greater than the costs associated with
simple settling.
Inclined plate, slant tube, and lamella settlers have even higher
removal efficiencies than conventional clarifiers, and greater
capacities per unit area are possible. Installed costs for these
advanced clarification systems are claimed to be one half the cost of
conventional systems of similar capacity.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Settling can be a highly reliable
technology for removing suspended solids. Sufficient retention time
and regular sludge removal are important factors affecting the
reliability of all settling systems. Proper control of pH adjustment,
chemical precipitation, and coagulant or flocculant addition are
additional factors affecting settling efficiencies in systems
(frequently clarifiers) where these methods are used.
Those advanced settlers using slanted tubes, inclined plates, or a
lamellar network may require pre-screening of the waste in order to
eliminate any fibrous materials which could potentially clog the
system. Some installations are especially vulnerable to shock
loadings, as from storm water runoff, but proper system design will
prevent this.
Maintainability: When clarifiers or other advanced settling devices
are used, the associated system utilized for chemical pretreatment and
sludge dragout must be maintained on a regular basis. Routine
maintenance of mechanical parts is also necessary. Lagoons require
little maintenance other than periodic sludge removal.
595
-------
Demonstration Status. Settling represents the typical method of
solids removal and is employed extensively in industrial waste
treatment. The advanced clarifiers are just beginning to appear in
significant numbers in commercial applications. Sedimentation or
clarification is used in many battery manufacturing plants as shown
below.
Settling Device No. Plants
Settling Tanks 55
Clarifier 13
Tube or Plate Settler 1
Lagoon 10
Settling is used both as part of end-of-pipe treatment and within the
plant to allow recovery of process solutions and raw materials. As
examples, settling tanks are commonly used on pasting waste streams in
lead acid battery manufacture to allow recovery of process water and
paste solids, and settling sump tanks are used to recover nickel and
cadmium in nickel cadmium battery manufacture.
7. Skimming
Pollutants with a specific gravity less than water will often float
unassisted to the surface of the wastewater. Skimming removes these
floating wastes. Skimming normally takes place in a tank designed to
allow the floating debris to rise and remain on the surface, while the
liquid flows to an outlet located below the floating layer. Skimming
dev.ces are therefore suited to the removal of non-emulsified oils
from raw waste streams. Common skimming mechanisms include the
rotating drum type, which picks up oil from the surface of the water
as it rotates. A doctor blade scrapes oil from the drum and collects
it in a trough for disposal or reuse. The water portion is allowed to
flow under the rotating drum. Occasionally, an underflow baffle is
installed after the drum; this has the advantage of retaining any
floating oil which escapes the drum skimmer. The belt type skimmer is
pulled vertically through -the water, collecting oil which is scraped
off from the surface and collected in a drum. Gravity separators,
such as the API type, utilize overflow and underflow baffles to skim a
floating oil layer from the surface of the wastewater. An overflow-
underflow baffle allows a small amount of wastewater (the oil portion)
to flow over into a trough for disposition or reuse while the majority
of the water flows underneath the baffle. This is followed by an
overflow baffle, which is set at a height relative to the first baffle
such that only the oil bearing portion will flow over the first baffle
during normal plant operation. A diffusion device, such as a vertical
slot baffle, aids in creating a uniform flow through the system and in
increasing oil removal efficiency.
596
-------
Application and Performance. Oil skimming is used in battery
manufacture to remove free oil used as a preservative or forming
lubricant for various metal battery parts. Another source of oil is
lubricants for drive mechanisms and other machinery contacted by
process water. Skimming is applicable to any waste stream containing
pollutants which float to the surface. It is commonly used to remove
free oil, grease, and soaps. Skimming is often used in conjunction
with air flotation or clarification in order to increase its
effectiveness.
The removal efficiency of a skimmer is partly a function of the
retention time of the water in the tank. Larger, more buoyant
particles require less retention time than smaller particles. Thus,
the efficiency also depends on the composition of the waste stream.
The retention time required to allow phase separation and subsequent
skimming varies from 1 to 15 minutes, depending on the wastewater
characteristics.
API or other gravity-type separators tend to be more suitable for use
where the amount of surface oil flowing through the system is
consistently significant. Drum and belt type skimmers are applicable
to waste streams which evidence smaller amounts of floating oil and
where surges of floating oil are not a problem. Using an API
separator system in conjunction with a drum type skimmer would be a
very effective method of removing floating contaminants from non-
emulsified oily waste streams. Sampling data shown below illustrate
the capabilities of the technology with both extremely high and
moderate oil influent levels.
Table VII-11
SKIMMING PERFORMANCE
Oil & Grease
mg/1
Plant Skimmer Type Ln Out
06058 API 224,669 17.9
06058 Belt 19.4 8.3
This data is intended to be illustrative of the very high level of oil
and grease removals attainable in a simple two-step oil removal
system.
Based on the performance of installations in a variety of
manufacturing plants and permit requirements that are consistently
achieved, it is determined that effluent oil levels may be reliably
reduced below 10 mg/1 with moderate influent concentrations. Very
597
-------
high concentrations of oil such as the 22 percent shown above may
require two step treatment to achieve this level.
Skimming which removes oil may also be used to remove base levels of
organics. Plant sampling data show that many organic compounds tend
to be removed in standard wastewater treatment equipment. Oil
separation not only removes oil but also organics that are more
soluble in oil than in water. Clarification removes organic solids
directly and probably removes dissolved organics by adsorption on
inorganic solids.
The source of these organic pollutants is not always known with
certainty, although in metal forming operations they seem to derive
mainly from various process lubricants. They are also sometimes
present in the plant water supply, as additives to proprietary
formulations of cleaners, or as the result of leaching from plastic
lines and other materials.
High molecular weight organics in particular are much more soluble in
organic solvents than in water. Thus they are much more concentrated
in the oil phase that is skimmed than in the wastewater. The ratio of
solubilities of a compound in oil and water phases is called the
partition coefficient. The logarithm of the partition coefficients
for fifteen polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds in
octanol and water are listed below:
PAH Log Octanol/Water
Priority Pollutant Partition Coefficient
1. Acenaphthene 4.33
3 9. Fluoranthene 5.33
72. Benzo(a)anthracene 5.61
73. Benzo(a)pyrene 6.04
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene 6.57
75. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 6.84
76. Chrysene 5.61
77. Acenaphthylene 4.07
78. Anthracene 4.45
79. Benzo(ghi)perylene 7.23
80. Fluorene 4.18
81. Phenanthrene 4.46
82. Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 5.97
83. Indeno(1,2,3,cd)pyrene 7.66
84. Pyrene 5.32
A study of priority organic compounds commonly found in metal forming
operation waste streams indicated that incidental removal of these
compounds often occurs as a result of oil removal or clarification
598
-------
processes. When all organics analyses from visited plants are
considered, removal of organic compounds by other waste treatment
technologies appears to be marginal in many cases. However, when only
raw waste concentrations of 0.05 mg/1 or greater are considered,
incidental organics removal becomes much more apparent. Lower values,
those less than 0.05 mg/1, are much more subject to analytical
variation, while higher values indicate a significant presence of a
given compound. When these factors are taken into account, analysis
data indicate that most clarification and oil removal treatment
systems remove significant amounts of the organic compounds present in
the raw waste. The API oil-water separation system and the thermal
emulsion breaker performed notably in this regard, as shown in the
following table (all values in mg/1).
TABLE VII-12
TRACE ORGANIC REMOVAL BY SKIMMING
(API Plus Belt Skimmers)
(From Plant 06058)
Inf. Eff.
Oil & Grease 225,000 14.6
Chloroform 0.023 0.007
Methylene Chloride 0.013 0.012
Naphthalene 2.31 0.004
N-nitrosodiphenylamine 59.0 0.182
Bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate 11.0 0.027
Diethyl phthalate
Butylbenzylphthalate 0.005 0.002
Di-n-octyl phthalate 0.019 0.002
Anthracene - phenanthrene 16.4 0.014
Toluene 0.02 0.012
Data from five plant days demonstrate removal of organics by the
combined oil skimming and settling operations performed on coil
coating wastewaters. Days were chosen where treatment system influent
and effluent analyses provided paired data points for oil and grease
and the organics present. All organics found at quantifiable levels
on those days were included. Further, only those days were chosen
where oil and grease raw wastewater concentrations exceeded 10 mg/1
and where there was reduction in oil and grease going through the
treatment system. All plant sampling days which met the above
criteria are included below. The conclusion is that when oil and
grease are removed, organics are removed, also.
Percent Removal
Plant-Day Oil & Grease Orqanics
599
-------
1054-3 95.9 98.2
13029-2 98.3 78.0
13029-3 95.1 77.0
38053-1 96.8 81.3
38053-2 98.5 86.3
Mean 96.9 84.2
The unit operation most applicable to removal of trace priority
organics is adsorption, and chemical oxidation is another possibility.
Biological degradation is not generally applicable because the
organics are not present in sufficient concentration to sustain a
biomass and because most of the organics are resistant to
biodegradation.
Advantages and Limitations. Skimming as a pretreatment is effective
in removing naturally floating waste material. It also improves the
performance of subsequent downstream treatments.
Many pollutants, particularly dispersed or emulsified oil, will not
float "naturally" but require additional treatments. Therefore,
skimming alone may not remove all the pollutants capable of being
removed by air flotation or other more sophisticated technologies.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Because of its simplicity,
skimming is a very reliable technique.
Maintainability: The skimming mechanism requires periodic
lubrication, adjustment, and replacement of worn parts.
Solid Waste Aspects: The collected layer of debris must be disposed
of by contractor removal, landfill, or incineration. Because
relatively large quantities of water are present in the collected
wastes, incineration is not always a viable disposal method.
Demonstration Status. Skimming is a common operation utilized
extensively by industrial waste treatment systems. Oil skimming is
used in seven battery manufacturing plants.
MAJOR TECHNOLOGY EFFECTIVENESS
The performance of individual treatment technologies was presented
above. Performance of operating systems is discussed here. Two
different systems are considered: L&S (hydroxide precipitation and
sedimentation or lime and settle) and LS&F (hydroxide precipitation,
sedimentation, and filtration or lime, settle, and filter).
Subsequently, an analysis of effectiveness of such systems is made to
develop one-day maximum, and ten-day and thirty-day average
concentration levels to be used in regulating pollutants. Evaluation
600
-------
of the L&S and the LS&F systems is carried out on the assumption that
chemical reduction of chromium, cyanide precipitation, and oil
skimming are installed and operating properly where appropriate.
L&S Performance Combined Metals Data Base
All of the plants employ pH adjustment and hydroxide precipitation
using lime or caustic, followed by settling (tank, lagoon or
clarifier) for solids removal. Most also add a coagulant or
flocculant prior to solids removal.
An analysis of this data was presented in the development documents
for the proposed regulations for coil coating and porcelain enameling
(January 1981). In response to the proposal, some commenters claimed
that it was inappropriate to use data from some categories for
regulation of other categories. In response to these comments, the
Agency reanalyzed the data. An analysis of variance was applied to
the data for the 126 days of sampling to test the hypothesis of
homogeneous plant mean raw and treated effluent levels across
categories by pollutant. This analysis is described in the report "A
Statistical Analysis of the Combined Metals Industries Effluent Data"
which is in the administrative record supporting this rulemaking. The
main conclusion drawn from the analysis of variance is that, with the
exception of electroplating, the categories are generally homogeneous
with regard to mean pollutant concentrations in both raw and treated
effluent. That is, when data from electroplating facilities are
included in the analysis, the hypothesis of homogeneity across
categories is rejected. When the electroplating data are removed from
the analysis the conclusion changes substantially and the hypothesis
of homogeneity across categories is not rejected. On the basis of
this analysis, the electroplating data were removed from the data base
used to determine limitations. Cases that appeared to be marginally
different were not unexpected (such as copper in copper forming and
lead in lead battery manufacturing) were accommodated in developing
limitations by using the larger values obtained from the marginally
different category to characterize the entire data set.
The statistical analysis provides support for the technical
engineering judgment that electroplating wastewaters are different
from most metal processing wastewaters. These differences may be
further explained by differences in the constituents and relative
amounts of pollutants in the raw wastewaters. Therefore, the
wastewater data derived from plants that only electroplate are not
used in developing limitations for the battery manufacturing category.
After removing the electroplating data, data from 21 plants and 52
days of sampling remained.
601
-------
For the purpose of developing treatment effectiveness, certain data
were deleted from the data base before examination for homogeneity.
These deletions were made to ensure that the data reflect properly
operated treatment systems and actual pollutant removal. The
following criteria were used in making these deletions:
o Plants where malfunctioning processes or treatment systems at
time of sampling were identified.
o Data days where pH was less than 7.0 or TSS was greater than 50
mg/1. (This is a prima facie indication of poor operation).
o Data points where the raw waste value was too low to assure
actual pollutant removal occurred (i.e., less than 0.1 mg/1 of
pollutant j.n raw waste).
Collectively, these selection criteria insure that the data are from
properly operating lime and settle treatment facilities. The
remaining data are displayed graphically in Figures VII-8 to VII-16
(pages 689 to 697). This common or combined metals data base provides
a more sound and usable basis for estimating treatment effectiveness
and statistical variability of lime and settle technology than the
available data from any one category. The range of raw waste
concentrations for battery manufacturing is also shown in these
figures. These levels of metals concentrations in the raw waste are
within the range of raw waste concentrations commonly encountered in
metals bearing industrial wastewater. Also these raw waste
concentrations combined with the nature of the wastewater clearly
indicate the applicability of lime and settle treatment technology to
the treatment of these wastewaters.
One-day Effluent Values
The basis assumption underlying the determination of treatment
effectiveness is that the data for a particular pollutant are
lognormally distributed by plant. The lognormal has been found to
provide a satisfactory fit to plant effluent data in a number of
effluent guidelines categories. In the case of the combined metal
categories data base, there are too few data from any one plant to
verify formally the lognormal assumption. Thus, we assumed
measurements of each pollutant from a particular plant, denoted by X,
followed a lognormal distribution with log mean n and log variance cr2.
The mean, variance and 99th percentile of X are then:
mean of X ซ E(X) * exp (n + *2 /2)
variance of X ซ V(X) ซ exp (2 y + a2) [exp( a2 )-l]
99th percentile * X.99 ซ exp ( y + 2.33 a)
602
-------
where exp is e, the base of the natural logarithm. The term lognormal
is used because the logarithm of X has a normal distribution with mean
u and variance a2. Using the basic assumption of lognormality the
actual treatment effectiveness was determined using a lognormal
distribution that, in a sense, approximates the distribution of an
average of the plants in the data base, i.e., an "average plant"
distribution. The notion of an "average plant" distribution is not a
strict statistical concept but is used here to determine limits that
would represent the performance capability of an average of the plants
in the data base.
This "average plant" distribution for a particular pollutant was
developed as follows: the log mean was determined by taking the
average of all the observations for the pollutant across plants. The
log variance was determined by the pooled within plant variance. This
is the weighted average of the plant variances. Thus, the log mean
represents the average of all the data for the pollutant and the log
variance represents the average of the plant log variances or average
plant variability for the pollutant.
The one day effluent values were determined as follows:
Let Xij * the jth observation on a particular pollutant at plant
i where
i = 1, ..., I
j * 1, ..., Ji
I * total number of plants
Ji = number of observations at plant i.
Then Yij * In Xij
where In means the natural logarithm.
Then y = log mean over all plants
I Ji
= ฃ ฃ Yi^/n'
where n = total number of observations
I
SZ ji
and
V(y) ซ pooled log variance
1 o
^I "* / -r_- -I \ ฃ
__
L
603
-------
2
where S. = log variance at plant i
Ji _ 2
(Yij - y)
y^ = log mean at plant i
Thus, y and V(y) are the log mean and log variance, respectively, of
the lognormal distribution used to determine the treatment
effectiveness. The estimated mean and 99th percentile of this
distribution form the basis for the long term average and daily
maximum effluent limitations, respectively. The estimates are
A
mean * E(X) * exp(y)ij; n (0.5 V(y))
A __ / --
99th percentile = X.9Q = exp [y + 2.33vV(y) ]
where 0 ( . ) is a Bessel function and exp is e, the base of the natural
logarithms (See Aitchison, J. and J.A.C. Brown, The Loqnormal
Distribution, Cambridge University Press, 1963). In cases where zeros
were present in the data, a generalized form of the lognormal, known
as the delta distribution was used (See Aitchison and Brown, op. cit.,
Chapter 9 ) .
For certain pollutants, this approach was modified slightly to
accommodate situations in which a category or categories stood out as
being marginally different from the others. For instance, after
excluding the electroplating data and other data that did not reflect
pollutant removal or proper treatment, the effluent copper data from
the copper forming plants were statistically significantly greater
than the copper data from the other plants. Thus, copper effluent
values shown in Table VI 1-13 are based only on the copper effluent
data from the copper forming plants. That is, the log mean for copper
is the mean of the logs of all copper values from the copper forming
plants only and the log variance is the pooled log variance of the
copper forming plant data only. In the case of cadmium, after
excluding the electroplating data and data that did not reflect
removal or proper treatment, there were insufficient data to estimate
the log variance for cadmium. The variance used to determine the
values shown in Table VI 1-13 for cadmium was estimated by pooling the
within plant variances for all the other metals. Thus, the cadmium
variability is the average of the plant variability averaged over all
the other metals. The log mean for cadmium is the mean of the logs of
the cadmium observations only. A complete discussion of the data and
calculations for all the metals is contained in the administrative
record for this rulemaking.
Average Effluent Values
604
-------
Average effluent values that form the basis for the monthly
limitations were developed in a manner consistent with the method used
to develop one day treatment effectiveness in that the lognormal
distribution used for the one-day effluent values was also used as the
basis for the average values. That is, we assume a number of
consecutive measurements are drawn from the distribution of daily
measurements. The approach used for the 10 measurements values was
employed previously for the electroplating category (see "Development
document for Existing Sources Pretreatment Standards for the
Electroplating Point Source Category" EPA 440/1-79/003, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., August, 1979).
That is, the distribution of the average of 10 samples from a
lognormal was approximated by another lognormal distribution.
Although the approximation is not precise theoretically, there is
empirical evidence based on effluent data from a number of categories
that the lognormal is an adequate approximation for the distribution
of small samples. In the course of previous work the approximation
was verified in a computer simulation study. We also note that the
average values were developed assuming independence of the
observations although no particular sampling scheme was assumed.
Ten-Sample average:
The formulas for the 10-sample limitations were derived on the basis
of simple relationships between the mean and variance of the
distributions of the daily pollutant measurements and the average of
10 measurements. We assume the daily concentration measurements for a
particular pollutant, denoted by X, follow a lognormal distribution
with_ log mean and log variance denoted by y and a2, respectively.
Let X10 denote the mean of 10 consecutive measurements. The following
relationships then hold assuming the daily measurements are
independent:
mean of X10 ซ E(X10) * E(X)
variance of X10 * V(X10) = V(X) f 10.
Where E(X) and V(X) are the mean and variance of X, respectively,
defined above. We then assume that X10 follows a lognormal
distribution with log mean P10 and log standard deviation ff10. The
mean and variance of X10 are then
E(X10) * exp (vio + 0.5a210)
o) * exP (2vio + a2io) [exp( a210)-l)
Now, u 10 and e210 can be derived in terms of y and a 2 as
vio = y + a2 /2 - 0.5 In [l+(exp( a2 -1 )/N]
cr2 = in [l + (exp{ a* ) -1 )/N]
605
-------
Therefore, uio and a2,0 can be estimated using the above relationships
and the estimates of $. and a2 obtained for the underlying lognormal
distribution. The 10 sample limitation value was determined by the
estimate of the approximate 99th percentile of the distribution of the
10 sample average given by
*
X10 (.99) * exp (fe10 + 2.33 a 10).
AI
whereHO and c 10 are the estimates of nlo and <*i0/ respectively.
30 Sample Average:
The average values based on 30 measurements are determined on the
basis of a statistical result known as the Central Limit Theorem.
This Theorem states that, under general and nonrestrictive
assumptions, the distribution of a sum of a number of random
variables, say n, is approximated by the normal distribution. The
approximation improves as the number of variables, n, increases. The
Theorem is quite general in that no particular distributional form is
assumed for the distribution of the individual variables. In most
applications (as in approximating the distribution of 30-day averages)
the Theorem is used to approximate the distribution of the average of
n observations of a random variable. The result makes it possible to
compute approximate probability statements about the average in a wide
range of cases. For instance, it is possible to compute a value below
which a specified percentage (e.g., 99 percent) of the averages of n
observations are likely to fall. Most textbooks state that 25 or 30
observations are sufficient for the approximation to be valid. In
applying the Theorem to the distribution of the 30 day average
effluent values, we approximate the distribution of the average of 30
observations drawn from the distribution of daily measurements and use
the estimated 99th percentile of this distribution. The monthly
limitations based on 10 consecutive measurements were determined using
the lognormal approximation described above because 10 measurements
was, in this case, considered too small a number for use of the
Central Limit Theorem.
30 Sample Average Calculation
The formulas for the 30 sample average were based on an application of
the Central Limit Theorem. According to the Theorem, the average of
30 observations drawn from the distribution of daily measurements,
denoted by X_a0, is approximately normally distributed. The mean and
variance of x30 are:
mean of X30 =_ E(X30)_* E(X)
variance of X30 = V(X30) * V(XH30.
606
-------
The 30 sample average value was determined by the estimate of the
approximate 99th percentile of the distribution of the 30 sample
average given by
xjo<-9ซ) s E(X) = 2.33\/V(X)/30
where A _
E(X) ซ exp(y)*n (0.5v(y)) / \
and VAX) = exp(27) [*n(2V(y)K* n//n-2\V(y) 1 ]
H /
The formulas for E(X) and VU) are estimates of E(X) and V(X)
respectively given in Aitchison, J. and J.A.C. Brown, The Loqnormal
Distribution, Cambridge University Press, 1963, page 45.
Table VII-13
COMBINED METALS DATA EFFLUENT VALUES (mg/1)
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ni
Zn
Fe
Mn
TSS
Application
Mean
0.079
0.08
0.58
0.12
0.57
0.30
0.41
0.21
12.0
One Day
Max.
0.32
0.42
1 .90
0.15
1 .41
1 .33
1.23
0.43
41 .0
1 0 Day Avg
Max.
0.15
0.17
1 .00
0.13
1.00
0.56
0.63
0.34
20.0
30 Day Avg
Max.
0.13
0.12
0.73
0.12
0.75
0.41
0.51
0.27
15.5
In response to the proposed coil coating and porcelain enameling
regulations, the Agency received comments pointing out that permits
usually required less than 30 samples to be taken during a month while
the monthly average used as the basis for permits and pretreatment
requirements usually is based on the average of 30 samples.
In applying the treatment effectiveness values to regulations we have
considered the comments, examined the sampling frequency required by
many permits and considered the change in values of averages depending
on the number of consecutive sampling days in the averages. The most
common frequency of sampling required in permits is about ten samples
per month or sliohtly greater than twice weekly. The 99th percentiles
607
-------
of the distribution of averages of ten consecutive sampling days are
not substantially different from the 99th percentile of the
distribution's 30 day average. (Compared to the one-day maximum, the
ten-day average is about 80 percent of the difference between one and
30 day values). Hence the ten day average provides a reasonable basis
for a monthly average limitation and is typical of the sampling
frequency required by existing permits.
The monthly average limitation is to be achieved in all permits and
pretreatment standards regardless of the number of samples required to
be analyzed and averaged by the permit or the pretreatment authority.
Additional Pollutants
A number of other pollutant parameters were considered with regard to^
the performance of lime and settle treatment systems in removing theifT
from industrial wastewater. Performance data for these parameters is
not readily available, so data available to the Agency in other
categories has been selectively used to determine the long term
average. Performance of lime and settle technology for each
pollutant. These data indicate that the concentrations shown in Table
VII-14 are reliably attainable with hydroxide precipitation and
settling. The precipitation of silver appears to be accomplished by
alkaline chloride precipitation and adequate chloride ions must be
available for this reaction to occur.
TABLE VII-14
L&S PERFORMANCE
ADDITIONAL POLLUTANTS
Pollutant Average Performance (mq/1)
Sb 0.7
As 0.51
Be 0.30
Hg 0.06
Se 0.30
Ag 0.10
Th 0.50
Al 1.11
Co 0.05
F 14.5
In establishing which data were suitable for use in Table VII-14 two
factors were heavily weighed; (1) the nature of the wastewater; (2)
and the range of pollutants or pollutant matrix in the raw wastewater.
These data have been selected from processes that generate dissolved
metals in the wastewater and which are generally free from complexing
608
-------
agents. The pollutant matrix was evaluated by comparing the
concentrations of pollutants found in the raw wastewaters with the
range of pollutants in the raw wastewaters of the combined metals data
set. These data are displayed in Tables VII-15 and VII-16 and
indicate that there is sufficient similarity in the raw wastes to
logically assume transferability of the treated pollutant
concentrations to the combined metals data base. The available data
on these added pollutants do not allow homogeneity analysis as was
performed on the combined metals data base. The data source for each
added pollutant is discussed separately.
TABLE VII-15
COMBINED METALS DATA SET - UNTREATED WASTEWATER
Pollutant Min. Cone (mq/1) Max. Cone, (mq/1)
Cd <0.1 3.83
Cr <0.1 116
Cu <0.1 108
Fe <0.1 263
Pb <0.1 29.2
Mn <0.1 5.98
Ni <0.1 27.5
Zn <0.1 337
TSS 4.6 4390
609
-------
TABLE VI1-16
MAXIMUM POLLUTANT LEVEL IN UNTREATED WASTEWATER
ADDITIONAL POLLUTANTS
(mg/1)
Pollutant As & Se Be Aq
As 4.2
Be - 10.24
Cd <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
Cr 0.18 8.60 0.23 22.8
Cu 33.2 1.24 110.5 2.2
Pb 6.5 0.35 11.4 5.35
Ni - 100 0.69
Ag - - 4.7 -
Zn 3.62 0.12 1512 <0.1
F - - ' - 760
Fe - 646
O&G 16.9 - 16 2.8
TSS 352 796 587.8 5.6
Antimony (Sb) - The achievable performance for antimony is based on
data from a battery and secondary lead plant. Both EPA sampling data
and recent permit data (1978-1982) confirm the achievability of 0.7
mg/1 in the battery manufacturing wastewater matrix included in the
combined data set.
Arsenic (As) - The achievable performance of 0.5 mg/1 for arsenic is
based on permit data from two nonferrous metals manufacturing plants.
The untreated wastewater matrix shown in Table VII-16 is comparable
with the combined data set matrix.
Beryllium (Be) - The treatability of beryllium is transferred from the
nonferrous metals manufacturing industry. The 0.3 performance is
achieved at a beryllium plant with the comparable untreated wastewater
matrix shown in Table VI1-16.
Mercury (Hq) - The 0.06 mg/1 treatability of mercury is based on data
from four battery plants. The untreated wastewater matrix at these
plants was considered in the combined metals data set.
610
-------
Selenium (Se) - The 0.30 mg/1 treatability of selenium is based on
recent permit data from one of the nonferrous metals manufacturing
plants also used for antimony performance. The untreated wastewater
matrix for this plant is shown in Table VII-16.
Silver - The treatability of silver is based on a 0.1 mg/1
treatability estimate from the inorganic chemicals industry.
Additional data supporting a treatability as stringent or more
stringent than 0.1 mg/1 is also available from seven nonferrous metals
manufacturing plants. The untreated wastewater matrix for these
plants is comparable and summarized in Table VII-16.
Thallium (Th) - The 0.50 mg/1 treatability for thallium is transferred
from the inorganic chemicals industry. Although no untreated
wastewater data are available to verify comparability with the
combined metals data set plants, no other sources of data for thallium
treatability could be identified.
Aluminum (Al) - The 1.11 mg/1 treatability of aluminum is based on the
mean performance of one aluminum forming plant and one coil coating
plant. Both of the plants are from categories considered in the
combined metals data set, assuring untreated wastewater matrix
comparability.
Cobalt (Co) - The 0.05 mg/1 treatability is based on nearly complete
removal of cobalt at a porcelain enameling plant with a mean untreated
wastewater cobalt concentration of 4.31 mg/1. In this case, the
analytical detection using aspiration techniques for this pollutant is
used as the basis of the treatability. Porcelain enameling was
considered in the combined metals data base, assuring untreated
wastewater matrix comparability.
Fluoride (F) - The 14.5 mg/1 treatability of fluoride is based on the
mean performance of an electronics and electrical component
manufacturing plant. The untreated wastewater matrix for this plant
shown in Table VII-16 is comparable to the combined metals data set.
LS&F Performance
Tables VII-17 and VII-18 show long term data from two plants which
have well operated precipitation-settling treatment followed by
filtration. The wastewaters from both plants contain pollutants from
metals processing and finishing operations (multi-category). Both
plants reduce hexavalent chromium before neutralizing and
precipitating metals with lime. A clarifier is used to remove much of
the solids load and a filter is used to "polish" or complete removal
of suspended solids. Plant A uses a pressure filter, while Plant B
uses a rapid sand filter.
611
-------
Raw waste data was collected only occasionally at each facility, and
the raw waste data is presented as an indication of the nature of the
wastewater treated. Data from Plant A was received as a statistical
summary and is presented as received. Raw laboratory data was
collected at Plant B and reviewed for spurious points and
discrepancies. The method of treating the data base is discussed
below under lime, settle, and filter treatment effectiveness.
Table VII-19 (page 613) shows long-term data for zinc and cadmium
removal at Plant C, a primary zinc smelter, which operates a LS&F
system. This data represents about 4 months (103 data days) taken
immediately before the smelter was closed. It has been arranged
similarily to Plants A and B for comparison and use.
TABLE VII-17
PRECIPITATION-SETTLING-FILTRATION (LS&F
Plant A
Parameters
No Pts.
Range mq/1
For 1979-Treated Wastewater
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
47
12
47
47
0.015
0.01
0.08
0.08
For 1978-Treated Wastewater
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
47
28
47
47
21
0.01
0.005
0.10
0.08
0.26
Raw Waste
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
32.0
0.08
1 .65
33.2
10.0
0.13
0.03
0.64
0.53
0.07
0.055
0.92
2.35
1 .1
72.0
0.45
20.0
32.0
95.0
Mean +_
std. dev.
PERFORMANCE
Mean + 2
std. dev
0.045 +0.029
0.019 +0.006
0.22 +0.13
0.17 +0.09
0.06 +0.10
0.016 +0.010
0.20 +_0.14
0.23 +0.34
0.49 +0.18
0.10
0.03
0.48
0.35
0.26
0.04
0.48
0.91
0.85
612
-------
TABLE VI1-18
PRECIPITATION-SETTLING-FILTRATION (LS&F) PERFORMANCE
Plant B
Parameters
No Pts.
Range mq/1
Mean _+ Mean + 2
std. dev. std. dev.
For 1979-Treated Wastewater
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
TSS
175
176
175
175
174
2
0.0
0.0
0.01
0.01
0.01
1 .00
- 0.40
- 0.22
- 1 .49
- 0.66
- 2.40
- 1 .00
0.068 +0.075
0.024 +0.021
0.219 +0.234
0.054 +0.064
0.303 +0.398
0.22
0.07
0.69
0. 18
1 .10
For 1978-Treated Wastewater
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
Total 1974-1
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
Raw Waste
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
Fe
TSS
144
143
143
131
144
979-Treated
1288
1290
1287
1273
1287
3
3
3
2
3
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
- 0.70
- 0.23
- 1 .03
- 0.24
- 1 .76
0.059 +0.088
0.017 +0.020
0. 147 +0. 142
0.037 +0.034
0.200 +0.223
0.24
0.06
0.43
0.11
0.47
Wastewater
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.80
0.09
1 .61
2.35
3.13
177
- 0.56
- 0.23
- 1 .88
- 0.66
- 3.15
-9.15
- 0.27
- 4.89
- 3.39
-35.9
-446
0.038 +0.055
0.011 +0.016
0. 184 +0.21 1
0.035 +0.045
0.402 +0.509
5.90
0. 17
3.33
22.4
0. 15
0.04
0.60
0.13
1 .42
613
-------
TABLE VII-19
PRECIPITATION-SETTLING-FILTRATION (LS&F) PERFORMANCE
Plant C
For Treated Wastewater
Parameters No Pts.
For Treated Wastewater
Range mg/1
Mean +_
std. dev.
Zn
Cd
TSS
PH
103
103
103
103
0.039 - 0.899 0.290 +0.131
0.010 - 0.500 0.049 +0.049
0.100 - 5.00 1.244 +.1.043
7.1 - 7.9 9.2*
Mean + 2
std. dev
0.552
0. 147
3.33
For Untreated Wastewater
Zn
Cd
TSS
pH
Fe
103
103
103
103
3
0.949 -29.8 11.009 +_6.933 24.956
0.039 - 2.319 0.542 +0.381 1.304
5.616 +.2.896 1 1 .408
7.6*
0.255
0.80 -19.6
6.8 - 8.2
0.107 - 0.46
* pH value is median of 103 values.
These data are presented to demonstrate the performance of
precipitation-settling-filtration (LS&F) technology under actual
operating conditions and over a long period of time.
It should be noted that the iron content of the raw waste of both
Plants A and B is high while that for Plant C is low. This results
for Plants A and B in coprecipitation of toxic metals with iron. Iron
coprecipitation using high-calcium lime for pH control yields the
results shown above. Plant operating personnel indicate that this
chemical treatment combination (sometimes with polymer assisted
coagulation) generally produces better and more consistent metals
removal than other combinations of sacrificial metal ions and alkalis.
The LS&F performance data presented here are based on systems that
provide polishing filtration after effective L&S treatment. We have
previously shown that L&S treatment is equally applicable to
wastewaters from the five categories because of the homogeneity of its
raw and treated wastewaters, and other factors. Because of the
similarity of the wastewaters after L&S treatment, the Agency believes
these wastewaters are equally amenable to treatment using polishing
filters added to the L&S treatment system. The Agency concludes that
LS&F data based on porcelain enameling and non-ferrous smelting and
refining is directly applicable to the aluminum forming, copper
forming, battery manufacturing, coil coating, and metal molding and
614
-------
casting categories, as well as to the porcelain enameling and
nonferrous melting and refining categories.
Analysis of Treatment System Effectiveness
Data are presented in Table VI1-13 showing the mean, one day, 10 day,
and 30 day values for nine pollutants examined in the L&S metals data
base. The mean variability factor for eight pollutants (excluding
cadmium because of the small number of data points) was determined and
is used to estimate one day, 10 day and 30 day values. (The
variability factor is the ratio of the value of concern to the mean:
the average variability factors are: one day maximum - 4.100; ten day
average - 1.821; and 30 day average - 1.618.) For values not
calculated from the common data base as previously discussed, the mean
value for pollutants shown in Table VI1-14 were multiplied by the
variability factors to derive the value to obtain the one, ten and 30
day values. These are tabulated in Table VII-20 (page 712).
The treatment effectiveness for sulfide precipitation and filtration
has been calculated similarily. Long term average values shown in
Tabie VI1-6 (page 687) have been multiplied by the appropriate
variability factor to estimate one day maximum, and ten and 30-day
average values. Variability factor developed in the combined metals
data base were used because the raw wastewaters are identical and the
treatment methods are similar as both use chemical precipitation and
solids removal to control metals.
LS&F technology data are presented in Tables VI1-17 and VI1-18. These
data represent two operating plants (A and B) in which the technology
has been installed and operated for some years. Plant A data was
received as a statistical summary and is presented without change.
Plant B data was received as raw laboratory analysis data.
Discussions with plant personnel indicated that operating experiments
and changes in materials and reagents and occasional operating errors
had occured during the data collection period. No specific
information was available on those variables. To sort out high values
probably caused by methodological factors from random statistical
variability, or data noise, the plant B data were analyzed. For each
of four pollutants (chromium, nickel, zinc, and iron), the mean and
standard deviation (sigma) were calculated for the entire data set. A
data day was removed from the complete data set when any individual
pollutant concentration for that day exceeded the sum of the mean plus
three sigma for that pollutant. Fifty-one data days (from a total of
about 1300) were eliminated by this method.
Another approach was also used as a check on the above method of
eliminating certain high values. The minimum values of raw wastewater
concentrations from Plant B for the same four pollutants were compared
to the total set of values for the corresponding pollutants. Any day
615
-------
on which the pollutant concentration exceeded the minimum value
selected from raw wastewater concentrations for that pollutant was
discarded. Forty-five days of data were eliminated by that procedure.
Forty-three days of data in common were eliminated by either
procedures. Since common engineering practice (mean plus 3 sigma) and
logic (treated waste should be less than raw waste) seem to coincide,
the data base with the 51 spurious data days eliminated is the basis
for all further analysis. Range, mean, standard deviation and mean
plus two standard deviations are shown in Tables VI1-17 and VI1-18 for
Cr, Cu, Ni, Zn and.Fe.
The Plant B data was separated into 1979, 1978, and total data base
(six years) segments. With the statistical analysis from Plant A for
1978 and 1979 this in effect created five data sets in which there is
some overlap between the individual years and total data sets from
Plant B. By comparing these five parts it is apparent that they are
quite similar and all appear to be from the same family of numbers.
The largest mean found among the five data sets for each pollutant was
selected as the long term mean for LS&F technology and is used as the
LS&F mean in Table VI1-20.
Plant C data was used as a basis for cadmium removal performance and
as a check on the zinc values derived from Plants A and B. The
cadmium data is displayed in Table VII-17 (page 698) and is
incorporated into Table VI1-20 for LS&F. The zinc data was analyzed
for compliance with the 1-day and 30-day values in Table VI1-20; no
zin value of the 103 data points exceeded the 1-day zinc value of
1.01 mg/1. The 103 data points were separated into blocks of 30
?eints and averaged. Each of the 3 full 30-day averages was less than
-, ne Table VII-20 value of 0.31 mg/1. Additionally the Plant C raw
wastewater pollutant concentrations (Table VI1-19) are well within the
raw wastewater concentrations of the combined metals data base (Table
VI1-15); further supporting the conclusion that Plant C wastewater
data is compatible with similar data from Plants A and B.
Concentration values for regulatory use are displayed in Table VII-20.
Mean one day, ten day and 30 day values for L&S for nine pollutants
were taken from Table VII-12; the remaining L&S values were developed
using the mean values in Table VII-14 and the mean variability factors
discussed above.
LS&F mean values for Cd, Cr, Ni, Zn and Fe are derived from plants A,
B, and C as discussed above. One, ten and thirty day values are
derived by applying the variability factor developed from the pooled
data base for the specific pollutant to the mean for that pollutant.
Other LS&F values are calculated using the long term average or mean
and the appropriate variability factors. Mean values for LS&F for
pollutants not already discussed are derived by reducing the L&S mean
616
-------
by one-third. The one-third reduction was established after examining
the percent reduction in concentrations going from L&S to LS&F data
for Cd, Cr, Ni, Zn, and Fe. The average reduction is 0.3338 or one
third.
Copper levels achieved at Plants A and B may be lower than generally
achievable because of the high iron content and low copper content of
the raw wastewaters. Therefore, the mean concentration value achieved
is not used; LS&F mean used is derived from the L&S technology.
L&S cyanide mean levels shown in Table VI1-8 are ratioed to one day,
ten day and 30 day values using mean variability factors. LS&F mean
cyanide is calculated by applying the ratios of removals L&S and LS&F
as discussed previously for LS&F metals limitations. The cyanide
performance was arrived at by using the average metal variability
factors. The treatment method used here is cyanide precipitation.
Because cyanide precipitation is limited by the same physical
processes as the metal precipitation, it is expected that the
variabilities will be similar. Therefore, the average of the metal
variability factors has been used as a basis for calculating the
cyanide one day, ten day and thirty day average treatment
effectiveness values.
The filter performance for removing TSS as shown in Table VI1-9 yields
a mean effluent concentration of 2.61 mg/1 and calculates to a 10 day
average of 4.33, 30 day average of 3.36 mg/1; a one day maximum of
8.88. These calculated values more than amply support the classic
values of 10 and 15, respectively, which are used for LS&F.
Although iron was reduced in some LS&F operations, some facilities
using that treatment introduce iron compounds to aid settling.
Therefore, the one day, ten day and 30 day values for iron at LS&F
were held at the L&S level so as to not unduly penalize the operations
which use the relatively less objectionable iron compounds to enhance
removals of toxic metals.
MINOR TECHNOLOGIES
Several other treatment technologies were considered for possible
application in BPT or BAT. These technologies are presented here with
a full discussion for most of them. A few are described only briefly
because of limited technical development.
8. Carbon Adsorption
The use of activated carbon to remove dissolved organics from water
and wastewater is a long demonstrated technology. It is one of the
most efficient organic removal processes available. This sorption
617
-------
process is reversible, allowing activated carbon to be regenerated for
reuse by the application of heat and steam or solvent. .Activated
carbon has also proved to be an effective adsorbent for many toxic
metals, including mercury. Regeneration of carbon which has adsorbed
significant metals, however, may be difficult.
The term activated carbon applies to any amorphous form of carbon that
has been specially treated to give high adsorption capacities.
Typical raw materials include coal, wood, coconut shells, petroleum
base residues, and char from sewage sludge pyrolysis. A carefully
controlled process of dehydration, carbonization, and oxidation yields
a product which is called activated carbon. This material has a high
capacity for adsorption due primarily to the large surface area
available for adsorption, 500 to 1500 m2/sq m resulting from a large
number of internal pores. Pore sizes generally range from 10 to 100
angstroms in radius.
Activated carbon removes contaminants from water by the process of
adsorption, or the attraction and accumulation of one substance on the
surface of another. Activated carbon preferentially adsorbs organic
compounds and, because of this selectivity, is particularly effective
in removing organic compounds from aqueous solution.
Carbon adsorption requires pretreatment to remove excess suspended
solids, oils, and greases. Suspended solids in the influent should be
less than 50 mg/1 to minimize backwash requirements; a downflow carbon
bed can handle much higher levels (up to 2000 mg/1) but requires
frequent backwashing. Backwashing more than two or three times a day
is not desirable; at 50 mg/1 suspended solids, one backwash will
suffice. Oil and grease should be less than about 10 mg/1. A high
level of dissolved inorganic material in the influent may cause
problems with thermal carbon reactivation (i.e., scaling and loss of
activity) unless appropriate preventive steps are taken. Such steps
might include pH control, softening, or the use of an acid wash on the
carbon prior to reactivation.
Activated carbon is available in both powdered and granular form. An
adsorption column packed with granular activated carbon is shown in
Figure VII-17 (page 698). Powdered carbon is less expensive per unit
weight and may have slightly higher adsorption capacity, but it is
more difficult to handle and to regenerate.
Application and Performance. Carbon adsorption is used to remove
mercury from wastewaters. The removal rate is influenced by the
mercury level in the influent to the adsorption unit. In Table VII-
21, removal levels found at three manufacturing facilities are listed.
618
-------
TABLE VI1-21
ACTIVATED CARBON PERFORMANCE (MERCURY)
Mercury levels - mq/1
Plant
A
B
C
In
28.0
0.36
0.008
Out
0.9
0.015
0.0005
In the aggregate these data indicate that very low effluent levels
could be attained from any raw waste by use of multiple adsorption
stages. This is characteristic of adsorption processes.
Isotherm tests have indicated that activated carbon is very effective
in adsorbing 65 percent of the organic priority pollutants and is
reasonably effective for another 22 percent. Specifically, for the
organics of particular interest, activated carbon was very effective
in removing 2,4-dimethylphenol, fluoranthene, isophorone, naphthalene,
all phthalates, and phenanthrene. It was reasonably effective on
1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethane, phenol, and toluene. Table
VII-22 (page 713) summarizes the treatability effectiveness for most
of the organic priority pollutants by activated carbon as compiled by
EpA. Table VI1-23 (page 714) summarizes classes of organic compounds
together with examples of organics that are readily adsorbed on
carbon.
Advantages and Limitations. The major benefits of carbon treatment
include applicability to a wide variety of organics and high removal
efficiency. Inorganics such as cyanide, chromium, and mercury are
also removed effectively. Variations in concentration and flow rate
are well tolerated. The system is compact, and recovery of adsorbed
materials is sometimes practical. However, destruction of adsorbed
compounds often occurs during thermal regeneration. If carbon cannot
be thermally desorbed, it must be disposed of along with any adsorbed
pollutants. The capital and operating costs of thermal regeneration
are relatively high. Cost surveys show that thermal regeneration is
generally economical when carbon use exceeds about 1,000 Ib/day.
Carbon cannot remove low molecular weight or highly soluble organics.
It also has a low tolerance for suspended solids, which must be
removed to at least 50 mg/1 in the influent water.
Operational Factors. Reliability: This system should be very
reliable with upstream protection and proper operation and maintenance
procedures.
619
-------
Maintainability: This system requires periodic regeneration or
replacement of spent carbon and is dependent upon raw waste load and
process efficiency.
Solid Waste Aspects: Solid waste from this process is contaminated
activated carbon that requires disposal. Carbon undergoes
regeneration, reduces the solid waste problem by reducing the
frequency of carbon replacement.
Demonstration Status. Carbon adsorption systems have been
demonstrated to be practical and economical in reducing COD, BOD, and
related parameters in secondary municipal and industrial wastewaters;
in removing toxic or refractory organics from isolated industrial
wastewaters; in removing and recovering certain organics from
wastewaters; and in removing and some times recovering selected
inorganic chemicals from aqueous wastes. Carbon adsorption is a
viable and economic process for organic waste streams containing up to
1 to 5 percent of refractory or toxic organics. Its applicability for
removal of inorganics such as metals has also been demonstrated.
9. Centrifuqation
Centrifugation is the application of centrifugal force to separate
solids and liquids in a liquid-solid mixture or to effect
concentration of the solids. The application of centrifugal force is
effective because of the density differential normally found between
the insoluble solids and the liquid in which they are contained. As a
waste treatment procedure, centrifugation is applied to dewatering of
sludges. One type of centrifuge is shown in Figure VII-18 (page 699).
There are three common types of centrifuges; disc, basket, and
conveyor. All three operate by removing solids under the influence of
centrifugal force. The fundamental difference among the three types
is the method by which solids are collected in and discharged from the
bowl.
In the disc centrifuge, the sludge feed is distributed between narrow
channels that are present as spaces between stacked conical discs.
Suspended particles are collected and discharged continuously through
small orifices in the bowl wall. The clarified effluent is discharged
through an overflow weir.
A second type of centrifuge which is useful in dewatering sludges is
the basket centrifuge. In this type of centrifuge, sludge feed is
introduced at the bottom of the basket, and solids collect at the bowl
wall while clarified effluent overflows the lip ring at the top.
Since the basket centrifuge does not have provision for continuous
discharge of collected cake, operation requires interruption of the
620
-------
feed for cake discharge for a minute or two in a 10 to 30 minute
overall cycle.
The third type of centrifuge commonly used in sludge dewatering is the
conveyor type. Sludge is fed through a stationary feed pipe into a
rotating bowl in which the solids are settled out against the bowl
wall by centrifugal force. From the bowl wall, the solids are moved
by a screw to the end of the machine, at which point they are dis-
charged. The liquid effluent is discharged through ports after pas-
sing the length of the bowl under centrifugal force.
Application And Performance. Virtually all industrial waste treatment
systems producing sludge can use centrifugation to dewater it.
Centrifugation is currently being used by a wide range of industrial
concerns.
The performance of sludge dewatering by centrifugation depends on the
feed rate, the rotational velocity of the drum, and the sludge
composition and concentration. Assuming proper design and operation,
the solids content of the sludge can be increased to 20 to 35 percent.
Advantages And Limitations. Sludge dewatering centrifuges have
minimal space requirements and show a high degree of effluent
clarification. The operation is simple, clean, and relatively
inexpensive. The area required for a centrifuge system installation
is less than that required for a filter system or sludge drying bed of
equal capacity, and the initial cost is lower.
Centrifuges have a high power cost that partially offsets the low
initial cost. Special consideration must also be given to providing
sturdy foundations and soundproofing because of the vibration and
noise that result from centrifuge operation. Adequate electrical
power must also be provided since large motors are required. The
major difficulty encountered in the operation of centrifuges has been
the disposal of the concentrate which is relatively high in suspended,
non-settling solids.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Centrifugation is highly reliable
with proper control of factors such as sludge feed, consistency, and
temperature. Pretreatment such as grit removal and coagulant addition
may be necessary, depending on the composition of the sludge and on
the type of centrifuge employed.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists of periodic lubrication,
cleaning, and inspection. The frequency and degree of inspection
required varies depending on the type of sludge solids being dewatered
and the maintenance service conditions. If the sludge is abrasive, it
is recommended that the first inspection of the rotating assembly be
made after approximately 1,000 hours of operation. If the sludge is
621
-------
not abrasive or corrosive, then the initial inspection might be
delayed. Centrifuges not equipped with a continuous sludge discharge
system require periodic shutdowns for manual sludge cake removal.
Solid Waste Aspects: Sludge dewatered in the centrifugation process
may be disposed of by landfill. The clarified effluent (centrate), if
high in dissolved or suspended solids, may require further treatment
prior to discharge.
Demonstration Status. Centrifugation is currently used in a great
many commercial applications to dewater sludge. Work is underway to
improve the efficiency, increase the capacity, and lower the costs
associated with centrifugation.
10. Coalescing
The basic principle of coalescence involves the preferential wetting
of a coalescing medium by oil droplets which accumulate on the medium
and then rise to the surface of the solution as they combine to form
larger particles. The most important requirements for coalescing
media are wettability for oil and large surface area. Monofilament
line is sometimes used as a coalescing medium.
Coalescing stages may be integrated with a wide variety of gravity oil
separation devices, and some systems may incorporate several
coalescing stages. In general, a preliminary oil skimming step is
desirable to avoid overloading the coalescer.
One commercially marketed system for oily waste treatment combines
coalescing with inclined plate separation and filtration. In this
system, the oily wastes flow into an inclined plate settler. This
unit consists of a stack of inclined baffle plates in a cylindrical
container with an oil collection chamber at the top. The oil droplets
rise and impinge upon the undersides of the plates. They then migrate
upward to a guide rib which directs the oil to the oil collection
chamber, from which oil is discharged for reuse or disposal.
The oily water continues on through another cylinder containing re-
placeable filter cartridges, which remove suspended particles from the
waste. From there the wastewater enters a final cylinder in which the
coalescing material is housed. As the oily water passes through the
many small, irregular, continuous passages in the coalescing material,
the oil droplets coalesce and rise to an oil collection chamber.
Application and Performance. Coalescing is used to treat oily wastes
which do not separate readily in simple gravity systems. The three-
stage system described above has achieved effluent concentrations of
10 to 15 mg/1 oil and grease from raw waste concentrations of 1000
mg/1 or more.
622
-------
Advantages and Limitations. Coalescing allows removal of oil droplets
too finely dispersed for conventional gravity separation-skimming
technology. It also can significantly reduce the residence times (and
therefore separator volumes) required to achieve separation of oil
from some wastes. Because of its simplicity, coalescing provides
generally high reliability and low capital and operating costs.
Coalescing is not generally effective in removing soluble or
chemically stabilized emulsified oils. To avoid plugging, coalescers
must be protected by pretreatment from very high concentrations of
free oil and grease and suspended solids. Frequent replacement of
prefilters may be necessary when raw waste oil concentrations are
high.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Coalescing is inherently highly
reliable since there are no moving parts, and the coalescing substrate
(monofi lament, etc. ) is inert in the process and therefore not
subject to frequent regeneration or replacement requirements. Large
loads or inadequate pretreatment, however, may result in plugging or
bypass of coalescing stages.
Maintainability: Maintenance requirements are generally limited to
replacement of the coalescing medium on an infrequent basis.
Solid Waste Aspects: No appreciable solid waste is generated by this
process.
Demonstration Status. Coalescing has been fully demonstrated in
industries generating oily wastewater, although none are currently in
use at any battery manufacturing facilities.
1 1 . Cyanide Oxidation b Chlorine
Cyanide oxidation using chlorine is widely used in industrial waste
treatment to oxidize cyanide. Chlorine can be utilized in either the
elemental or hypochlorite forms. This classic procedure can be
illustrated by the following two step chemical reaction:
1. C12 + NaCN + 2NaOH ---- > NaCNO + 2NaCl + H20
2. 3C12 + 6NaOH + 2NaCNO ---- > 2NaHC03 + N2 + 6NaCl + 2H20
The reaction presented as Equation 2 for the oxidation of cyanate is
the final step in the oxidation of cyanide. A complete system for the
alkaline chlorination of cyanide is shown in Figure VII-19 (page 700).
The alkaline chlorination process oxidizes cyanides to carbon dioxide
and nitrogen. The equipment often consists of an equalization tank
followed by two reaction tanks, although the reaction can be carried
out in a single tank. Each tank has an electronic recorder-controller
623
-------
to maintain required conditions with respect to pH and oxidation
reduction potential (ORP). In the first reaction tank, conditions are
adjusted to oxidize cyanides to cyanates. To effect the reaction,
chlorine is metered to the reaction tank as required to maintain the
ORP in the range of 350 to 400 millivolts, and 50 percent aqueous
caustic soda is added to maintain a pH range of 9.5 to 10. In the
second reaction tank, conditions are maintained to oxidize cyanate to
carbon dioxide and nitrogen. The desirable ORP and pH for this
reaction are 600 millivolts and a pH of 8.0. Each of the reaction
tanks is equipped with a propeller agitator designed to provide
approximately one turnover per minute. Treatment by the batch process
is accomplished by using two tanks, one for collection of water over a
specified time period, and one for the treatment of an accumulated
batch. If dumps of concentrated wastes are frequent, another tank may
be required to equalize the flow to the treatment tank. When the
holding tank is full, the liquid is transferred to the reaction tank
for treatment. After treatment, the supernatant is discharged and the
sludges are collected for removal and ultimate disposal.
Application and Performance. The oxidation of cyanide waste by
chlorine is a classic process and is found in most industrial plants
using cyanide. This process is capable of achieving effluent levels
that are nondetectable. The process is potentially applicable to
battery facilities where cyanide is a component in cell wash
formulations.
Advantages and Limitations. Some advantages of chlorine oxidation for
handling process effluents are operation at ambient temperature,
suitability for automatic control, and low cost. Disadvantages
include the need for careful pH control, possible chemical
interference in the treatment of mixed wastes, and the potential
hazard of storing and handling chlorine gas.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Chlorine oxidation is highly
reliable with proper monitoring and control and proper pretreatment to
control interfering substances.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists of periodic removal of sludge
and recalibration of instruments.
Solid Waste Aspects: There is no solid waste problem associated with
chlorine oxidation.
Demonstration Status. The oxidation of cyanide wastes by chlorine is
a widely used process in plants using cyanide in cleaning and metal
processing baths. Alkaline chlorination is also used for cyanide
treatment in a number of inorganic chemical facilities producing
hydroganic acid and various metal cyanides.
624
-------
12- Cyanide Oxidation By Ozone
Ozone is a highly reactive oxidizing agent which is approximately ten
times more soluble than oxygen on a weight basis in water. Ozone may
be produced by several methods, but the silent electrical discharge
method is predominant in the field. The silent electrical discharge
process produces ozone by passing oxygen or air between electrodes
separated by an insulating material. A complete ozonation system is
represented in Figure VII-20 (page 701).
Application and Performance. Ozonation has been applied commercially
to oxidize cyanides, phenolic chemicals, and organo-metal complexes.
Its applicability to photographic wastewaters has been studied in the
laboratory with good results. Ozone is used in industrial waste
treatment primarily to oxidize cyanide to cyanate and to oxidize
phenols and dyes to a variety of colorless nontoxic products.
Oxidation of cyanide to cyanate is illustrated below:
CN- + 03 > CNO- + 02
Continued exposure to ozone will convert the cyanate formed to carbon
dioxide and ammonia; however, this is not economically practical.
Ozone oxidation of cyanide to cyanate requires 1.8 to 2.0 pounds ozone
per pound of CN-; complete oxidation requires 4.6 to 5.0 pounds ozone
per pound of CN-. Zinc, copper, and nickel cyanides are easily
destroyed to a nondetectable level, but cobalt and iron cyanides are
more resistant to ozone treatment.
Advantages and Limitations. Some advantages of ozone oxidation for
handling process effluents are its suitability to automatic control
and on-site generation and the fact that reaction products are not
chlorinated organics and no dissolved solids are added in the
treatment step. Ozone in the presence of activated carbon,
ultraviolet, and other promoters shows promise of reducing reaction
time and improving ozone utilization, but the process at present is
limited by high capital expense, possible chemical interference in the
treatment of mixed wastes, and an energy requirement of 25 kwh/kg of
ozone generated. Cyanide is not economically oxidized beyond the
cyanate form.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Ozone oxidation is highly reliable
with proper monitoring and control, and proper pretreatment to control
interfering substances.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists of periodic removal of sludge,
and periodic renewal of filters and desiccators required for the input
625
-------
of clean dry air; filter life is a function of input concentrations of
detrimental constituents.
Solid Waste Aspects: Pretreatment to eliminate substances which will.
interfere with the process may be necessary. Dewatering of sludge
generated in the ozone oxidation process or in an "in line" process
may be desirable prior to disposal.
13. Cyanide Oxidation By_ Ozone With UV Radiation
One of the modifications of the ozonation process is the simultaneous
application of ultraviolet light and ozone for the treatment of
wastewater, including treatment of halogenated organics. The combined
action of these two forms produces reactions by photolysis,
photosensitization, hydroxylation, oxygenation, and oxidation. The
process is unique because several reactions and reaction species are
active simultaneously.
Ozonation is facilitated by ultraviolet absorption because both the
ozone and the reactant molecules are raised to a higher energy state
so that they react more rapidly. In addition, free radicals for use
in the reaction are readily hydrolyzed by the water present. The
energy and reaction intermediates created by the introduction of both
ultraviolet and ozone greatly reduce the amount of ozone required
compared with a system using ozone alone. Figure VII-21 (page 702)
shows a three-stage UV-ozone system. A system to treat mixed cyanides
requires pretreatment that involves chemical coagulation,
sedimentation, clarification, equalization, and pH adjustment.
Application and Performance. The ozone-UV radiation process was
developed primarily for cyanide treatment in the electroplating and
color photo-processing areas. It has been successfully applied to
mixed cyanides and organics from organic chemicals manufacturing
processes. The process is particularly useful for treatment of
complexed cyanides such as ferricyanide, copper cyanide, and nickel
cyanide, which are resistant to ozone alone.
Ozone combined with UV radiation is a relatively new technology. Four
units are currently in operation, and all four treat cyanide bearing
waste.
Ozone-UV treatment could be used in battery plants to destroy cyanide
present in waste streams from some cell wash operations.
14* Cyanide Oxidation By Hydrogen Peroxide
Hydrogen peroxide oxidation removes both cyanide and metals in cyanide
containing wastewaters. In this process, cyanide bearing waters are
heated to 49 to 54ฐC (120 to 130ฐF) and the pH is adjusted to 10.5 to
626
-------
11.8. Formalin (37 percent formaldehyde) is added while the tank is
vigorously agitated. After 2 to 5 minutes, a proprietary peroxygen
compound (41 percent hydrogen peroxide with a catalyst and additives)
is added. After an hour of mixing, the reaction is complete. The
cyanide is converted to cyanate, and the metals are precipitated as
oxides or hydroxides. The metals are then removed from solution by
either settling or filtration.
The main equipment required for this process is two holding tanks
equipped with heaters and air spargers or mechanical stirrers. These
tanks may be used in a batch or continuous fashion, with one tank
being used for treatment while the other is being filled. A settling
tank or a filter is needed to concentrate the precipitate.
Application and Performance. The hydrogen peroxide oxidation process
is applicable to cyanide-bearing wastewaters, especially those
containing metal-cyanide complexes. In terms of waste reduction
performance, this process can reduce total cyanide to less than 0.1
mg/1 and the zinc or cadmium to less than 1.0 mg/1.
Advantages and Limitations. Chemical costs are similar to those for
alkaline chlorination using chlorine and lower than those for
treatment with hypochlorite. All free cyanide reacts and is
completely oxidized to the less toxic cyanate state. In addition, the
metals precipitate and settle quickly, and they may be recoverable in
many instances. However, the process requires energy expenditures to
heat the wastewater prior to treatment.
Demonstration Status. This treatment process was introduced in 1971
and is used in several facilities. No battery manufacturing plants
use oxidation by hydrogen peroxide.
15. Evaporation
Evaporation is a concentration process. Water is evaporated from a
solution, increasing the concentration of solute in the remaining
solution. If the resulting water vapor is condensed back to liquid
water, the evaporation-condensation process is called distillation.
However, to be consistent with industry terminology, evaporation is
used in this report to describe both processes. Both atmospheric and
vacuum evaporation are commonly used in industry today. Specific
evaporation techniques are shown in Figure VII-22 (page 703) and
discussed below.
Atmospheric evaporation could be accomplished simply by boiling the
liquid. However, to aid evaporation, heated liquid is sprayed on an
evaporation surface, and air is blown over the surface and subse-
quently released to the atmosphere. Thus, evaporation occurs by
humidification of the air stream, similar to a drying process. Equip-
627
-------
ment for carrying out atmospheric evaporation is quite similar for
most applications. The major element is generally a packed column
with an accumulator bottom. Accumulated wastewater is pumped from the
base of the column, through a heat exchanger, and back into the top of
the column, where it is sprayed into the packing. At the same time,
air drawn upward through the packing by a fan is heated as it contacts
the hot liquid. The liquid partially vaporizes and humidifies the air
stream. The fan then blows the hot, humid air to the outside
atmosphere. A scrubber is often unnecessary because the packed column
itself acts as a scrubber.
Another form of atmospheric evaporator also works on the air humidi-
fication principle, but the evaporated water is recovered for reuse by
condensation. These air humidification techniques operate well below
the boiling point of water and can utilize waste process heat to
supply the energy required.
In vacuum evaporation, the evaporation pressure is lowered to cause
the liquid to boil at reduced temperature. All of the water vapor is
condensed, and to maintain the vacuum condition, noncondensible gases
(air in particular) are removed by a vacuum pump. Vacuum evaporation
may be either single or double effect. In double effect evaporation,
two evaporators are used, and the water vapor from the first
evaporator (which may be heated by steam) is used to supply heat to
the second evaporator. As it supplies heat, the water vapor from the
first evaporator condenses. Approximately equal quantities of
wastewater are evaporated in each unit; thus, the double effect system
evaporates twice the amount of water that a single effect system does,
at rearly the same cost in energy but with added capital cost and
complexity. The double effect technique is thermodynamically possible
because the second evaporator is maintained at lower pressure (higher
vacuum) and, therefore, lower evaporation temperature. Vacuum
evaporation equipment may be classified as submerged tube or climbing
film evaporation units.
Another means of increasing energy efficiency is vapor recompression
evaporation, which enables heat to be transferred from the condensing
water vapor to the evaporating wastewater. Water vapor generated from
incoming wastewaters flows to a vapor compressor. The compressed
steam than travels through the wastewater via an enclosed tube or coil
in which it condenses as heat is transferred to the surrounding
solution. In this way, the compressed vapor serves as a heating
medium. After condensation, this distillate is drawn off continuously
as the clean water stream. The heat contained in the compressed vapor
is used to heat the wastewater, and energy costs for system operation
are reduced.
In the most commonly used submerged tube evaporator, the heating and
condensing coil are contained in a single vessel to reduce capital
628
-------
cost. The vacuum in the vessel is maintained by an eductor-type pump,
which creates the required vacuum by the flow of the condenser cooling
water through a venturi. Wastewater accumulates in the bottom of the
vessel, and it is evaporated by means of submerged steam coils. The
resulting water vapor condenses as it contacts the condensing coils in
the top of the vessel. The condensate then drips off the condensing
coils into a collection trough that carries it out of the vessel.
Concentrate is removed from the bottom of the vessel.
The major elements of the climbing film evaporator are the evaporator,
separator, condenser, and vacuum pump. Wastewater is "drawn" into the
system by the vacuum so that a constant liquid level is maintained in
the separator. Liquid enters the steam-jacketed evaporator tubes, and
part of it evaporates so that a mixture of vapor and liquid enters the
separator. The design of the separator is such that the liquid is
continuously circulated from the separator to the evaporator. The
vapor entering the separator flows out through a mesh entrainment
separator to the condenser, where it is condensed as it flows down
through the condenser tubes. The condensate, along with any entrained
air, is pumped out of the bottom of the condenser by a liquid ring
vacuum pump. The liquid seal provided by the condensate keeps the
vacuum in the system from being broken.
Application and Performance. Both atmospheric and vacuum evaporation
are used in many industrial plants, mainly for the concentration and
recovery of process solutions. Many of these evaporators also recover
water for rinsing. Evaporation has also been applied to recovery of
phosphate metal cleaning solutions.
In theory, evaporation should yield a concentrate and a deionized
condensate. Actually, carry-over has resulted in condensate metal
concentrations as high as 10 mg/1, although the usual level is less
than 3 mg/1, pure enough for most final rinses. The condensate may
also contain organic brighteners and antifoaming agents. These can be
removed with an activated carbon bed, if necessary. Samples from one
plant showed 1,900 mg/1 zinc in the feed, 4,570 mg/1 in the
concentrate, and 0.4 mg/1 in the condensate. Another plant had 416
mg/1 copper in the feed and 21,800 mg/1 in the concentrate. Chromium
analysis for that plant indicated 5,060 mg/1 in the feed and 27,500
mg/1 in the concentrate. Evaporators are available in a range of
capacities, typically from 15 to 75 gph, and may be used in parallel
arrangements for processing of higher flow rates.
Advantages and Limitations. Advantages of the evaporation process are
that it permits recovery of a wide variety of process chemicals, and
it is often applicable to concentration or removal of compounds which
cannot be accomplished by any other means. The major disadvantage is
that the evaporation process consumes relatively large amounts of
energy for the evaporation of water. However, the recovery of waste
629
-------
heat from many industrial processes (e.g., diesel generators,
incinerators, boilers and furnaces) should be considered as a source
of this heat for a totally integrated evaporation system. Also, in
some cases solar heating could be inexpensively and effectively
applied to evaporation units. Capital costs for vapor compression
evaporators are substantially higher than for other types of
evaporation equipment. However, the energy costs associated with the
operation of a vapor compression evaporator are significantly lower
than costs of other evaproator types. For some applications,
pretreatment may be required to remove solids or bacteria which tend
to cause fouling in the condenser or evaporator. The buildup of scale
on the evaporator surfaces reduces the heat transfer efficiency and
may present a maintenance problem or increase operating cost.
However, it has been demonstrated that fouling of the heat transfer
surfaces can be avoided or minimized for certain dissolved solids by
maintaining a seed slurry which provides preferential sites for
precipitate deposition. In addition, low temperature differences in
the evaporator will eliminate nucleate boiling and supersaturation
effects. Steam distillable impurities in the process stream are
carried over with the product water and must be handled by pre-or post
treatment.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Proper maintenance will ensure a
high degree of reliability for the system. Without such attention,
rapid fouling or deterioration of vacuum seals may occur, especially
when corrosive liquids are handled.
Maintainability: Operating parameters can be automatically
controlled. Pretreatment may be required, as well as periodic
cleaning of the system. Regular replacement of seals, especially in a
corrosive environment, may be necessary.
Solid Waste Aspects: With only a few exceptions, the process does not
generate appreciable quantities of solid waste.
Demonstration Status. Evaporation is a fully developed, commercially
available wastewater treatment system. It is used extensively to
recover plating chemicals in the electroplating industry, and a pilot
scale unit has been used in connection with phosphating of aluminum.
Proven performance in silver recovery indicates that evaporation could
be a useful treatment operation for the photographic industry, as well
as for metal finishing. Vapor compression evaporation has been
practically demonstrated in a number of industries, including chemical
manufacturing, food processing, pulp and paper, and metal working.
One battery plant has recently reported showing the use of
evaporation.
630
-------
16. Flotation
Flotation is the process of causing particles such as metal hydroxides
or oil to float to the surface of a tank where they can be
concentrated and removed. This is accomplished by releasing gas
bubbles which attach to the solid particles, increasing their buoyancy
and causing them to float. In principle, this process is the opposite
of sedimentation. Figure VII-23 (page 704) shows one type of
flotation system.
Flotation is used primarily in the treatment of wastewater streams
that carry heavy loads of finely divided suspended solids or oil.
Solids having a specific gravity only slightly greater than 1.0, which
would require abnormally long sedimentation times, may be removed in
much less time by flotation.
This process may be performed in several ways: foam, dispersed air,
dissolved air, gravity, and vacuum flotation are the most commonly
used techniques. Chemical additives are often used to enhance the
performance of the flotation process.
The principal difference among types of flotation is the method of
generating the minute gas bubbles (usually air) in a suspension of
water and small particles. Chemicals may be used to improve the
efficiency with any of the basic methods. The following paragraphs
describe the different flotation techniques and the method of bubble
generation for each process.
Froth Flotation - Froth flotation is based on differences in the
physiochemical properties in various particles. Wettability and
surface properties affect the particles' ability to attach themselves
to gas bubbles in an aqueous medium. In froth flotation, air is blown
through the solution containing flotation reagents. The particles
with water repellant surfaces stick to air bubbles as they rise and
are brought to the surface. A mineralized froth layer, with mineral
particles attached to air bubbles, is formed. Particles of other
minerals which are readily wetted by water do not stick to air bubbles
and remain in suspension.
Dispersed Air Flotation - In dispersed air flotation, gas bubbles are
generated by introducing the air by means of mechanical agitation with
impellers or by forcing air through porous media. Dispersed air
flotation is used mainly in the metallurgical industry.
Dissolved Air Flotation - In dissolved air flotation, bubbles are
produced by releasing air from a supersaturated solution under
relatively high pressure. There are two types of contact between the
gas bubbles and particles. The first type is predominant in the
flotation of flocculated materials and involves the entrapment of
631
-------
rising gas bubbles in the flocculated particles as they increase in
size. The bond between the bubble and particle is one of physical
capture only. The second type of contact is one of adhesion.
Adhesion results from the intermolecular attraction exerted at the
interface between the solid particle and gaseous bubble.
Vacuum Flotation - This process consists of saturating the wastewater
with air either directly in an aeration tank, or by permitting air to
enter on the suction of a wastewater pump. A partial vacuum is
applied, which causes the dissolved air to come out of solution as
minute bubbles. The bubbles attach to solid particles and rise to the
surface to form a scum blanket, which is normally removed by a
skimming mechanism. Grit and other heavy solids that settle to the
bottom are generally raked to a central sludge pump for removal. A
typical vacuum flotation unit consists of a covered cylindrical tank
in which a partial vacuum is maintained. The tank is equipped with
scum and sludge removal mechanisms. The floating material is
continuously swept to the tank periphery, automatically discharged
into a scum trough, and removed from the unit by a pump also under
partial vacuum. Auxiliary equipment includes an aeration tank for
saturating the wastewater with air, a tank with a short retention time
for removal of large bubbles, vacuum pumps, and sludge pumps.
Application and Performance. The primary variables for flotation
design are pressure, feed solids concentration, and retention period.
The suspended solids in the effluent decrease, and the concentration
of solids in the float increases with increasing retention period.
When the flotation process is used primarily for clarification, a
retention period of 20 to 30 minutes is adequate for separation and
concentration.
Advantages and Limitations. Some advantages of the flotation process
are the high levels of solids separation achieved in many
applications, the relatively low energy requirements, and the
adaptability to meet the treatment requirements of different waste
types. Limitations of flotation are that it often requires addition
of chemicals to enhance process performance and that it generates
large quantities of solid waste.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Flotation systems normally are
very reliable with proper maintenance of the sludge collector
mechanism and the motors and pumps used for aeration.
Maintainability: Routine maintenance is required on the pumps and
motors. The sludge collector mechanism is subject to possible cor-
rosion or breakage and may require periodic replacement.
Solid Waste Aspects: Chemicals are commonly used to aid the flotation
process by creating a surface or a structure that can easily adsorb or
632
-------
entrap air bubbles. Inorganic chemicals, such as the aluminum and
ferric salts, and activated silica, can bind the particulate matter
together and create a structure that can entrap air bubbles. Various
organic chemicals can change the nature of either the air-liquid
interface or the solid-liquid interface, or both. These compounds
usually collect on the interface to bring about the desired changes.
The added chemicals plus the particles in solution combine to form a
large volume of sludge which must be further treated or properly
disposed.
Demonstration Status. Flotation is a fully developed process and is
readily available for the treatment of a wide variety of industrial
waste streams. Flotation separation has been used in two battery
manufacturing plants as a part of precipitation systems for metals
removal.
17. Gravity Sludge Thickening
In the gravity thickening process, dilute sludge is fed from a primary
settling tank or clarifier to a thickening tank where rakes stir the
sludge gently to densify it and to push it to a central collection
well. The supernatant is returned to the primary settling tank. The
thickened sludge that collects on the bottom of the tank is pumped to
dewatering equipment or hauled away. Figure VII-24 (page 705) shows
the construction of a gravity thickener.
Application and Performance. Thickeners are generally used in
facilities where the sludge is to be further dewatered by a compact
mechanical device such as a vacuum filter or centrifuge. Doubling the
solids content in the thickener substantially reduces capital and
operating cost of the subsequent dewatering device and also reduces
cost for hauling. The process is potentially applicable to almost any
industrial plant.
Organic sludges from sedimentation units of one to two percent solids
concentration can usually be gravity thickened to six to ten percent;
chemical sludges can be thickened to four to six percent.
Advantages and Limitations. The principal advantage of a gravity
sludge thickening process is that it facilitates further sludge
dewatering. Other advantages are high reliability and minimum
maintenance requirements.
Limitations of the sludge thickening process are its sensitivity to
the flow rate through the thickener and the sludge removal rate.
These rates must be low enough not to disturb the thickened sludge.
633
-------
Operational Factors. Reliability: Reliability is high with proper
design and operation. A gravity thickener is designed on the basis of
square feet per pound of solids per day, in which the required surface
area is related to the solids entering and leaving the unit.
Thickener area requirements are also expressed in terms of mass
loading, grams of solids per square meter per day (Ibs/sq ft/day).
Maintainability: Twice a year, a thickener must be shut down for
lubrication of the drive mechanisms. Occasionally, water must be
pumped back through the system in order to clear sludge pipes.
Solid Waste Aspects: Thickened sludge from a gravity thickening
process will usually require further dewatering prior to disposal,
incineration, or drying. The clear effluent may be recirculated in
part, or it may be subjected to further treatment prior to discharge.
Demonstration Status. Gravity sludge thickeners are used throughout
industry to reduce water content to a level where the sludge may be
efficiently handled. Further dewatering is usually practiced to
minimize costs of hauling the sludge to approved landfill areas.
Sludge thickening is used in seven battery manufacturing plants.
18. Insoluble Starch Xanthate
Insoluble starch xanthate is essentially an ion exchange medium used
to remove dissolved heavy metals from wastewater. The water may then
either be reused (recovery application) or discharged (end-of-pipe
application). In a commercial electroplating operation, starch
xanthate is coated on a filter medium. Rinse water containing dragged
out heavy metals is circulated through the filters and then reused for
rinsing. The starch-heavy metal complex is disposed of and replaced
periodically. Laboratory tests indicate that recovery of metals from
the complex is feasible, with regeneration of the starch xanthate.
Besides electroplating, starch xanthate is potentially applicable to
any other industrial plants where dilute metal wastewater streams are
generated. Its present use is limited to one electroplating plant.
19. Ion Exchange
Ion exchange is a process in which ions, held by electrostatic forces
to charged functional groups on the surface of the ion exchange resin,
are exchanged for ions of similar charge from the solution in which
the resin is immersed. This is classified as a sorption process be-
cause the exchange occurs on the surface of the resin, and the ex-
changing ion must undergo a phase transfer from solution phase to
solid phase. Thus, ionic contaminants in a waste stream can be ex-
changed for the harmless ions of the resin.
634
-------
Although the precise technique may vary slightly according to the ap-
plication involved, a generalized process description follows. The
wastewater stream being treated passes through a filter to remove any
solids, then flows through a cation exchanger which contains the ion
exchange resin. Here, metallic impurities such as copper, iron, and
trivalent chromium are retained. The stream then passes through the
anion exchanger and its associated resin. Hexavalent chromium, for
example, is retained in this stage. If one pass does not reduce the
contaminant levels sufficiently, the stream may then enter another
series of exchangers. Many ion exchange systems are equipped with
more than one set of exchangers for this reason.
The other major portion of the ion exchange process concerns the re-
generation of the resin, which now holds those impurities retained
from the waste stream. An ion exchange unit with in-place regen-
eration is shown in Figure VII-25 (page 706). Metal ions such as
nickel are removed by an acid, cation exchange resin, which is
regenerated with hydrochloric or sulfuric acid, replacing the metal
ion with one or more hydrogen ions. Anions such as dichromate are
removed by a basic, anion exchange resin, which is regenerated with
sodium hydroxide, replacing the anion with one or more hydroxyl ions.
The three principal methods employed by industry for regenerating the
spent resin are:
A) Replacement Service: A regeneration service replaces the spent
resin with regenerated resin, and regenerates the spent resin at
its own facility. The service then has the problem of treating
and disposing of the spent regenerant.
B) In-Place Regeneration: Some establishments may find it less
expensive to do their own regeneration. The spent resin column
is shut down for perhaps an hour, and the spent resin is
regenerated. This results in one or more waste streams which
must be treated in an appropriate manner. Regeneration is
performed as the resins require it, usually every few months.
C) Cyclic Regeneration: In this process, the regeneration of the
spent resins takes place within the ion exchange unit itself in
alternating cycles with the ion removal process. A regeneration
frequency of twice an hour is typical. This very short cycle
time permits operation with a very small quantity of resin and
with fairly concentrated solutions, resulting in a very compact
system. Again, this process varies according to application, but
the regeneration cycle generally begins with caustic being pumped
through the anion exchanger, carrying out hexavalent chromium,
for example, as sodium dichromate. The sodium dichromate stream
then passes through a cation exchanger, converting the sodium
dichromate to chromic acid. After concentration by evaporation
or other means, the chromic acid can be returned to the process
635
-------
line. Meanwhile, the cation exchanger is regenerated with
sulfuric acid, resulting in a waste acid stream containing the
metallic impurities removed earlier. Flushing the exchangers
with water completes the cycle. Thus, the wastewater is purified
and, in this example, chromic acid is recovered. The ion
exchangers, with newly regenerated resin, then enter the ion
removal cycle again.
Application and Performance. The list of pollutants for which the ion
exchange system has proved effective includes aluminum, arsenic,
cadmium, chromium (hexavalent and trivalent), copper, cyanide, gold,
iron, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, silver, tin, zinc, and more.
Thus, it can be applied to a wide variety of industrial concerns.
Because of the heavy concentrations of metals in their wastewater, the
metal finishing industries utilize ion exchange in several ways. As
an end-of-pipe treatment, ion exchange is certainly feasible, but its
greatest value is in recovery applications. It is commonly used as an
integrated treatment to recover rinse water and process chemicals.
Some electroplating facilities use ion exchange to concentrate and
purify plating baths. Also, many industrial concerns, including a
number of battery manufacturing plants, use ion exchange to reduce
salt concentrations in incoming water sources.
Ion exchange is highly efficient at recovering metal bearing solu-
tions. Recovery of chromium, nickel, phosphate solution, and sulfuric
acid from anodizing is commercial. A chromic acid recovery efficiency
of 99.5 percent has been demonstrated. Typical data for purification
of rinse water have been reported and are displayed in Table VI1-24.
Sampling at one battery manufacturing plant characterized influent and
effluent streams for an ion exchange unit on a silver bearing waste.
This system was in start-up at the time of sampling, however, and was
not found to be operating effectively.
636
-------
TABLE VI1-24
Parameter
Ion Exchange Performance
Plant A
Plant B
All Values mg/1
Al
Cd
Cr+3
Cr+6
Cu
CN
Au
Fe
Pb
Mn
Ni
Ag
S04
Sn
Zn
Prior To
Purifi-
cation
5.6
5.7
3.1
7.1
4.5
9.8
7.4
4.4
6.2
1.5
1.7
14.8
After
Purifi-
cation
0.20
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.09
0.04
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
Prior To
Purifi-
cation
43.0
3.40
2.30
1 .70
1.60
9.10
210.00
1.10
After
Purifi-
cation
0.10
0.09
0.10
0.01
0.01
0.01
2.00
0.10
Advantages and Limitations. Ion exchange is a versatile technology
applicable to a great many situations. This flexibility, along with
its compact nature and performance, makes ion exchange a very
effective method of wastewater treatment. However, the resins in
these systems can prove to be a limiting factor. The thermal limits
of the anion resins, generally in the vicinity of 60ฐC, could prevent
its use in certain situations. Similarly, nitric acid, chromic acid,
and hydrogen peroxide can all damage the resins, as will iron,
manganese, and copper when present with sufficient concentrations of
dissolved oxygen. Removal of a particular trace contaminant may be
uneconomical because of the presence of other ionic species that are
preferentially removed. The regeneration of the resins presents its
own problems. The cost of the regenerative chemicals can be high. In
addition, the waste streams originating from the regeneration process
are extremely high in pollutant concentrations, although low in
volume. These must be further processed for proper disposal.
Operational Factors. Reliability: With the exception of occasional
clogging or fouling of the resins, ion exchange has proved to be a
highly dependable technology.
Maintainability: Only the normal maintenance of pumps, valves, piping
and other hardware used in the regeneration process is required.
637
-------
Solid Waste Aspects: Few, if any, solids accumulate within the ion
exchangers, and those which do appear are removed by the regeneration
process. Proper prior treatment and planning can eliminate solid
buildup problems altogether. The brine resulting from regeneration of
the ion exchange resin must usually be treated to remove metals before
discharge. This can generate solid waste.
Demonstration Status. All of the applications mentioned in this
document are available for commercial use, and industry sources
estimate the number of units currently in the field at well over 120.
The research and development in ion exchange is focusing on improving
the quality and efficiency of the resins, rather than new
applications. Work is also being done on a continuous regeneration
process whereby the resins are contained on a fluid-transfusible belt.
The belt passes through a compartmentalized tank with ion exchange,
washing, and regeneration sections. The resins are therefore
continually used and regenerated. No such system, however, has been
reported beyond the pilot stage.
Ion exchange is used for nickel recovery at one battery plant, for
silver and water recovery at another, and for trace nickel and cadmium
removal at a third.
20. Membrane Filtration
Membrane filtration is a treatment system for removing precipitated
metals from a wastewater stream. It must therefore be preceded by
those treatment techniques which will properly prepare the wastewater
for solids removal. Typically, a membrane filtration unit is preceded
by pH adjustment or sulfide addition for precipitation of the metals.
These steps are followed by the addition of a proprietary chemical
reagent which causes the precipitate to be non-gelatinous, easily
dewatered, and highly stable. The resulting mixture of pretreated
wastewater and reagent is continuously recirculated through a filter
module and back into a recirculation tank. The filter module contains
tubular membranes. While the reagent-metal hydroxide precipitate
mixture flows through the inside of the tubes, the water and any
dissolved salts permeate the membrane. When the recirculating slurry
reaches a concentration of 10 to 15 percent solids, it is pumped out
of the system as sludge.
Application and Performance. Membrane filtration appears to be
applicable to any wastewater or process water containing metal ions
which can be precipitated using hydroxide, sulfide or carbonate
precipitation. It could function as the primary treatment system, but
also might find application as a polishing treatment (after
precipitation and settling) to ensure continued compliance with metals
limitations. Membrane filtration systems are being used in a number
of industrial applications, particularly in the metal finishing area.
638
-------
They have also been used for toxic metals removal in the metal
fabrication industry and the paper industry.
The permeate is claimed by one manufacturer to contain less than the
effluent concentrations shown in the following table, regardless of
the influent concentrations. These claims have been largely
substantiated by the analysis of water samples at various plants in
various industries.
In the performance predictions for this technology, pollutant
concentrations are reduced to the levels shown below in Table VI1-25
unless lower levels are present in the influent stream.
TABLE VI1-25
MEMBRANE FILTRATION SYSTEM EFFLUENT
Specific
Metal
Al
Cr,
Cr
Cu
Fe
Pb
CN
Ni
Zn
TSS
(+6)
(T)
Manufacturers
Guarantee
0.5
0.02
0.03
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.02
0.1
0.1
Plant 19066
In Out
0.46 0.01
4.13 0.018
18.8 0.043
288 0.3
0.652 0.01
<0.005 <0.005
9.56 0.017
2.09 0.046
Plant 31022
In Out
5.25
98.4
<0.005
0.057
8.00 0.222
21.1 0.263
0.288 0.01
<0.005 <0.005
194 0.352
5.00 0.051
632
0.1
13.0
8.0
Predicted
Performance
0.05
0.20
0.30
0.05
0.02
0.40
0.10
1 .0
Advantages and Limitations. A major advantage of the membrane
filtration system is that installations can use most of the
conventional end-of-pipe systems that may already be in place.
Removal efficiencies are claimed to be excellent, even with sudden
variation of pollutant input rates; however, the effectiveness of the
membrane filtration system can be limited by clogging of the filters.
Because pH changes in the waste stream greatly intensify clogging
problems, the pH must be carefully monitored and controlled. Clogging
can force the shutdown of the system and may interfere with
production. In addition, the relatively high capital cost of this
system may limit its use.
639
-------
Operational Factors. Reliability: Membrane filtration has been shown
to be a very reliable system, provided that the pH is strictly
controlled. Improper pH can result in the clogging of the membrane.
Also, surges in the flow rate of the waste stream must be controlled
in order to prevent solids from passing through the filter and into
the effluent.
Maintainability: The membrane filters must be regularly monitored,
and cleaned or replaced as necessary. Depending on the composition of
the waste stream and its flow rate, frequent cleaning of the filters
may be required. Flushing with hydrochloric acid for 6 to 24 hours
will usually suffice. In addition, the routine maintenance of pumps,
valves, and other plumbing is required.
Solid Waste Aspects: When the recirculating reagent-precipitate
slurry reaches 10 to 15 percent solids, it is pumped out of the
system. It can then be disposed of directly or it can undergo a
dewatering process. Because this sludge contains toxic metals, it
requires proper disposal.
Demonstration Status. There are more than 25 membrane filtration
systems presently in use on metal finishing and similar wastewaters.
Bench scale and pilot studies are being run in an attempt to expand
the list of pollutants for which this system is known to be effective.
Although there are no data on the use of membrane filtration in
battery manufacturing plants, the concept has been successfully
demonstrated using battery plant wastewater. A unit has been
installed at one battery manufacturing plant based on these tests.
21 . Peat Adsorption
Peat moss is a complex natural organic material containing lignin and
cellulose as major constituents. These constituents, particularly
lignin, bear polar functional groups, such as alcohols, aldehydes,
ketones, acids, phenolic hydroxides, and ethers, that can be involved
in chemical bonding. Because of the polar nature of the material, its
adsorption of dissolved solids such as transition metals and polar
organic molecules is quite high. These properties have led to the use
of peat as an agent for the purification of industrial wastewater.
Peat adsorption is a "polishing" process which can achieve very low
effluent concentrations for several pollutants. If the concentrations
of pollutants are above 10 mg/1, then peat adsorption must be preceded
by pH adjustment for metals precipitation and subsequent
clarification. Pretreatment is also required for chromium wastes
using ferric chloride and sodium sulfide. The wastewater is then
pumped into a large metal chamber called a kier which contains a layer
of peat through which the waste stream passes. The water flows to a
640
-------
second kier for further adsorption. The wastewater is then ready
discharge. This system may be automated or manually operated.
for
Application and Performance. Peat adsorption can be used in battery
manufacturing for removal of residual dissolved metals from clarifier
effluent. Peat moss may be used to treat wastewaters containing heavy
metals such-as mercury, cadmium, zinc, copper, iron, nickel, chromium,
and lead, as well as organic matter such as oil, detergents, and dyes.
Peat adsorption is currently used commercially at a textile plant, a
newsprint facility, and a metal reclamation operation.
Table VII-26 contains performance figures obtained from pilot plant
studies. Peat adsorption was preceded by pH adjustment for
precipitation and by clarification.
TABLE VII-26
Pollutant
(mg/1)
Cr+6
Cu
CN
Pb
Hg
Ni
Ag
Sb
Zn
PEAT ADSOPRTION PERFORMANCE
In
35,000
250
36.0
20.0
1 .0
2.5
1 .0
2.5
"1 .5
Out
0.04
0.24
0.7
0.025
0.02
0.07
0.05
0.9
0.25
In addition, pilot plant studies have shown that chelated metal
wastes, as well as the chelating agents themselves, are removed by
contact with peat moss.
Advantages and Limitations. The major advantages of the system
include its ability to yield low pollutant concentrations, its broad
scope in terms of the pollutants eliminated, and its capacity to
accept wide variations of waste water composition.
Limitations include the cost of purchasing, storing, and disposing of
the peat moss; the necessity for regular replacement of the peat may
lead to high operation and maintenance costs. Also, the pH adjustment
must be altered according to the composition of the waste stream.
641
-------
Operational Factors. Reliability: The question of long term
reliability is not yet fully answered. Although the manufacturer
reports it to be a highly reliable system, operating experience is
needed to verify the claim.
Maintainability: The peat moss used in this process soon exhausts its
capacity to adsorb pollutants. At that time, the kiers must be
opened, the peat removed, and fresh peat placed inside. Although this
procedure is easily and quickly accomplished, it must be done at
regular intervals, or the system's efficiency drops drastically.
Solid Waste Aspects: After removal from the kier, the spent peat must
be eliminated. If incineration is used, precautions should be taken
to insure that those pollutants removed from the water are not
released again in the combustion process. Presence of sulfides in the
spent peat, for example, will give rise to sulfur dioxide in the fumes
from burning. The presence of significant quantities of toxic heavy
metals in battery manufacturing wastewater will in general preclude
incineration of peat used in treating these wastes.
Demonstration Status. Only three facilities currently use commercial
adsorption systems in the United States - a textile manufacturer, a
newsprint facility, and a metal reclamation firm. No data have been
reported showing the use of peat adsorption in battery manufacturing
plants.
22. Reverse Osmosis
The process of osmosis involves the passage of a liquid through a
semipermeable membrane from a dilute to a more concentrated solution.
Reverse osmosis (RO) is an operation in which pressure is applied to
the more concentrated solution, forcing the permeate to diffuse
through the membrane and into the more dilute solution. This
filtering action produces a concentrate and a permeate on opposite
sides of the membrane. The concentrate can then be further treated or
returned to the original operation for continued use, while the
permeate water can be recycled for use as clean water. Figure VI1-26
(page 707) depicts a reverse osmosis system.
As illustrated in Figure VII-27, (page 708), there are three basic
configurations used in commercially available RO modules: tubular,
spiral-wound, and hollow fiber. All of these operate on the principle
described above, the major difference being their mechanical and
structural design characteristics.
The tubular membrane module uses a porous tube with a cellulose
acetate membrane lining. A common tubular module consists of a length
of 2.5 cm (1 inch) diameter tube wound on a supporting spool and
encased in a plastic shroud. Feed water is driven into the tube under
642
-------
pressures varying from 40 to 55 atm {600-800 psi). The permeate
passes through the walls of the tube and is collected in a manifold
while the concentrate is drained off at the end of the tube. A less
widely used tubular RO module uses a straight tube contained in a
housing, under the same operating conditions.
Spiral-wound membranes consist of a porous backing sandwiched between
two cellulose acetate membrane sheets and bonded along three edges.
The fourth edge of the composite sheet is attached to a large permeate
collector tube. A spacer screen is then placed on top of the membrane
sandwich, and the entire stack is rolled around the centrally located
tubular permeate collector. The rolled up package is inserted into a
pipe able to withstand the high operating pressures employed in this
process, up to 55 atm (800 psi) with the spiral-wound module. When
the system is operating, the pressurized product water permeates the
membrane and flows through the backing material to the central
collector tube. The concentrate is drained off at the end of the
container pipe and can be reprocessed or sent to further treatment
facilities.
The hollow fiber membrane configuration is made up of a bundle of
polyamide fibers of approximately 0.0075 cm (0.003 in.) OD and 0.0043
cm (0.0017 in.) ID. A commonly used hollow fiber module contains
several hundred thousand of the fibers placed in a long tube, wrapped
around a flow screen, and rolled into a spiral. The fibers are bent
in a U-shape and their ends are supported by an epoxy bond. The
hollow fiber unit is operated under 27 atm (400 psi), the feed water
being dispersed from the center of the module through a porous
distributor tube. Permeate flows through the membrane to the hollow
interiors of the fibers and is collected at the ends of the fibers.
The hollow fiber and spiral-wound modules have a distinct advantage
over the tubular system in that they are able to load a very large
membrane surface area into a relatively small volume. However, these
two membrane types are much more susceptible to fouling than the
tubular system, which has a larger flow channel. This characteristic
also makes the tubular membrane much easier to clean and regenerate
than either the spiral-wound or hollow fiber modules. One
manufacturer claims that their helical tubular module can be
physically wiped clean by passing a soft porous polyurethane plug
under pressure through the module.
Application and Performance. In a number of metal processing plants,
the overflow from the first rinse in a countercurrent setup is
directed to a reverse osmosis unit, where it is separated into two
streams. The concentrated stream contains dragged out chemicals and
is returned to the bath to replace the loss of solution caused by
evaporation and dragout. The dilute stream (the permeate) is routed
to the last rinse tank to provide water for the rinsing operation.
643
-------
The rinse flows from the last tank to the first tank, and the cycle is
complete.
The closed-loop system described above may be supplemented by the
addition of a vacuum evaporator after the RO unit in order to further
reduce the volume of reverse osmosis concentrate. The evaporated
vapor can be condensed and returned to the last rinse tank or sent on
for further treatment.
The largest application has been for the recovery of nickel solutions.
It has been shown that RO can generally be applied to most acid metal
baths with a high degree of performance, providing that the membrane
unit is not overtaxed. The limitations most critical here are the
allowable pH range and maximum operating pressure for each particular
configuration. Adequate prefiltration is also essential. Only three
membrane types are readily available in commercial RO units, and their
overwhelming use has been for the recovery of various acid metal
baths. For the purpose of calculating performance predictions of this
technology, a rejection ratio of 98 percent is assumed for dissolved
salts, with 95 percent permeate recovery.
Advantages and Limitations. The major advantage of reverse osmosis
for handling process effluents is its ability to concentrate dilute
solutions for recovery of salts and chemicals with low power
requirements. No latent heat of vaporization or fusion is required
for effecting separations; the main energy requirement is for a high
pressure pump. It requires relatively little floor space for compact,
high capacity units, and it exhibits good recovery and rejection rates
for a number of typical process solutions. A limitation of the
reverse osmosis process for treatment of process effluents is its
limited temperature range for satisfactory operation. For cellulose
acetate systems, the preferred limits are 18ฐ to 30ฐC (65ฐ to 85ฐF);
higher temperatures will increase the rate of membrane hydrolysis and
reduce system life, while lower temperatures will result in decreased
fluxes with no damage to the membrane. Another limitation is
inability to handle certain solutions. Strong oxidizing agents,
strongly acidic or basic solutions, solvents, and other organic
compounds can cause dissolution of the membrane. Poor rejection of
some compounds such as borates and low molecular weight organics is
another problem. Fouling of membranes by slightly soluble components
in solution or colloids has caused failures, and fouling of membranes
by feed waters with high levels of suspended solids can be a problem.
A final limitation is inability to treat or achieve high concentration
with some solutions. Some concentrated solutions may have initial os-
motic pressures which are so high that they either exceed available
operating pressures or are uneconomical to treat.
644
-------
Operational Factors. Reliability: Very good reliability is achieved
so long as the proper precautions are taken to minimize the chances of
fouling or degrading the membrane. Sufficient testing of the waste
stream prior to application of an RO system will provide the
information needed to insure a successful application.
Maintainability: Membrane life is estimated to range from six months
to three years, depending on the use of the system. Downtime for
flushing or cleaning is on the order of two hours as often as once
each week; a substantial portion of maintenance time must be spent on
cleaning any prefilters installed ahead of the reverse osmosis unit.
Solid Waste Aspects: In a closed loop system utilizing RO there is a
constant recycle of concentrate and a minimal amount of solid waste.
Prefiltration eliminates many solids before they reach the module and
helps keep the buildup to a minimum. These solids require proper
disposal.
Demonstration Status. There are presently at least one hundred
reverse osmosis wastewater applications in a variety of industries.
In addition to these, there are 30 to 40 units being used to provide
pure process water for several industries. Despite the many types and
configurations of membranes, only the spiral-wound cellulose acetate
membrane has had widespread success in commercial applications.
Reverse osmosis is used at one battery plant to treat process
wastewater for reuse as boiler feedwater.
23. Sludge Bed Drying
As a waste treatment procedure, sludge bed drying is employed to
reduce the water content of a variety of sludges to the point where
they are amenable to mechanical collection and removal to landfill.
These beds usually consist of 15 to 45 cm (6 to 18 in.) of sand over a
30 cm (12 in.) deep gravel drain system made up of 3 to 6 mm (1/8 to
1/4 in.) graded gravel overlying drain tiles. Figure VII-28 (page
709) shows the construction of a drying bed.
Drying beds are usually divided into sectional areas approximately 7.5
meters (25 ft) wide x 30 to 60 meters (100 to 200 ft) long. The
partitions may be earth embankments, but more often are made of planks
and supporting grooved posts.
To apply liquid sludge to the sand bed, a closed conduit or a pressure
pipeline with valved outlets at each sand bed section is often
employed. Another method of application is by means of an open
channel with appropriately placed side openings which are controlled
by slide gates.. With either type of delivery system, a concrete
splash slab should be provided to receive the falling sludge and
prevent erosion of the sand surface.
645
-------
Where it is necessary to dewater sludge continuously throughout the
year regardless of the weather, sludge beds may be covered with a
fiberglass reinforced plastic or other roof. Covered drying beds
permit a greater volume of sludge drying per year in most climates
because of the protection afforded from rain or snow and because of
more efficient control of temperature. Depending on the climate, a
combination of open and enclosed beds will provide maximum utilization
of the sludge bed drying facilities.
Application and Performance. Sludge drying beds are a means of
dewatering sludge from clarifiers and thickeners. They are widely
used both in municipal and industrial treatment facilities.
Dewatering of sludge on sand beds occurs by two mechanisms: filtration
of water through the bed and evaporation of water as a result of
radiation and convection. Filtration is generally complete in one to
two days and may result in solids concentrations as high as 15 to 20
percent. The rate of filtration depends on the drainability of the
sludge.
The rate of air drying of sludge is related to temperature, relative
humidity, and air velocity. Evaporation will proceed at a constant
rate to a critical moisture content, then at a falling rate to an
equilibrium moisture content. The average evaporation rate for a
sludge is about 75 percent of that from a free water surface.
Advantages and Limitations. The main advantage of sludge drying beds
over other types of sludge dewatering is the relatively low cost of
construction, operation, and maintenance.
Its disadvantages are the large area of land required and long drying
times ttiat depend, to a great extent, on climate and weather.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Reliability is high with favorable
climactic conditions, proper bed design and care to avoid excessive or
unequal sludge application. If climatic conditions in a given area
are not favorable for adequate drying, a cover may be necessary.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists basically of periodic removal
of the dried sludge. Sand removed from the drying bed with the sludge
must be replaced and the sand layer resurfaced.
The resurfacing of sludge beds is the major expense item in sludge bed
maintenance, but there are other areas which may require attention.
Underdrains occasionally become clogged and have to be cleaned.
Valves or sludge gates that control the flow of sludge to the beds
must be kept watertight. Provision for drainage of lines in winter
should be provided to prevent damage from freezing. The partitions
between beds should be tight so that sludge will not flow from one
646
-------
compartment to another. The outer walls or banks around the beds
should also be watertight.
Solid Waste Aspects: The full sludge drying bed must either be
abandoned or the collected solids must be removed to a landfill.
These solids contain whatever metals or other materials were settled
in the clarifier. Metals will be present as hydroxides, oxides,
sulfides, or other salts. They have the potential for leaching and
contaminating ground water, whatever the location of the semidried
solids. Thus the abandoned bed or landfill should include provision
for runoff control and leachate monitoring.
Demonstration Status. Sludge beds have been in common use in both
municipal and industrial facilities for many years. However,
protection of ground water from contamination is not always adequate.
24. Ultrafiltration
Ultrafiltration (UF) is a process which uses semipermeable polymeric
membranes to separate emulsified or colloidal materials suspended in a
liquid phase by pressurizing the liquid so that it permeates the
membrane. The membrane of an ultrafilter forms a molecular screen
which retains molecular particles based on their differences in size,
shape, and chemical structure. The membrane permits passage of
solvents and lower molecular weight molecules. At present, an
ultrafilter is capable of removing materials with molecular weights in
the range of 1,000 to 100,000 and particles of comparable or larger
sizes.
In an ultrafiltration process, the feed solution is pumped through a
tubular membrane unit. Water and some low molecular weight materials
pass through the membrane under the applied pressure of 2 to 8 atm (10
to 100 psiq). Emulsified oil droplets and suspended particles are
retained, concentrated, and removed continuously. In contrast to
ordinary filtration, retained materials are washed off the membrane
filter rather than held by it. Figure VII-29 (page 710) represents
the ultrafiltration process.
Application and Performance. Ultrafiltration has potential
application to battery manufacturing for separation of oils and
residual solids from a variety of waste streams. In treating battery
manufacturing wastewater, its greatest applicability would be as a
polishing treatment to remove residual precipitated metals after
chemical precipitation and clarification. Successful commercial use,
however, has been primarily for separation of emulsified oils from
wastewater. Over one hundred such units now operate in the United
States, treating emulsified oils from a variety of industrial
processes. Capacities of currently operating units range from a few
hundred gallons a week to 50,000 gallons per day. Concentration of
647
-------
oily emulsions to 60 percent oil or more is possible. Oil
concentrates of 40 percent or more are generally suitable for
incineration, and the permeate can be treated further and in some
cases recycled back to the process. In this way, it is possible to
eliminate contractor removal costs for oil from some oily waste
streams.
The test data in Table VII-27 indicate ultrafiltration performance
(note that UF is not intended to remove dissolved solids):
TABLE VII-27
ULTRAFILTRATION PERFORMANCE
Parameter Feed (mq/1) Permeate (mq/1)
Oil (freon extractable) 1230 4
COD 8920 148
TSS 1380 13
Total Solids 2900 296
The removal percentages shown are typical, but they can be influenced
by pH and other conditions.
The permeate or effluent from the ultrafiltration unit is normally of
a quality that can be reused in industrial applications or discharged
directly. The concentrate from the ultrafiltration unit can be
disposed of as any oily or solid waste.
Advantages and Limitations. Ultrafiltration is sometimes an
attractive alternative to chemical treatment because of lower capital
equipment, installation, and operating costs, very high oil and
suspended solids removal, and little required pretreatment. It places
a positive barrier between pollutants and effluent which reduces the
possibility of extensive pollutant discharge due to operator error or
upset in settling and skimming systems. Alkaline values in alkaline
cleaning solutions can be recovered and reused in process.
A limitation of ultrafiltration for treatment of process effluents is
its narrow temperature range (18ฐ to 30ฐC) for satisfactory operation.
Membrane life decreases with higher temperatures, but flux increases
at elevated temperatures. Therefore, surface area requirements are a
function of temperature and become a tradeoff between initial costs
and replacement costs for the membrane. In addition, ultrafiltration
cannot handle certain solutions. Strong oxidizing agents, solvents,
and other organic compounds can dissolve the membrane. Fouling is
sometimes a problem, although the high velocity of the wastewater
648
-------
normally creates enough turbulence to keep fouling at a minimum.
Large solids particles can sometimes puncture the membrane and must be
removed by gravity settling or filtration prior to the ultrafiltration
unit.
Operational Factors. Reliability: The reliability of an
ultrafiltration system is dependent on the proper filtration, settling
or other treatment of incoming waste streams to prevent damage to the
membrane. Careful pilot studies should be done in each instance to
determine necessary pretreatment steps and the exact membrane type to
be used.
Maintainability: A limited amount of regular maintenance is quired
for the pumping system. In addition, membranes must be periodically
changed. Maintenance associated with membrane plugging can be reduced
by selection of a membrane with optimum physical characteristics and
sufficient velocity of the waste stream. It is occasionally necessary
to pass a detergent solution through the system to remove an oil and
grease film which accumulates on the membrane. With proper
maintenance, membrane life can be greater than twelve months.
Solid Waste Aspects: Ultrafiltration is used primarily to recover
solids and liquids. It therefore eliminates solid waste problems when
the solids (e.g., paint solids) can be recycled to the process.
Otherwise, the stream containing solids must be treated by end-of-pipe
equipment. In the most probable applications within the battery
manufacturing category, the ultrafilter would remove hydroxides or
sulfides of metals which have recovery value.
Demonstration Status. The ultrafiltration process is well developed
and commercially available for treatment of wastewater or recovery of
certain high molecular weight liquid and solid contaminants.
25. Vacuum Filtration
In wastewater treatment plants, sludge dewatering by vacuum filtration
generally uses cylindrical drum filters. These drums have a filter
medium which may be cloth made of natural or synthetic fibers or a
wire-mesh fabric. The drum is suspended above and dips into a vat of
sludge. As the drum rotates slowly, part of its circumference is
subject to an internal vacuum that draws sludge to the filter medium.
Water is drawn through the porous filter cake to a discharge port, and
the dewatered sludge, loosened by compressed air, is scraped from the
filter mesh. Because the dewatering of sludge on vacuum filters is
relativley expensive per kilogram of water removed, the liquid sludge
is frequently thickened prior to processing. A vacuum filter is shown
in Figure VII-30 (page 711).
649
-------
Application and Performance. Vacuum filters are frequently used both
in municipal treatment plants and in a wide variety of industries.
They are most commonly used in larger facilities, which may have a
thickener to double the solids content of clarifier sludge before
vacuum filtering.
The function of vacuum filtration is to reduce the water content of
sludge, so that the solids content increases from about 5 percent to
about 30 percent.
Advantages and Limitations. Although the initial cost and area
requirement of the vacuum filtration system are higher than those of a
centrifuge, the operating cost is lower, and no special provisions for
sound and vibration protection need be made. The dewatered sludge
from this process is in the form of a moist cake and can be
conveniently handled.
Operational Factors. Reliability: Vacuum filter systems have proven
reliable at many industrial and municipal treatment facilities. At
present, the largest municipal installation is at the West Southwest
wastewater treatment plant of Chicago, Illinois, where 96 large
filters were installed in 1925, functioned approximately 25 years, and
then were replaced with larger units. Original vacuum filters at
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, now have over 28 years of continuous
service, and Chicago has some units with similar or greater service
life.
Maintainability: Maintenance consists of the cleaning or replacement
of the filter media, drainage grids, drainage piping, filter pans, and
other parts of the equipment. Experience in a number of vacuum filter
plants indicates that maintenance consumes approximately 5 to 15
percent of the total time. If carbonate buildup or other problems are
unusually severe, maintenance time may be as high as 20 percent. For
this reason, it is desirable to maintain one or more spare units.
If intermittent operation is used, the filter equipment should be
drained and washed each time it is taken out of service. An allowance
for this wash time must be made in filtering schedules.
Solid Waste Aspects: Vacuum filters generate a solid cake which is
usually trucked directly to landfill. All of the metals extracted
from the plant wastewater are concentrated in the filter cake as
hydroxides, oxides, sulfides, or other salts.
Demonstration Status. Vacuum filtration has been widely used for many
years. It is a fully proven, conventional technology for sludge
dewatering. Vacuum filtration is used in two battery manufacturing
plants for sludge dewatering.
650
-------
26. Permanganate Oxidation
Permanganate oxidation is a chemical reaction by which wastewater
pollutants can be oxidized. When the reaction is carried to
completion, the byproducts of the oxidation are not environmentally
harmful. A large number of pollutants can be practically oxidized by
permanganate, including cyanides, hydrogen sulfide, and phenol. In
addition, the chemical oxygne demand (COD) and many odors in
wastewaters and sludges can be significantly reduced by permanganate
oxidation carried to its end point. Potassium permanganate can be
added to wastewater in either dry or slurry form. The oxidation
occurs optimally in the 8 to 9 pH range. As an example of the
permanganate oxidation process, the following chemical equation shows
the oxidation of phenol by potassium permanganate:
3 C6H5(OH) + 28KMn04 + 5H2 > 18 C02 + 28KOH + 28 Mn02.
One of the byproducts of this oxidation is manganese dioxide (Mn02),
which occurs as a relatively stable hydrous colloid usually having a
negative charge. These properties, in addition to its large surface
area, enable manganese dioxide to act as a sorbent for metal cation,
thus enhancing their removal from the wastewater.
Application and Performance. Commercial use of permanganate oxidation
has been primarily for the control of phenol and waste odors. Several
municipal waste treatment facilities report that initial hydrogen
sulfide concentrations (causing serious odor problems) as high as
100 mg/1 have been reduced to zero through the application of
potassium permanganate. A variety of industries (including metal
finishers and agricultural chemical manufacturers) have used
permanganate oxidiation to totally destroy phenol in their
wastewaters.
Advantages and Limitations. Permanganate oxidation has several
advantages as a wastewater treatment technique. Handling and storage
are facilitated by its non-toxic and non-corrosive nature.
Performance has been proved in a number of municipal and industrial
applications. The tendency of the manganese dioxide by-product to act
as a coagulant aid is a distinct advantage over other types of
chemical treatment.
The cost of permanganate oxidation treatment can be limiting where
very large dosages are required to oxidize wastewater pollutants. In
addition, care must be taken in storage to prevent exposure to intense
heat, acids, or reducing agents; exposure could create a fire hazard
or cause explosions. Of greatest concern is the environmental hazard
which the use of manganese chemicals in treatment could cause. Care
must be taken to remove the manganese from treated water before
discharge.
651
-------
Operational Factors. Reliability: Maintenance consists of periodic
sludge removal and cleaning of pump feed lines. Frequency of
maintenance is dependent on wastewater characteristics.
Solid Waste Aspects: Sludge is generated by the process where the
manganese dioxide byproduct tends to act as a coagulant aid. The
sludge from permanganate oxidation can be collected and handled by
standard sludge treatment and processing equipment. No battery
manufacturing facilities are known to use permanganate oxidation for
wastewater treatment at this time.
Demonstration Status. The oxidiation of wastewater pollutants by
potassium permanganate is a proven treatment process in several types
of industries. It has been shown effective in treating a wide variety
of pollutants in both municipal and industrial wastes.
IN-PROCESS POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNIQUES
Introduction
In general, the most cost-effective pollution reduction techniques
available to any industry are those which prevent completely the entry
of pollutants into process wastewater or reduce the volume of
wastewater requiring treatment. These "in-process" controls can
increase treatment effectiveness by presenting the pollutants to
treatment in smaller, more concentrated waste streams from which they
can be more completely removed, or by eliminating pollutants which are
not readily removed or which interfere with the treatment of other
pollutants. They also frequently yield economic benefits both in
decreased waste treatment costs and in decreased consumption or
recovery of process materials. Process water use in battery
manufacturing provides many opportunities for in-process control and,
as Table VII-28 (Page 715) shows, some in-process control measures
have been implemented by many battery manufacturing facilities. The
wide range in process water use and wastewater discharge exhibited by
battery manufacturing plants (as shown in the data presented in
Section V) reflects the present variability of in-process control at
these facilities.
While many in-process pollution control techniques are of general
significance, specific applications of these techniques vary among
different battery manufacturing subcategories. In addition, some in-
process control techniques apply only to specific processing steps.
Generally Applicable In-Process Control Techniques
Techniques which may be applied to reduce pollutant discharges from
most battery manufacturing subcategories include waste segregation,
water recycle and reuse, water use reduction, process modification,
652
-------
and plant maintenance and good housekeeping. Effective in-process
control at most plants will entail a combination of several
techniques. Frequently, the practice of one in-process control
technique is required for the successful implementation of another.
For example, waste segregation is frequently a prerequisite for the
extensive practice of wastewater recycle or reuse.
Waste Segregation - The segregation of wastewater streams is a key
element in cost-effective pollution control. Separation of non-
contact cooling water from process wastewater prevents dilution of the
process wastes and maintains the purity of the non-contact stream for
subsequent reuse or discharge. Similarly, the segregation of process
waste streams differing significantly in their chemical
characteristics can reduce treatment costs and increase effectiveness.
Segregation of specific process wastewater streams is common at
battery manufacturing plants.
Mixing process wastewater with non-contact cooling water generally has
an adverse effect on both performance and treatment cost. The
resultant waste stream is usually too contaminated for continued reuse
in non-contact cooling, or for discharge without treatment. The
increased volume of wastewater increases the size and cost of treat-
ment facilities and lowers removal effectiveness. Thus a plant which
segregates non-contact cooling water and other nonprocess waters from
process wastewater can generally achieve a lower mass discharge of
pollutants while incurring lower treatment costs.
Battery manufacturing plants commonly produce multiple process
wastewater streams having significantly different chemical
characteristics; some are high in toxic metals, some may contain
primarily suspended solids, and others may be quite dilute.
Wastewater from a specific process operation usually contains only a
few of the many pollutants generated at a particular site.
Segregation of these individual process waste streams may allow
reductions in treatment costs and pollutant discharges.
The segregation of dilute process waste streams from those bearing
high pollutant loads often allows further process use of the dilute
streams. Some may be cycled to the process from which they were
discharged while others may be suitable for use in another process.
Sometimes, the dilute process waste streams are suitable for
incorporation into the product.
Segregation of waste streams containing high levels of suspended
solids allows separate treatment of these streams in relatively
inexpensive settling systems. Often the clarified wastewater is
suitable for further process use and both pollutant loads and the
wastewater volume requiring further treatment are reduced.
Segregation and separate treatment of these waste streams may yield an
653
-------
additional economic benefit to the plant by allowing increased
recovery of process materials. Because the solids borne by wastewater
from a specific process operation are primarily composed of materials
used in that operation, sludges resulting from separate settling of
these streams may frequently be reclaimed for use in the process with
little or no processing. 'This technique presently is used to recover
materials used in processing pasted, electrodeposited, and impregnated
electrodes at battery manufacturing plants.
Wastewater Recycle and Reuse - The recycle or reuse of process
wastewater is a particularly effective technique for the reduction of
both pollutant discharges and treatment costs. The term "recycle" is
used to designate the return of process wastewater to the process or
processes from which it originated, while "reuse" refers to the use of
wastewater from one process in another. Both recycle and reuse of
process wastewater are presently practiced at battery manufacturing
plants although recycle is more extensively used. The most frequently
recycled waste streams include air pollution control scrubber
discharges, and wastewater from equipment and area cleaning. Numerous
other process wastewater streams from battery manufacturing activities
may also be recycled or reused.
Both recycle and reuse are frequently possible without treatment of
the wastewater; process pollutants present in the waste stream are
often tolerable (or occasionally even beneficial) for process use.
Recycle or reuse in these instances yields cost savings by reducing
the volume of wastewater requiring treatment. Where treatment is
required for recycle or reuse, it is frequently considerably simpler
than the treatment necessary to achieve effluent quality suitable for
release to the environment. Treatment prior to recycle or reuse
observed in present practice is generally restricted to simple
settling or neutralization. Since these treatment practices are less
costly than those used prior to discharge, economic as well as
environmental benefits are usually realized. In addition to these in-
process recycle and reuse practices, some plants are observed to
return part or all of the treated effluent from an end-of-pipe
treatment system for further process use.
Recycle can usually be implemented with minimal complications and
expense. Treatment requirements are likely to be least for recycle
and piping to remote locations in the plant is not generally required.
Common points of wastewater recycle in present practice include air
pollution control scrubbers and equipment and area wash water. In
addition, recycle of wastewater is observed in some product rinsing
operations and in contact cooling.
The rate of water used in wet scrubbers is determined by the
requirement for adequate contact with the air being scrubbed and not
654
-------
by the mass of pollutants to be removed. As a result, wastewater
streams from once-through scrubbers are characteristically very dilute
and high in volume. These streams can usually be recycled extensively
without treatment with no deleterious effect on scrubber performance.
Limited treatment such as neutralization where acid fumes are scrubbed
can significantly increase the practical recycle rate.
Water used in washing process equipment and production floor areas
frequently serves primarily to remove solid materials and is often
treated by settling and recycled. This practice is especially
prevalent at lead subcategory plants but is observed in other sub-
categories as well. In some instances the settled solids as well as
the clarified wastewater are returned for use in the process. The
extent of recycle of these waste streams is characteristically very
high, and in many cases no wastewater is discharged from the recycle
loop.
Water used in product rinsing is also recirculated in some cases,
especially from battery rinse operations. This practice is ultimately
limited by the concentrations of materials rinsed off the product in
the rinsewater. Wastewater from contact cooling operations also may
contain low concentrations of pollutants which do not interfere with
the recycle of these streams. In some cases, recycle of contact
cooling water with no treatment is observed while in others,
provisions for heat removal in cooling towers is required. Where
contact cooling water becomes heavily contaminated with acid,
neutralization may be required to minimize corrosion.
Water used in vacuum pump seals and ejectors commonly becomes
contaminated with process pollutants. The levels of contaminants in
these high volume waste streams are sometimes low enough to allow
recycle to the process. With minimal treatment, a high degree of
recycle of wastewater from contact cooling streams may require pro-
visions for neutralization or removal of heat.
The extent of recycle possible in most process water uses is
ultimately limited by increasing concentrations of dissolved solids in
the water. The buildup of dissolved salts generally necessitates some
small discharge or "blowdown" from the process to treatment. In some
cases, the rate of addition of dissolved salts may be sufficiently low
to be balanced by removal of dissolved solids in water entrained in
settled solids. In these cases, complete recycle with no discharge
can be achieved. In other instances, the contaminants which build up
in the recycle loop may be compatible with another process operation,
and the "blowdown" may be used in another process. One example of
this condition is observed in lead subcategory scrubber, battery
rinse, and contact cooling wastes which become increasingly laden with
sulfuric acid and lead during recycle. Small volumes bled from these
655
-------
recycle loops may be used in diluting concentrated acid to prepare
battery electrolyte as observed at some existing facilities.
Water Use Reduction - The volume of wastewater discharge from a plant
or specific process operation may be reduced simply eliminating excess
flow and unnecessary water use. Often this may be accomplished with
no change in the manufacturing process or equipment and without any
capital expenditure. A comparison of the volumes of process water
used in and discharged from equivalent process operations at different
battery manufacturing plants or on different days at the same plant
indicates numerous opportunities for water use reductions. Additional
reductions in process water use and discharge may be achieved by
modifications to process techniques and equipment.
Many production units in battery manufacturing plants were observed to
operate intermittently or at highly variable production rates. The
practice of shutting off process water flow during periods when the
unit is not operating and of adjusting flow rates during periods of
low production can prevent much unnecessary water use. Water may be
shut off and controlled manually or through automatically controlled
valves. Manual adjustment involves the human factor and has been
found to be somewhat unreliable in practice; production personnel
often fail to turn off manual valves when production units are shut
down and tend to increase water flow rates to maximum levels "to
insure good operation" regardless of production activity. Automatic
shut off valves may be used to turn off water flows when production
units are inactive. Automatic adjustment of flow rates according to
production levels requires more sophisticated control systems
incorporating production rate sensors.
Observations and flow measurements at visited battery manufacturing
plants indicate that automatic flow controls are rarely employed.
Manual control of process water use is generally observed in process
rinse operations, and little or no adjustment of these flows to
production level was practiced. The present situation is exemplified
by a rinse operation at one plant where the daily average production
normalized discharge flow rate was observed to vary from 90 to 1200
I/kg over a three-day span. Thus, significant reductions in pollutant
discharges can be achieved by the application of flow control in this
category at relatively little cost.
Additional flow reductions may be achieved by the implementation of
more effective water use in some process operations. These measures
generally require the purchase or modification of some process
equipment and involve larger capital investment than the simple flow
control measures discussed above. The most significant areas for
improvement in water use effectiveness are in rinsing operations and
in equipment and area cleanup. Under some circumstances, process
water use in removing excess materials from electrode stock and in
656
-------
washing batteries may be eliminated without any significant change in
the manufacturing process or the final product.
Rinsing is a common operation in the manufacture of batteries and a
major source of wastewater discharge at most plants. Efficient
rinsing implies the removal of the greatest possible mass of material
in the smallest possible volume of water. It is achieved by ensuring
that the material removed is distributed uniformly through the rinse
water. (The high porosity of many of the electrode structures makes
the achievement of uniform mixing difficult, necessitating long
product residence times and high mixing rates in rinses.) Rinsing
efficiency is also increased by the use of multi-stage and
countercurrent rinses. Multi-stage rinses reduce the total rinse
water requirements by allowing the removal of most of the contaminants
in more concentrated waste streams with only the final stage rinse
diluted to the levels required for final product purity. In a
countercurrent rinse, dilute wastewater from each rinse stage is
reused in the preceding rinse stage and all of the contaminants are
discharged in a single concentrated waste stream.
Equipment and area cleanup practices observed at battery manufacturing
plants vary widely. While some plants employ completely dry cleanup
techniques, many others use water with varying degrees of efficiency.
The practice of "hosing down" equipment and production areas generally
represents a very inefficient use of water, especially when hoses are
left running during periods when they are not used. Alternative
techniques which use water more efficiently include floor wash
machines and bucket and sponge or bucket and mop techniques as
observed at some plants.
A major factor necessitating battery washing in many cases is
electrolyte spillage on the battery case during filling. This
spillage and subsequent wash requirements are maximized when batteries
are filled by immersion or by "overfill and withdraw." Water use in
battery washing may be significantly reduced by the use of filling
techniques and equipment which add the correct amount of electrolyte
to the battery without overfilling and which minimize drips and spills
on the battery case. These electrolyte addition techniques and the
production of finished batteries with little or no battery washing are
observed at numerous plants in the category.
Additional reduction in process water use and wastewater discharge may
be achieved by the substitution of dry air pollution control devices
such as baghouses for wet scrubbers where the emissions requiring
control are amenable to these techniques.
657
-------
Multi-stage and Countercurrent Rinsing
Of the many schemes discussed above for reduction of water use in a
battery production plant, multi-stage and countercurrent rinsing are
most likely to result in the greatest reduction of water consumption
and use.
Multi-stage and countercurrent rinses are employed at many plants in
the battery manufacturing category. In most cases, however, these
techniques are not combined with effective flow control, and the
wastewater discharge volumes from the multi-stage or countercurrent
rinses are as large as or larger than corresponding single stage rinse
flows at other plants. Three instances of countercurrent rinsing with
reasonable levels of flow control are noted to illustrate the benefits
which may be realized by this technique within the battery
manufacturing category.
Two lead subcategory plants use two-stage countercurrent rinses to
rinse electrodes after open-case formation. These rinses discharge
3.3 and 3.6 I/kg. At 28 other plants, single stage rinses are used
after open-case formation with an average discharge of 20.9 I/kg.
Thus, the use of two-stage countercurrent rinsing in this application
is seen to reduce rinse wastewater flow by a factor of 6.05 (83% flow
reduction). Still further reductions would result from better
operation of these rinse installations or from the use of additional
countercurrent stages.
One cadmium subcategory plant has recently implemented a five-stage
countercurrent rinse after electrode impregnation. This change has
reduced the rinse discharge from 150,000 to 12,000 gal/day. In
addition, the countercurrent rinse discharge is sufficiently
concentrated to be sold for its caustic (NaOH) content. The flow
rates before and after implementation of the cascade rinse indicate a
12.5 fold reduction in wastewater flow by this technique. Since a
substantial increase in production also occurred, the actual flow
reduction attributable to countercurrent rinsing must have been
greater. These results illustrate the flow reductions which may be
achieved by countercurrent rinsing. The transfer of this performance
to other process elements and subcategories requires the consideration
of rinsing factors which may differ.
Rinse water requirements and the benefits of countercurrent rinsing
may be influenced by the volume of drag-out solution carried into each
rinse stage by the electrode or material being rinsed, by the number
of rinse stages used, by the initial concentrations of impurities
being removed, and by the final product cleanliness required. The
influence of these factors is expressed in the rinsing equation which
may be stated simply as:
658
-------
Co (1/n)
Vr - x TO
Vr is the flow through each rinse stage.
Co is the concentration of the contaminant (s) in
the initial process bath
Cf is the concentration of the contaminant (s) in
the final rinse to give acceptable product
cleanliness
n is the number of rinse stages employed,
and
VD is the flow of drag-out carried into each
rinse stage
For a multi-stage rinse, the total volume of rinse wastewater is equal
to n times Vr while for a countercurrent rinse, Vr is the total volume
of wastewater discharge.
Drag-out is solution which remains in the pores and on the surface of
electrodes or materials being rinsed when they are removed from
process baths or rinses. In battery manufacturing, drag-out volumes
may be quite high because the high porosity and surface areas of
electrodes. Based on porosity and surface characteristics, it is
estimated that the drag-out volume will be approximately 20 percent of
the apparent electrode volume (including pores). Because of the
highly porous nature of many electrodes, perfect mixing in each rinse
generally is not achieved, and deviation from ideal rinsing is
anticipated.
The application of the rinsing equation with these considerations to
the lead subcategory example cited above provides a basis for the
transfer of countercurrent rinse performance to other subcategories
and process elements. Based on the specific gravities of component
materials and approximately 20 percent porosity, the apparent specific
gravity of lead electrodes may be estimated as 7.0; the volume of
drag-out per unit weight of lead is:
659
-------
VD ซ 0.2 ซ 0.029 I/kg.
7.0
Based on the average single stage rinse flow, the rinse
ratio (equal to Co/Cf) is:
- Vr ซ 20.9 ซ 720
VD 0.029
The calculated flow for a two stage countercurrent rinse
providing equivalent product cleaning is then given by
V*r ซ Co (ป/n) x Vd ซ 720 ฐ'ง x 0.029 ซ 0.78 I/kg.
Cf
This calculated flow yields a rinse ratio of 26.8 and is 4.4 times
(26.8 r 6.05) lower than the observed countercurrent rinse flow
reflecting the extent to which ideal mixing is not achieved in the
rinses. One of these two plants was visited for sampling and was
observed to employ no mixing or agitation in the rinse tanks.
Therefore, performance significantly closer to the ideal should be
attainable by adding agitation to the rinse tanks.
A corresponding comparison between theoretical and actual
countercurrent rinse performance cannot be made for the cadmium
subcategory plant because of uncertainties in production level, number
of impregnation and rinse cycles performed on each electrode, and
electrode pore volume during the early stages of impregnation (a
process which fills electrode pores with active material to achieve
the final electrode porosity).
To transfer countercurrent rinse results to other process elements,
allowance must be made for the fact that required rinse ratios may be
substantially different in order to provide adequate contaminant
removal from some electrodes. To encompass all process element
requirements, an extreme case is considered in which contaminants
initially present at 10 percent (100,000 mg/1) in a process bath must
be reduced to a nearly immeasurable 1.0 mg/kg (one part per million)
in the final rinsed electrode. The 20 percent drag-out found
appropriate for lead electrodes is also applicable to other electrode
types and materials rinsed, since all have high porosity and surface
area requirements in order to sustain high current densities. The
specific gravities of most electrode materials are lower than those of
lead and its salts. Consequently, lower electrode densities are
expected. An estimated specific gravity of 4.5 is used for purposes
of this calculation. Also, the active materials used as the basis of
production normalizing parameters make up only approximately 45
percent of the total electrode weight in most cases.
660
-------
On the basis of these figures, it may be calculated that the volume of
drag-out amounts to:
VD ซ 0.2 ป 0.044 I/kg of electrode
4.5
or
VD ซ 0.2 x ] ซ 0.1 I/kg of pnp
4.5 0.45
The concentration of pollutant in the final rinse may be calculated as
10 mg/1 based on the factors postulated and calculated above. The
rinse ratio (Co/Cf) is 10,000.
Using these rinsing parameters, theoretical rinse flow requirements
may be calculated for single stage rinses and for a variety of multi-
stage and countercurrent rinses. Both ideal flows and flows increased
by the 4.4 factor found in the lead subcategory are shown for counter-
current rinses.
Number of Required Rinse Water per Mass of Product (pnp)
Rinse (I/kg)
Stages Multi-stage Countercurrent
Ideal Ideal Adjusted Rinse
Ratio
1 1000 1000
2 20 10 44.0 22.7
3 6.6 2.2 9.68 103.3
4 4.0 1.0 4.4 227.3
5 3.2 0.63 2.77 361.
7 2.6 0.37 1.63 613.
10 2.5 0.25 1.1 909.
Single stage rinse flow requirements calculated for these conditions
are somewhat higher than those presently observed in the battery
manufacturing category. The highest reported rinse flow is
approximately 2000 I/kg, and most are substantially less than
1000 I/kg. This indicates that the cleanliness level has been
conservatively estimated.
In general, these calculations confirm that extreme conditions have
been chosen for the calculations and that the lead subcategory data
have been transferred to rinsing requirements more severe in terms of
drag-out and cleanliness than any presently encountered in practice.
661
-------
Therefore, countercurrent rinse discharge flows lower than those
calculated should be attainable in all process elements in the
category.
In later sections of this document it is necessary to calculate the
wastewater generation when countercurrent cascade rinsing is
substituted for single stage rinsing. A rinse ratio of 6.6 is used
later for this calculation. It is based on the 6.05 rinse ratio found
in existing lead subcategory plants with an allowance of 10 percent
added for increased efficiency obtained by improved agitation. As
shown above, a rinse ratio of 22 would be expected from a two stage
system and much higher ratios are obtained by using additional stages.
Process Modification - There are numerous process alternatives for the
manufacture of batteries in most of the battery manufacturing
subcategories, and the alternatives frequently differ significantly in
the quantity and quality of wastewater produced. Most process
modifications which may be considered as techniques for reducing
pollutant discharge are specific to individual subcategories and are
discussed in subsequent sections. In general, process modifications
considered deal with changes in electrolyte addition techniques as
discussed previously and changes in electrode formation processes. In
addition, changes in amalgamation procedures and improvements in
process control to reduce rework requirements are viable techniques to
reduce wastewater discharge at some sites.
One process modification applicable to several subcategories is the
substitution of alternative formulations for cell wash materials
containing chromate and cyanide. This substitution will eliminate
these pollutants from process wastewater at the plants which presently
use them.
Plant Maintenance and Good Housekeeping - Housekeeping practices are
particularly significant for pollution control at battery
manufacturing facilities. Large quantities of toxic materials used as
active materials in battery electrodes are handled and may be spilled
in production areas. The use of water in cleaning up these materials
may contribute significantly to wastewater discharges at some
facilities.
Maintenance practices are observed to be important in eliminating
unnecessary spills and leaks and in reducing contamination of non-
contact cooling water. Examples of the impact of faulty maintenance
were observed in the contamination of non-contact cooling water in a
leaking ball mill cooling jacket at one lead subcategory facility and
in the use of excess water in hosing down a malfunctioning
amalgamation blender. In both cases, the volume of wastewater
requiring treatment and losses of process materials were increased
662
-------
resulting in increased treatment and manufacturing process costs as
well as increased pollutant discharges.
Good housekeeping encompasses a variety of plant design and operating
practices which are important for efficient plant operation and worker
hygiene and safety as well as for water pollution control. These
include:
Floor maintenance and treatment in areas where toxic
materials are handled to minimize cracks and pores in which
spilled materials may lodge. This reduces the volume of
water required to clean up spills and increases the
efficiency of dry cleanup techniques.
Preventing drips and spills and collecting those which can
not be avoided, especially in electrolyte addition areas.
Isolating the collected materials rather than letting them
run over equipment and floor surfaces can greatly reduce
wash-down requirements and also allow the collected
materials to be returned for process use instead of being
discharged to waste treatment.
Reduction in spillage in bulk handling by provision for dust
control and for rapid dry cleanup of spilled materials.
Cadmium Subcateqory
Cadmium subcategory manufacturing processes involve a wide variety of
process water uses in active material preparation, electrode
processing and rinses, cell washing, equipment and area washing, and
air pollution control. Consequently, many different in-process
control techniques are applicable. These include waste segregation,
material recovery, process water recycle and reuse, water use control
(reduction), and process modification possibilities.
Waste Segregation - The segregation of wastewater streams from
individual process operations is presently practiced by some
manufacturers in this subcategory. Segregation of specific waste
streams is useful in allowing recycle and reuse and in making the
recovery of some process materials feasible. Waste streams segregated
for these purposes include wet air pollution control scrubber
discharges which are segregated for recycle, formation process
solutions which are segregated for reuse in formation or in other
process operations and waste streams from impregnation,
electrodeposition and wet plate cleaning or brushing which are
segregated to allow material recovery. Segregation of process wastes
is not practiced for end-of-pipe treatment in this subcategory because
all process waste streams are amenable to treatment by the same
technologies. The segregation of noncontact cooling and heating water
663
-------
from process wastewater is essential for effective removal of process
pollutants in end-of-pipe treatment, and it is presently practiced at
most plants in the subcategory. Many plants recirculate non-contact
cooling water through cooling towers.
Material Recovery - Cadmium or nickel hydroxide particles, formed
during impregnation or electrodeposition, do not adhere to the
electrode structure and are removed in rinse or process discharges.
If the discharges from cathode and anode processes are segregated,
these particles may be recovered by settling to yield separate sludges
rich in cadmium or nickel. The metal values may be recovered from
these sludges. This practice, presently employed in the subcategory,
yields an economic return from recovered cadmium and nickel; reduces
the waste loads flowing to treatment; and reduces the quantities of
toxic metal sludge requiring disposal.
Wastewater Recycle and Reuse - Process wastewater streams produced in
this subcategory which are presently recycled or suitable for recycle
include wet scrubber discharges, wastewater from scrubbing impregnated
electrodes or electrode stock, and process solutions used in material
deposition and electrode formation. Recycle of these waste streams is
presently practiced and is observed to yield large reductions in
process wastewater flow.
Air pollution control scrubbers are employed to control emissions of
acid fumes and toxic metals (cadmium and nickel) from process
solutions used in electrodeposition, impregnation, active material
preparation and material recovery operations. Recycle of water used
in these scrubbers is common but not universal. Of six wet scrubbers
reported in use at plants in this subcategory, five employ extensive
recycle of the scrubber water. Discharge flow rates from recirculated
scrubber "systems were as low as 1.1 1/hr, while the non-recirculated
scrubber had a discharge of 9538 1/hr. In many cases, caustic
solutions are used in the scrubbers and recirculated until neutralized
by the collected acid fumes. This practice results in the
presentation to treatment of a concentrated small volume discharge
from which pollutants may be effectively removed.
Wet cleaning of impregnated electrodes or electrode stock results in
large volumes of wastewater bearing high concentrations of particulate
nickel or cadmium hydroxide. This wastewater may be treated by
settling and recycled for continued use in the wet scrubbing
operation. Since the primary contaminants in this waste stream are
suspended solids, a very high degree of recycle after settling is
practical. Recycle of this waste stream following settling to remove
suspended solids is practiced at one plant with wastewater discharged
only once per month. The volume of wastewater from this process after
recycle is only 4.8 I/kg. This may be compared to a discharge volume
664
-------
of 108 I/kg observed at another plant which does not recycle electrode
scrubbing wastewater.
Water used in washing process equipment and production floor areas in
this subcategory also becomes contaminated primarily with suspended
solids. The wastewater may be treated by settling and recycled for
further use in floor and equipment wash operations. Recycle of these
waste streams will allow effective maintenance of equipment and floor
areas with little or no resultant process wastewater discharge.
Process solutions used in material deposition and electrode formation
are extensively reused at most plants and represent a minimal
contribution to the total wastewater flow. Reuse of these process
solutions significantly reduces pollutant loads discharged to waste
treatment and also yields economic benefits in reduced consumption of
process chemicals.
Water Use Control and Reduction - Large volumes of process water are
used in rinsing at cadmium subcategory plants. On site observations
at several plants and analysis of flow rate information from other
sites indicate that effective control of water use in these operations
is not achieved, and that substantial reductions from present
discharge rates may be attained by instituting effective water use
control. The lack of effective water use control in these operations
is demonstrated by the wide range of flow rates among plants and on
different days at the same plant. Practices contributing to excessive
water use and discharge in rinsing were observed during sampling
visits at four cadmium subcategory plants. At one plant for example,
measured rinse flow was observed to be about 25 percent greater than
the values reported in the dcp, although the production rate was about
50 percent less than that reported. The wastewater discharge per unit
of production was approximately three times the value indicated by dcp
information. At this site rinsing was practiced on a batch basis, and
the rinse cycle included an overflow period after the rinse tank was
filled with water. The length of this overflow period was observed to
vary arbitrarily and was frequently lengthened considerably when the
water was left running through coffee breaks and meals. Similar rinse
flow variability was observed at other plants.
Flows reported in dcp's for wastewater discharge from process rinses
associated with anode and nickel cathode electrodeposition and
impregnation are attainable by implementation of rinse flow control at
all sites. This can be achieved through the use of automatic shut-
offs which will close water supply valves when the process line is not
running and adjustment of rinse flow rates when production rates vary.
Further reductions may be achieved by application of multi-stage
countercurrent rinse techniques. While multi-stage rinses are common
in the subcategory, countercurrent rinsing is practiced only sometimes
665
-------
and is not accompanied by effective water use control. Implementation
of countercurrent rinses in this subcategory will differ at different
plants since rinsing equipment and techniques are observed to vary.
Another technique used to reduce process flow rates is the use of dry
air pollution control equipment such as bag houses. Two plants
reported using bag houses to control dust emissions caused by
processing dry materials.
Wastes from electrolyte preparation and addition to cells result from
equipment washing and from drips and spills of electrolyte.
Collection of electrolyte drips in filling operations and reusing this
material in filling cells can aid in eliminating this waste stream.
Wastewater from washing electrolyte preparation and addition equipment
is reported by only a few plants. Other plants evidently use dry
equipment maintenance procedures or recycle equipment wash water.
Floor cleaning at cadmium subcategory plants may also be accomplished
with or without the use of process water, and where water is used, the
efficiency of use varies. Efficient use of floor wash water may
substantially reduce wastewater discharge at some plants as indicated
by the comparison of reported normalized discharge flows for this
activity which range from 0.25 to 33.4 liters per kilogram of finished
cells produced. Dry floor cleanup is a viable option in this
subcategory since most of the materials requiring removal from pro-
duction floor areas are dry solids. Seven active plants in the
subcategory reported no process wastewater from washing floors and
apparently employ dry floor cleaning techniques. Only two plants in
the subcategory reported wastewater discharge from floor cleaning.
Process Modification - Numerous manufacturing processes for the pro-
duction of cadmium subcategory batteries are observed. They vary
widely in the volume and characteristics of process wastewater pro-
duced. Many of the process variations, however, correspond to
variations in battery performance characteristics and therefore may
not be suitable for use as bases for pollutant discharge reductions
throughout the subcategory. For example, the manufacture of pasted
and pocket plate powder electrodes is observed to yield significantly
lower wastewater discharges than the production of sintered,
impregnated electrodes, but the current and power densities attained
in pocket plate electrodes are lower than those in sintered,
impregnated electrodes. Since the products of these two process
alternatives are not equivalent, process modification by substitution
of one for the other may not be a viable basis for effluent
limitations. There are, however, some observed or potential process
modifications which can result in reduced pollutant discharges without
significantly affecting product characteristics. These include
modifications in electrode formation practices and improvements in
process control on active material preparation operations.
666
-------
In-case formation appears to be feasible without any apparent impact
on battery performance characteristics. This practice which
eliminates wastewater discharge from spent formation solutions and
from post formation rinses could be applied to reduce pollutant
discharges.
In the production of cadmium powder for use in battery manufacturing,
the product is rinsed after precipitation. Improved process control
of the precipitation step and of rinsing would reduce the volume of
wastewater from this operation by approximately 40%.
Calcium Subcateqory
Process water use in this subcategory is very limited. Consequently,
the opportunities for in-process controls significantly reducing water
use or wastewater discharge are correspondingly limited. Water used
in the disposal of calcium scrap may be reduced by limiting the amount
of scrap produced and by limiting the amount of water used per unit
weight of scrap disposed. Alternatively, this waste source may be
eliminated altogether by allowing the calcium to react with
atmospheric moisture and disposing of the resultant calcium hydroxide
as a solid waste.
Lead Subcateqory
Unfortunately, most existing treatment plants in this subcategory were
found to be improperly designed, maintained, or operated. In this
subcategory, some in-process control technologies which significantly
reduce pollutant discharge are commonly practiced and are consequently
included in best practicable treatment technology. Some of these
control technologies are discussed below.
Process water uses in lead subcategory plants include contact cooling,
electrode rinsing, battery washing, equipment and area washing, and
air pollution control scrubbers. Wastewater discharges from these
sources may be reduced or eliminated by application of a variety of
in-process control techniques. Most of the identified applicable in-
process controls are presently in use at one or more plants in the
subcategory. Some, such as pasting area wash down recirculation,
scrubber discharge recycle, use of dry air pollution control
techniques, and elimination of contact cooling water discharges, are
extensively practiced.
Waste Segregation - The segregation of wastewater streams from
different process operations is a vital part of effective pollution
control at lead subcategory plants. Wastewater from pasting areas and
equipment wash-down is commonly segregated from other process waste
streams because it carries extremely high concentrations of
recoverable suspended lead oxide particles. Scrubber discharges and
667
-------
battery rinse water are segregated to allow recycle or reuse. In
addition, acid used in forming batteries is kept separate from process
wastewater at essentially all sites so that it can be reused in
formation. Battery wash water may also be segregated when it contains
detergents and significant quantities of oil and grease.
Material Recovery - The recovery of particulate lead oxide from paste
preparation and application wastes is a common practice at lead
subcategory plants which reduces both wastewater pollutant loads and
the mass of solid waste requiring disposal. This, material is
generally recovered by settling from the equipment and area wash water
as a part of treatment of this stream for recycle. Approximately 30
percent of lead subcategory plants reuse the settled solids directly
in paste formulation.
Wastewater Recycle and Reuse - Process wastewater streams that are
presently recycled or reused in this subcategory include pasting area
wash-down, scrubber wastewater, battery rinse water and contact
cooling water. In addition, some plants in the subcategory treated
effluent water for reuse in the manufacturing process. While the
extent of recycle and reuse varies from plant to plant, numerous
examples in present practice show that these techniques can be highly
effective in reducing wastewater volume and pollutant discharges.
Equipment and Floor Wash Water - Recycle from paste preparation and
application areas is widespread. These recycle systems commonly
include settling for suspended solids removal and operate as
completely closed loop systems resulting in the complete elimination
of process wastewater discharge from this source. Water from the
recirculated wash-down stream may be used in the paste mixing
operation and ultimately be evaporated from the plates in drying and
curing. Some water is also entrained with the solids settled from the
wastewater. As a result, this operation often has a net negative
water balance and requires the introduction of fresh make-up or of
wastewater from another process which is suitable for reuse in this
way. Fifty-five plants in the subcategory reported the reuse of past-
ing area wastewater.
Wet scrubbers are used for the control of sulfuric acid fumes and mist
resulting from electrolyte preparation and battery formation
processes. Significant recycle of these scrubber streams is possible
before acid concentrations become high enough to impair fume scrubbing
efficiency. If no reagents are added, the concentrated scrubber
discharge after recycle is suitable for use in electrolyte
formulation. Alternatively, caustic solutions may be used in the
scrubber allowing a still higher degree of recycle and reducing the
volume of discharge to very low values.
668
-------
Rinsing of. Batteries is performed primarily to remove sulfuric acid
spilled on the outside of the battery case. If the acid results from
overfilling the battery or dumping electrolyte from the battery, or if
it has previously been used in formation it will contain lead and
other metals. The wastewater from rinsing the batteries will
consequently contain acid, lead, and other contaminants from process
conveyors, racks, or floors over which the acidic rinse* water is
permitted to run. Failure to segregate the battery rinse water from
battery wash water in which detergent formulations are used may also
result in the presence of detergents in this waste stream.
The rinse water characteristically becomes only slightly contaminated
in a single use and it may be recycled for use in rinsing several
times before acidity becomes too high for effective rinsing. When the
acidity becomes too high for further use in rinsing, the rinse water
may be reused in pasting area washdown or in electrolyte preparation.
Use in acid cutting for electrolyte, however, requires that levels of
contaminants, especially iron, be generally low. This may be achieved
by care in rinsing to prevent contact of the corrosive rinse water
with exposed iron and steel surfaces or contaminated floor areas.
Alternatively, the spent rinse water may be treated to remove iron
prior to use in acid cutting. Nineteen plants reported the reuse of
rinse water. Five of these plants treat process wastewater before
reusing in the rinse operations. Typically, treatment involves pH
adjustment and settling to remove particulates before the wastewater
is reused for rinsing purposes.
Contact cooling water used in battery formation may be recirculated
extensively as described for battery rinse water. In this case, the
rate of acid buildup in the recycled stream should be quite low, but
the water may require cooling in a cooling tower for continued use. A
small bleed from the recycle loop is sufficient to control the levels
of acid and lead in the water, and the bleed stream may be reused in
acid cutting, pasting area washdown or paste preparation. Caustic may
be added to the recycled water to maintain an alkaline or neutral pH
and prevent corrosion or safety hazards.
Iron accumulating in the contact cooling water as a result of the
contact of acid water with production racks or conveyors may be an
obstacle to reuse of the bleed stream. This problem may be resolved
either by treatment to remove the iron by chemical precipitation or by
the prevention of contamination through the use of epoxy coatings on
racks or conveyors and control of contact cooling water flow patterns.
Wastewater from vacuum pump seals and ejectors used in dehydrating
formed plates for use in dry charged batteries also may be extensively
recycled. Since the level of contamination in waste streams from this
use is low, recycle may drastically reduce the high volume discharges
presently produced at some facilities.
669
-------
Discharges from steam curing processes and wastewater from general
floor area and equipment washdown can be retained for reuse in acid
cutting operations, along with bleed streams from recirculation
systems used for wet scrubbers, contact cooling, or battery rinsing.
Process Modification - While there are numerous process alternatives
for many operations in the manufacture of batteries in the lead
subcategory, the alternatives which are most significant in their
impact on wastewater discharge are in the processes for formation of
the battery electrodes. In addition, differences in plate curing
techniques also influence process wastewater discharge to some extent,
as does the addition of a rinse prior to battery washing.
The greatest differences in wastewater discharge in this subcategory
result from the difference between dehydrated plate battery
manufacture and wet or damp charged battery manufacture. This
difference in formation procedures also results in significant
differences in product characteristics as discussed in Section V.
The major water uses in the formation and dehydration of electrodes
for dry charged batteries are in rinsing and dehydrating the formed
plates. Thorough rinsing is required to remove residual sulfuric acid
from the formed plates and characteristically produces a large volume
of wastewater. Water is used in dehydration of the plates either in
ejectors used to maintain a vacuum and enhance drying or in water
seals or vacuum pumps used for the same purpose.
While rinsing and drying the plates is an indispensable part of the
formation process, plate dehydration can be accomplished without the
use of ejector or vacuum pump seal water. Oven drying without process
water use for the dehydration of dry-charged plates was observed, and
approximately 50% of all plants producing dehydrated plate batteries
showed no wastewater discharge from dehydration of the plates.
Oxidation of negative plates during the heat drying process may be
controlled by the introduction of inert or reducing atmospheres into
the drying ovens.
Several distinct formation procedures are employed in the production
of wet and damp charged batteries resulting in significant variations
in wastewater discharge flow rate. In addition to the differences
between wet and damp charged battery formation, formation processes
differ in the concentration of the formation electrolyte and in the
rate of charging. All of these variations are observed to have an
influence on wastewater discharge from the formation process and from
the plant as a whole.
The formation of damp charged batteries concludes with dumping the
formation acid from the battery which is shipped empty. Although no
process wastewater is directly discharged from the electrolyte dumping
670
-------
operations, the production of damp batteries influences wastewater
discharge in two ways. First, the practice of dumping acid from the
batteries increases the amount of acid contamination of the outside of
the battery case. This effect, however, is also observed in double
fill closed formation. Second, since the batteries are shipped dry,
electrolyte usage on-site is significantly reduced. This reduces the
amount of water used in acid cutting and therefore the potential
amount of process wastewater which may be used in battery acid
cutting.
The formation of assembled batteries may be accomplished using dilute
electrolyte which is subsequently dumped and replaced with more
concentrated acid for shipment with the battery. This double-fill
process allows maximum formation rates, but increases the extent of
acid contamination of battery cases. Battery wash requirements are
consequently increased as well. As an alternative, batteries may be
formed using acid which is sufficiently concentrated to be shipped
with the battery after formation has been completed. This single fill
battery formation process is widely used in present practice, and is
most amenable to wastewater discharge reduction. No significant
differences in product characteristics between batteries formed by
single fill and double fill techniques are reported.
The formation process generates heat which must be removed from the
batteries being formed if an acceptable product quality is to be
achieved. The rate at which this heat is generated depends upon the
rate at which formation proceeds. When batteries are formed rapidly
as is common in present practice, heat generation is so rapid that the
batteries must be cooled using fine sprays of water on the battery
cases. This contact cooling water constitutes a significant source of
wastewater discharge at many plants. When batteries are formed more
slowly, the heat may be dissipated to the atmosphere without the use
of contact cooling water and this source of wastewater discharge is
eliminated. In addition, formation at a lower rate reduces gassing
during formation and consequently reduces acid mist and fumes
associated with this process, limiting the need for wet scrubbers and
the extent of acid contamination of battery cases and formation areas
and equipment.
Battery formation at a lower rate without the use of contact cooling
water is practiced by a significant number of manufacturers and was
observed in visits to lead subcategory plants. While batteries formed
at high rates are frequently placed on conveyors during charging,
batteries subjected to low rate formation are often stacked on
stationary racks for the formation period which may last up to seven
days. Low rate formation requires somewhat more floor area and more
charging harnesses than high rate formation to allow for the larger
inventory of batteries being formed simultaneously, but eliminates the
need for piping and spray nozzles for contact cooling. Battery
671
-------
handling requirements and electric power consumption are substantially
identical for high and low rate formation.
Most electrodes used in this subcategory are produced by application
of a leady oxide paste to a supporting grid and subsequently curing
the pasted electrode. In the curing process, the free lead content of
the plates is reduced by oxidation and some sulfation occurs resulting
in improved paste adhesion and mechanical strength in the electrodes.
At most plants, curing is accomplished over several days in curing
rooms providing controlled temperature and humidity. No process water
is used, and no wastewater results. A few plants achieve faster plate
curing by the use of steam. In this process, steam condenses on the
electrodes producing a small volume of contaminated process
wastewater. This source of wastewater may be eliminated by the use of
the more conventional '"dry" curing technique. Alternatively, the
process wastewater from curing may be reused elsewhere in the process.
Possible areas of reuse include acid cutting and paste formulation.
Washing batteries with detergent formulations generates process
wastewater which, unlike most lead subcategory waste streams, may not
be suitable for reuse in electrolyte preparation or paste formulation.
This is due to the presence of detergents and oils and greases removed
by detergent action. The provision of a rinse prior to detergent
washing allows removal of most of the lead and sulfuric acid from the
battery case in a stream which is suitable for reuse in the process.
This reduces the loads of these pollutants which must be removed in
treatment and reduces the volume of water needed for detergent washing
(due to the reduced amounts of contaminants to be removed from the
battery). The volume of wastewater to be treated and discharged is
also reduced.
Plant Maintenance and Good Housekeeping - At lead subcategory plants,
maintenance and housekeeping practices are of great importance for the
implementation of the other in-process control measures which have
been previously discussed. Recycle and reuse are especially dependent
on the exclusion of contaminants from the process water streams. In
addition, effective plant maintenance and housekeeping practices may
reduce or eliminate some process wastewater sources. Plant
maintenance practices, such as (1) epoxy coating of racks and
equipment which contact process wastewater and (2) containment of the
wastewater to minimize such contact, reduce the extent of
contamination with materials inimical to further use of the water. In
addition, these measures minimize corrosion by the acidic wastewater
and extend the useful life of production equipment.
Both lead and sulfuric acid are hazardous materials which must be
controlled in the work place. At some plants, large quantities of
water are used and wastewater discharged in washing down production
areas to control workers exposure to these materials. This water use
672
-------
may be substantially reduced or eliminated by the application of plant
maintenance and housekeeping practices to reduce spillage and loss of
these materials and by the use of dry or water efficient cleanup
techniques.
Control of lead dust within the plant also represents a significant
water use at some plants where production floor areas are washed down
with hoses or other similarly inefficient techniques. The use of
proper material handling techniques to minimize the dust problem and
dry clean-up or water efficient cleanup techniques can reduce or
eliminate the volume of discharge from this source. Examples of water
efficient cleanup techniques include floor wash machines and bucket
and mop floor washing.
Equipment maintenance may also contribute significantly to wastewater
discharge reduction. At one plant, a leaking cooling jacket on a ball
mill resulted in contamination of non-contact cooling water with lead
creating an additional process wastewater discharge. In addition,
leaks in pumps and piping used to handle electrolyte are likely
because of the corrosive action of sulfuric acid and may constitute a
source of pollutant discharge and necessitate the use of water for
washing down affected areas. Proper maintenance of this equipment can
minimize discharge from this source.
Leclanche Subcateqory
Process water use and wastewater discharge in this subcategory are
limited. Many plants presently report no discharge of process
wastewater, and most others discharge only limited volumes of
wastewater from one or two sources. All of the existing discharges
can be eliminated by the implementation of effective in-process
control measures, especially wastewater recycle and reuse.
Waste Segregation - At most plants in this subcategory, waste
segregation is not required except for the segregation of process
wastewater from other wastes. Only one or two battery manufacturing
waste sources are typically encountered in this subcategory, and the
characteristics of the resultant waste streams are generally similar.
One exception to this observation occurs where paste separators are
employed or pasted paper separators are produced. In this case,
segregation of wastewater from the paste preparation and handling
operations from other process waste streams is important for effective
treatment as well as wastewater recycle and reuse.
Wastewater Recycle and Reuse - Essentially all of the process
wastewater discharge streams reported in this subcateogry result from
washing production equipment, fixtures, and utensils. While the
specific recycle and reuse techniques differ, waste streams from both
673
-------
paste preparation and application and from other equipment clean-up
may be completely recycled and reused eliminating process wastewater
discharged from these sources. Process water used to supply heat for
setting paste separators in some cells is also amenable to extensive
recycle.
Equipment used in the preparation and application of paste to cells
containing paste separators or to paper for use as cell separator
material, is generally washed down with water periodically as a part
of normal maintenance. The resultant wastewater, generally containing
paste, ammonium chloride, zinc, and mercury, may be retained and
reused in subsequent equipment washing. The buildup of contaminants
in the wash water can be controlled by using a portion of the wash
stream in paste preparation. The contaminants which are normal
constituents of _the paste are thereby included in the product, and
discharge of process wastewater pollutants from this operation is
eliminated. This recycle and reuse practice is demonstrated at plants
which report no process wastewater discharge from paste preparation
and application.
Water used in washing equipment and utensils for most other production
operations serves primarily to remove insoluble materials such as
carbon and manganese dioxide particles. Wastewater from these washing
operations can be retained, treated by settling to remove the solids,
and reused in further equipment washing. The buildup of dissolved
materials in this stream may be controlled by use some of the wash
water in electrolyte or cathode formulation. Since the primary source
of dissolved salts in the wash water is electrolyte incorporated in
cell cathodes or handled in the process equipment, the contaminants in
the wash water after settling are normal electrolyte constituents, and
no deleterious effect on cell performance will result from this
practice.
Water is used to supply heat for setting paste separators by one
manufacturer. As a result of contact with machinery used to convey
the cells, and occasional spillage from cells, this water becomes
moderately contaminated with oil and grease, paste, manganese dioxide
particulates, zinc, ammonium chloride, and mercury. These
contaminants, however, do not interfere with the use of this water for
heat transfer to the outside of assembled cells. Wastewater discharge
from this operation results from manufacturing conveniences,
maintenance of the equipment, and from drag-out of water on the cells
and conveyors. Discharge from each of these process sources may be
reduced or eliminated by recycle and reuse of the water.
The paste processing steps in making mercury containing seperator
paper generates a wastewater discharge when the paste mixing equipment
is washed. The flow from the wash operation is minimal and can be
674
-------
eliminated either by dry maintenance of the equipment or recycle of
the wash water for inclusion in the paste.
.Water Use Control and Reduction - Water use in equipment and floor
cleaning at some sites in this subcategory may be substantially
reduced by the implementation of water use controls or eliminated
entirely by the substitution of dry equipment cleanup procedures.
Most plants in the subcategory presently employ dry equipment and
floor cleaning techniques and discharge no process wastewater. Dry
air pollution control devices also serve to reduce water use in this
subcategory.
Reduction in water use in cleaning electrolyte handling and delivery
equipment and cathode blending equipment may be possible by more
effective control of flow rates at several sites in the subcategory.
These reductions would decrease the cost of treating wastewater for
recycle or of contract removal of the wastes. The potential for such
reductions is indicated by the broad range in water use for this
purpose within the subcategory. Normalized discharge flows ranging
from 0.01 I/kg of cells produced to 6.37 I/kg of cells produced were
reported by plants that discharge from this operation. Some of this
variation, however, is attributable to variations in the type of cells
produced and the nature of the production equipment requiring
cleaning. As noted in the previous discussion, this water may be
recycled, eliminating all wastewater discharge to the environment from
this source. Use of dry maintenance techniques will also serve to
eliminate equipment cleaning wastewater discharge. The majority of
plants do not report any wastewater discharge from equipment
maintenance, indicating that these techniques are widely applied in
this subcategory.
Water is used in a washing machine at one plant to clean fixtures used
to transport cell cathodes to the assembly. Since the machine is
often used with only a partial load, wastewater discharge from this
process may be reduced by scheduling washing cycles so that a complete
load is washed each time. This may require a somewhat increased
inventory of the fixtures, but will reduce waste treatment costs as
well as pollutant discharge.
A majority of manufacturers reported no wastewater discharged from
floor wash procedures, and it is concluded that dry maintenance tech-
niques are widely applied in the subcategory although not specifically
identified by most facilities. Some of these dry techniques include
either sweeping or vacuuming floor areas and using desiccant materials
in instances of spillage.
Process Modification - Variations in manufacturing processes and
products in this subcategory are observed to correspond to variations
in process water use and wastewater discharge. Significant
675
-------
differences in wastewater discharge are observed between plants
producing cells with paste separators and pasted paper separators.
Among plants producing cells with paste separators, differences in
wastewater discharge result from differences in assembly technique and
in the paste formulation employed. Relatively high water usage and
wastewater discharge are also associated with the manufacture of
foliar batteries. While cells using pasted paper and paste separators
serve the same applications and are directly competitive, the foliar
batteries are designed for a unique application.
The manufacture of cells using heat-set paste separators is observed
to produce a wastewater discharge from the paste setting operation.
This source of discharge may be eliminated by substitution of a paste
formulation which sets at a lower temperature or by use of pasted
paper separators. Industry personnel report that production of paste
separator cells is significantly less costly than the manufacture of
cells with pasted paper separators.
Plant Maintenance and Housekeeping - Dry cleanup of production areas
is practiced at essentially all sites in this subcategory. In
addition, most facilities employ dry cleaning techniques in
maintaining process equipment. These practices contribute to the low
wastewater discharge rates typical of this subcategory.
Lithium Subcateqory
Process water use and wastewater discharges in the lithium subcategory
are limited. The cell anode material reacts vigorously with water,
necessitating the use of non-aqueous electrolytes and dry processes
for most manufacturing operations. Correspondingly, opportunities for
in-process control are also limited.
Thermal batteries similar to those produced in the calcium subcategory
are manufactured in this subcategory including the production of heat
generation component material. As discussed for the calcium
subcategory, this waste stream may be recycled after settling,
eliminating this source of wastewater discharge.
At some plants in this subcategory, wet scrubbers are used to control
emissions from sulfur dioxide and thionyl chloride depolarizer
materials. Extensive recycle of the scrubber discharge streams is
possible, reducing the volume of wastewater discharge to minimal
values.
Magnesium Subcategory
Half of the plants in this subcategory report zero discharge of
magnesium battery manufacturing process wastewater. The remaining
facilities report process wastewater discharges from eight different
676
-------
process operations to which a variety of in-process control techniques
may be applied.
At one plant which produces magnesium anode thermal batteries, process
wastewater discharges result from wet scrubbers on dehumidification
equipment used to control conditions in process areas and from the
production of heating component material. These waste streams may be
extensively recycled significantly reducing or eliminating wastewater
discharges from these sources.
Significant wastewater discharge from floor washing operations is also
reported in this subcategory and may be reduced by the use of water-
efficient or dry floor cleaning techniques. Alternatively, the floor
wash water may be treated and recycled.
Zinc Subcateqory
Manufacturing processes in the zinc subcategory involve a wide variety
of process water uses and wastewater discharge sources. Wastewater
discharges result from active material preparation, electrode
processing and associated rinses, cell washing, and equipment and area
cleaning. Consequently a variety of techniques may be applied within
the process to reduce the volume of wastewater or mass of pollutants
discharged.
Waste Segregation - The segregation of individual process waste
streams which differ markedly in character is an important factor in
effective water pollution control. The segregation of non-contact
cooling and heating water from process wastes is essential for
effective removal of process pollutants in end-of-pipe treatment.
Waste segregation is presently practiced at most plants in the
subcategory, many of which recirculate non-contact cooling water
through cooling towers.
Many cell cleaning or electrode preparation operations involve the use
of organic reagents such as methanol, methylene chloride, and
hydrazine, which ultimately leave the process in organic laden waste
streams. The segregation of the organic laden waste streams from
waste streams bearing predominantly toxic metals and suspended solids
is necessary if these pollutants are to be removed effectively and
without incurring excessive costs.
The volume of the organic laden waste streams is quite small at most
sites, and contract removal to a central location is generally less
costly than wastewater treatment and is predominant in present
practice. Efficient segregation therefore also contributes to
minimizing the cost of contract disposal.
677
-------
Silver oxides are used as the depolarizer in some of the cells
manufactured in this subcategory and are present at particularly high
concentrations in wastewater streams from some active material and
cathode preparation operations. The segregation of these waste
streams may allow recovery of the silver for use on site or its return
to a refinery.
Amalgamation of zinc anodes consumes large quantities of mercury, part
of which enters process wastewater. Specific process waste streams,
contain substantial concentrations of mercury and segregation, and
separate treatment of these streams can reduce the total mass of
mercury released to the environment.
Wastewater Recycle and Reuse - Process operations in this subcategory
produce waste streams which may be recycled for use in the same
operation or reused at some other point in the process. Waste streams
which may be recycled or reused in this subcategory include a variety
of process solutions, cell wash and rinse wastewater, electrolyte
dripped in battery filling, equipment and area wash water, and
wastewater from rinsing amalgamated zinc powder. While most of these
streams may be recycled without treatment, a few, notably the floor
and equipment wash wastewater, may require some degree of treatment
before being recycled.
The opportunity for wastewater recycle and reuse in this subcategory
is in general minimal because plants in this subcategory do not employ
wet scrubbers and the electrolyte content of many zinc subcategory
cells is low. Process solutions in this subcategory are commonly
reused extensively until either depleted or heavily contaminated, and
consequently represent a minimal contribution to the total wastewater
flow. Reuse of process solutions significantly reduces pollutant
loads discharged to waste treatment, and also yields economic benefits
in reduced consumption of process chemicals.
At several plants, it was observed that the addition of electrolyte to
assembled cells resulted in small volumes of dripped or spilled
electrolyte which was collected and discarded. With care in
maintaining the cleanliness of the drip collection vessels, this
electrolyte can be returned for addition to cells eliminating this
source of highly concentrated wastes.
At most plants, it was observed that cell washing removed small
amounts of contaminants from most cells and that water use was
governed by the need to ensure adequate contact of the wash solution
and rinse water with the complete cell surface. At two plants,
wastewater discharges from these operations are presently reduced by
the practice of recycling the cell wash and rinse wastewater and
discharging from the recycle system only occasionally, generally once
678
-------
each day. Cell wash operations in which this recycle is practiced
result in substantially lower discharge volumes than similar cell
washes without recycle.
Water is frequently used to wash production equipment, especially
equipment used in mixing slurries for the preparation of pasted
electrodes and for the amalgamation of zinc powder. The usual purpose
of this equipment wash water is to remove solids from the equipment.
Because the concentrations of dissolved materials in the equipment
wash water are generally moderate, the wastewater from equipment
washing can be recycled for further use with any minor treatment.
This practice is employed so effectively at one plant that water from
equipment washing is discharged only once every six months.
Water used in washing production floor areas also serves primarily to
remove solid materials, and wastewater from this operation may be
recycled generally if suspended solids removal is provided; where
mercury is used in the production areas being cleaned, the wastewater
must be treated by a technique which is effective in removing mercury.
Wastewater from rinsing wet amalgamated zinc powder contains zinc,
mercury, and soluble materials used in the amalgamation process.
Countercurrent rinsing, if applied to these rinse steps, will result
in smaller volume discharge which contain relatively high
concentrations of mercury and zinc. These contaminants may readily be
reduced to levels acceptable for use in washing floors.
Water Use Control and Reduction - The degree of control of process
water use is observed to vary significantly among zinc subcategory
plants. Production normalized process water use and wastewater
discharge in specific process operations are observed to vary by as
much as a factor of twenty between different plants, and by factors of
six or more from day to day at a single plant. The most significant
area where wastewater discharge may be reduced through more effective
flow control and efficient water use is in rinsing active materials,
electrodes, and finished cells. These reductions may often be
achieved by very simple actions such as turning off rinse water flows
when production stops, by adjusting rinse flow rates to correspond to
varying levels of production activity, and by the modification of
rinsing techniques to provide multistage or countercurrent rinses.
Other techniques which reduce process flows include the replacement of
wet processes with processes that do not use water. For example,
floor maintenance can be performed by using dry sweeping or vacuuming
techniques. In instances of spillage, desiccant material can be
applied with subsequent dry floor cleaning. Since most plants report
no wastewater from cleaning, these dry techniques are apparently
widely applied in the subcategory although not specifically identified
679
-------
by most plants. Only a few plants discharge significant volumes of
floor wash water because of such practices as hosing down floor areas.
Material recovery may also significantly reduce pollutant loadings.
Zinc cell manufacturerers practice material recovery for silver and
mercury in either process wastewater or reject cells.
Process Modification - Manufacturing processes in this subcategory are
widely varied often corresponding to differences in product types,
physical configuration and performance characteristics. A significant
number of manufacturing operations are governed by military
specifications. Some of the observed variations, however, do not
correspond to discernible differences in the end product, and reflect
only differences in plant practices.
Zinc powder for use in anodes is amalgamated by three techniques;
"wet" amalgamation in which the zinc powder and mercury are mixed in
an aqueous solution which is subsequently drained off and discharged;
"gelled" amalgamation in which zinc and mercury are moistened with a
small volume of electrolyte and mixed with binders to produce an
amalgamated anode gel; and "dry" amalgamation in which zinc and
mercury are mixed without the introduction of any aqueous phase.
Since amalgamated material produced by all three techniques is used on
a competitive basis in many cell types, the substitution of a dry
amalgamation technique for wet amalgamation may be considered a viable
in-process control technique for the reduction of process wastewater
discharges in this subcategory.
Silver peroxide is presently produced by several chemical processes at
facilities in this subcategory, and different wastewater discharge
volumes are observed to result. Substantially less wastewater per
unit of product is discharged from one process, and the process
solutions are completely recycled.
Cell wash procedures and materials are highly variable in this
subcategory, and the resultant normalized discharge volumes vary over
nearly three orders of magnitude, from 0.09 to 34.1 I/kg of cells
produced. At some sites, organic solvents are used to remove oils and
greases from cell cases, eliminating most water use. At others cells
are simply rinsed with water without the use of any chemicals in the
cell wash.
Cell wash formulations used sometimes contain toxic pollutants,
especially chromium and cyanide not otherwise encountered in battery
manufacturing wastewater. Cells are successfully washed at many
facilities using formulations which do not contain cyanide or
chromate. Therefore substitution of an alternative chemical in the
680
-------
cell wash is a practical method for eliminating these pollutants from
wastewater discharges in this subcategory.
Another process modification involves forming electrodes in the
battery case. This eliminates the post-formation rinsing step,
thereby reducing water usage and pollutant loadings. One plant
presently uses this procedure.
Plant Maintenance and Good Housekeeping - As in subcategories
previously discussed, plant maintenance and housekeeping practices
play a vital role in water pollution control. Because large
quantities of mercury are used in this subcategory, good housekeeping
practices to control losses of the toxic metal are of particular
importance for both water pollution control and industrial hygiene.
These include the maintenance of floors in process areas where mercury
is used, to eliminate cracks and pits in which mercury could be
trapped necessitating excessive water use in cleaning. Most plant
maintenance and housekeeping practices applicable in this subcategory
are similar to those previously discussed for other subcategories.
681
-------
10
10'
10
10*
io-
to
'7
10"
10
-to
10
10
-11
12
10
-13
(OH)
Cd(OH)2 -
PtaS
1 t
234
7
PH
9 10 11 12 13
FIGURE VII - 1. COMPARATIVE SOLUBILITIES OF METAL HYDROXIDES
AND SULFIDE AS A FUNCTION OF pH
682
-------
oo
u>
9
M
VTION (MG/L)
* 4
^ ป
BE
H
Z
U
U
Z
o
U
U
Z
N ^
1-
z
111
D
J
U.
Ik
U
4
O
<
U
>
o
0
o
o
o
0 0
o
r\n I
(
1 rป ฐ6 *
> 0 ฐ
8ฐ
On ^ x
O
0
O
5 6 ~ 7 " 6 ~ T 10 11 12
MINIMUM EFFLUENT pH
FIGURE VII-2. EFFLUENT ZINC CONCENTRATION VS. MINIMUM EFFLUENT pH
-------
0.40
SODA ASH AND
CAUSTIC SODA
8.5
9.0
9.5
PH
10.0
10.5
FIGURE VII-3. LEAD SOLUBILITY IN THREE ALKALIES
684
-------
oo
ui
SULFURIC SULFUR
ACID DIOXIDE
I
pH CONTROLLER
a---,
RAW WASTE
(HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM)
n
r--n
oRP CONTROLLER
1
00
(TRIVALENT CHROMIUM)
LIME OR CAUSTIC
REACTION TANK
PRECIPITATION TANK
pH CONTROLLER
TO CLARIFIER
(CHROMIUM
HYDROXIDE)
FIGURE VII-4. HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM REDUCTION WITH SULFUR DIOXIDE
-------
INFLUENT
EFFLUENT
WATER
LEVEL
STORED
BACKWASH
WATER
-* FILTER
HBACKWASH-*-
THREE WAY VALVE
FILTER
MEDIA
FILTER
COMPARTMENT
COLLECTION CHAMBER
DRAIN
FIGURE VII - 5. GRANULAR BED FILTRATION
686
-------
PERFORATED
BACKING PLATE
FABRIC
FILTER MEDIUM
SOLID
RECTANGULAR
END PLATE
INLET
SLUDGE
FABRIC
FILTER MEDIUM
ENTRAPPED SOLIDS
FILTERED LIQUID OUTLET
PLATES AND FRAMES ARE
PRESSED TOGETHER DURING
FILTRATION CYCLE
RECTANGULAR
METAL PLATE
RECTANGULAR FRAME
FIGURE VII-6. PRESSURE FILTRATION
687
-------
SEDIMENTATION BASIN
INLET ZONE
INLET LIQUID
BAFFLES TO MAINTAIN
QUIESCENT CONDITIONS
OUTLET ZONE
**ซป. * * SETTLING PARTICLf
* * ""'**'**** TRAJECTORY .
OUTLET LIQUID
BELT-TYPE SOLIDS COLLECTION
MECHANISM
SETTLED PARTICLES COLLECTED
AND PERIODICALLY REMOVED
CIRCULAR CLARIFIER
SETTLING ZONE
INLET LIQUID
T|T
CIRCULAR BAFFLE
I -
INLET ZONE
ANNULAR OVERFLOW WEIR
/
y' * __
* *> LIQu'lD *
/.VV.FLOW^;
OUTLET LIQUID
SETTLING PARTICLES
REVOLVING COLLECTION
MECHANISM
SETTLED PARTICLES
COLLECTED AND PERIODICALLY
REMOVED
SLUDGE DRAWOFF
FIGURE VII - 7. REPRESENTATIVE TYPES OF SEDIMENTATION
688
-------
en
00
eป
I 0.1
C
o
o
Ul
E
1 0.01
0.001
22 Values
^OffGra
0ฉ ฉ<
ฉ00ฉ
^
)
@,
Iftrv
Ih
S>
ฉ ฉ
ฉ
/T
ฉ<
ฉ
Dฉ
><
|Tv
<5
^
9
ฉ
> ฉ
1
totte
ฉ
ry
ฉ
Ca
tec
|0
r>
-1
law Waste
Valui
(
!S
fS
9
ฉ
ฉC
1 Value
Ofl
FG
raf
C
ih
)
D
V
0.01
Data points with a raw waste concentration
less than 0.1 mg/l were not included in
treatment effectiveness calculations.
0.1
1.0
Cadmium Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
10 100
(Number of observations = 2)
FIGURE VII-8
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
CADMIUM
-------
069
Chromium Treated Effluent Concentration (mg/l)
.1 1.0 10 100 10t
Chromium Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
(Number of observations = 26
FIGURE VII -9
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
CHROMIUM
>
ฉ
^
i
>
c
ฉ
(!)
t
^
(j
i
(
)
^
ฉ
(^
t
@:
)
ฉ
0
ฉ
O
3
cs
3
ฉ
CD
CD
s?
c*
O
^
o>
I
-------
21 Values
OffGn
ฉ
ฉฉ ฉ
iph
i
ฉ
ฎ
9
D
ฉi
Batl
:er\
ฉ
rC
ฉ
ati
sg
or
V
Raw Wast
eVah
jes
vo
^
e
e
1
s
o>
w
o
o
4^
|
I
Ul
g
Coppe
O.I
ฉ
ฉ
ฉ
0.1
1.0
10
Copper Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
100 1000
(Number of observations = 19)
FIGURE VII -10
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
COPPER
-------
VD
to
Iron Treated Effluent Concentration (mg/l)
3
9 o r*
* Lป o
/ /
1 Value
OffGrap
-
ฉ
ฉ
ป
OS)
h
ฉ
5>0
t
)
Dt
\
(
> '
/
ฉ
ฉ
[)
C
ป
s
1
Batt
'J
ฉ
ery Ca
()
'J
te
i
30
n
i
M
]
Lป
Flaw Waste
0
ฉ
/TS
;Valu
ฉ
es
ฉ
(
\
ฉ
(}
ฉ
s,
0.1
1.0
10
Iron Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
100 1000
(Number of observations = 29)
FIGURE VII-11
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
IRON
-------
20 Values
OffGra
ฉ (
Ph
S)
e
ฉฉ
ฉฉ
ฉ ฉ
1
ฉ
Jatti
i
sry
D
Ca
tei
|0
ry
1
(
law Waste
> ฉ
ฉ
) ฉ
Valu
es
(
)
ฉ
ฉฉฉ
ฉ
ฉ
e
u
0.1
U)
0.01
0.001
ฉ
T;
0.01
0.1
1.0
Lead Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
10
100
(Number of observations = 23)
FIGURE VII-12
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
LEAD
-------
vo
17 Values
t
Manganese Treated Effluent Concentration (mg/l) S
9 o ^ ซ
1 5 2 |
4ฎ
51
SJ
36)
/sv
1
!>
A
<5>
rt\
ฉ
5
(
1
<
I
(
1
5
ฉ
E
latte
/
ry Catet
y
\
a
loryf
II
tow Waste
ฉ@ฉ
Values
ฉ0(^
ฉ
ฉ
0.1
1.0 10
Manganese Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
100 1000
(Number of observations = 10)
FIGURE VII-13
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
MANGANESE
-------
ฃ2 =
^ o
*- c
c o
vo
en
E"~ O)
_ JC
JE u
< Z
X ฉ
1.0
0.1
.01
22 Values
Off G
ฉ0 '
G
ฉ
raph
B
ฉ
><
-
SK
ฉ
ฉ
D
ฉ
Batte
ฉ
ฉ
ry C
1
6
)
-ate
f
go
at
nr
ฃ
R
U-H
ai
I
(V
)
7
s
Waste Val
ฉ
ฉ
ฉ ฉ <
Vฎ
ues(IN
D
D
ฉ
lickf
ฉ
ปD
ฉ
(
) ฎ
ฉ
X
X
X
0.1
1.0 10
ฉ Nickel Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
x Aluminum Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
100
(Number of observations = 13)
(Number of observations = 5)
1000
FIGURE VII-14
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
NICKEL AND ALUMINUM
-------
vo
cr\
100
eu
u
c
o
o
4
eu
T3
O)
4-1
2
10
1.0
<
(
(
)
)
)
)
1
)
)
>
(
) ฎ
ฉ
Batt
Is
ฉ
ฎ_
cry
\
/!
/
Cc
ฉ
1 (t
$
ฉ
ฉ
ซ_
yv
te
i
gc
>
r
)
)
j
/
Raw Wasti
)ฉ ฉ
1
ฎ ฉ
ฎ.M
iValu
ฉ
(7
es
"ฉ
<
i
ฉ
ฎ
\\
D
ฉ
)
i
s>
9
6
i
1 ฉ ฉ
ฎ
D ฉ
ฎ
(r)
m
ฉ
ฎ
ฉ
(
(F\t
^
-
ฉ
>
1.0
10
100
TSS Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
1000 10,000
(Number of observations = 46)
FIGURE VII -15
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
TSS
-------
vo
I 1.0
e
1
e
CJ
0.1
0.01
7 Values
Off Graph
0 d
ฉ ฉ ฎ( @
b
ฉ
/2v
S)
ฉ
ฉK)
<
(?>
>>
3
(:
)
i <
/
/
I
) ฉ
>
\
\
ฉ
Jatti
ฉ
ฉ
sry
W
Ca
ฉ
tei
ฉ
ปซ
(
ry
)
1
1 ซ
f)aw Waste
ฉ
ฉฉ ฉ
^fft
ฉ
ฉ
ฉ
ฉ
a\
Valui
(:
ฎ,
K
ฉ'
) ฉ
ฉI
ฉ
>
D
)
li
ฃ>
<
<
3
>
g
S>ฉ
e_
~
i i i i
1 Value
9fff
G
ra|
Dh
t
'
0.1
1.0
10
Zinc Raw Waste Concentration (mg/l)
100
1000
(Number of observations = 29)
FIGURE VII-16
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION SEDIMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS
ZINC
-------
FLANGE
WASTE WATER
WASH WATER
SURFACE WASH
MANIFOLD
BACKWASH
INFLUENT
DISTRIBUTOR
BACKWASH
REPLACEMENT CARBON
CARBON REMOVAL PORT
TREATED WATER
SUPPORT PLATE
FIGURE VII-17. ACTIVATED CARBON ADSORPTION COLUMN
698
-------
CONVEYOR DRIVE
DRYING
LIQUID
OUTLET
SLUDGE
INLET
CYCLOGEAR
f x
i SLUDGE
DISCHARGE
CONVEYOR
BOWL
REGULATING
RING
IMPELLER
FIGURE VII-18. CENTRIFUGATION
699
-------
O
O
RAW WASTE
CAUSTIC
SODA
PH
CONTROLLER
cto
r
ORP CONTROLLERS
\
CAUSTIC
SODA
WATER
CONTAINING
CYANATE
CHLORINE
CIRCULATING
PUMP
REACTION TANK
CHLORINATOR
PH
CONTROLLER
00
TREATED
WASTE
REACTION TANK
FIGURE VII-19. TREATMENT OF CYANIDE WASTE BY ALKALINE CHLORINATION
-------
CONTROLS
OZONE
GENERATOR
DRY AIR
OZONE
REACTION
TANK
i^ >i TREATED
{XI "
WASTE
RAW WASTE-
FIGURE VII - 20. TYPICAL OZONE PLANT FOR WASTE TREATMENT
701
-------
MIXER
Fll
ST
SE
ST
Tl
WASTEWATER g1
FEED TANK
<
V,
t
(A
(ST *
AGE j
3
W ,
H
:OND 5
AGE j
3
HIRD J
PAGE ^
L =
WD
[PUMP
TREATED WATEF
c
y,
1
C
Q,
I
C
r7 _ EXHAUST
=a
i
c
3
i
a
1
1
I
c
1
c
I
GAS
TEMPERATURE
CONTROL
PH MONITORING
_ TEMPERATURE
CONTROL
PH MONITORING
TEMPERATURE
CONTROL
PH MONITORING
OZONE
OZONE
GENERATOR
FIGURE VII-21. UV/OZONATION
-------
EXHAUST
CONDENSER
WATER VAPOR
PACKED TOWER
EVAPORATOR
WA8TEWATER
EVAPORATOR
STEAM-
HEAT
EXCHANGER
TEAM
STEAM
CONDENSATE
CONCENTRATE
STEAM
CONDENSATE
PUMP
ATMOSPHERIC EVAPORATOR
WASTEWATER
VAPOR-LIQUID
MIXTURE i SEPARATOR
S. I
WATER VAPOR
Y777.
LIQUID
RETURN
COOLING
WATER
CONDENSATE
VACUUM PUMP
CONCENTRATE
CLIMBING FILM EVAPORATOR
O
u>
CONDENSATE
WASTEWATER
VACUUM LINE xQ^0^
1 ฃ
) 3
777777777777"
XXXXXXxxxxxx(
t/??//?/?7?y/'?'.
'Wffiffffifr.
COOLING
^ WATER
STEAM
WASTE
WATER - ^
STEAM rrrn
DNCENTR ATE 'ซ - STEAM
CONDENSATE
SUBMERGED TUBE EVAPORATOR
HOT VAPOR
*~
STEAM
CONDENSATE
m
^
CONCENTRATE
-.V
VAP
A
cor
SA1
UK
4DEN-
ฃ
I
T
r
COOLING
WATER
m
>NDENSATE
/ACUUM PUMP
ป- EXHAUST
ACCUMULATOR
CONDENSATE
FOR REUSE
CONCENTRATE FOR REUSE
DOUBLE-EFFECT EVAPORATOR
FIGURE VII-22. TYPES OF EVAPORATION EQUIPMENT
-------
OILY WATER
INFLUENT
WATER
DISCHARGE
OVERFLOW
SHUTOFF
VALVE
EXCESS
AIR OUT
LEVEL
CONTROLLER
TO SLUDGE
TANK *
FIGURE VII - 23. DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION
704
-------
CONDUIT
TO MOTOR
INFLUENT
CONDUIT TO
OVERLOAD
ALARM
COUNTERFLOW
INFLUENT WELL
EFFLUENT PIPE
EFFLUENT CHANNEL
PLAN
TURNTABLE
BASE
HANDRAIL
INFLUENT
CENTER COLUMN
CENTER CAGE
WEIR
STILTS
CENTER SCRAPER
SQUEEGEE
SLUDGE PIPE
FIGURE VII-24. GRAVITY THICKENING
705
-------
WASTE WATER CONTAINING
DISSOLVED METALS OR
OTHER IONS
/I
REGENERANT
'SOLUTION
OIVERTER VALVE
I V
DISTRIBUTOR
SUPPORT
REGENERANT TO REUSE,
TREATMENT. OR DISPOSAL
DIVERTER VALVE
METAL-FREE WATER
FOR REUSE OR DISCHARGE
FIGURE VII - 25. ION EXCHANGE WITH REGENERATION
706
-------
MACROMOLECULES
AND SOLIDS
MEMBRANE
450 PSI|
WATER
PERMEATE {WATER)
MEMBRANE CROSS SECTFON,
IN TUBULAR, HOLLOW FIBER,
OR SPIRAL-WOUND CONFIGURATION
o
FEED-
~ o'o. ' V ./o o-
_ '. ฐซo*o ฐ\ o .
CONCENTRATE
IS ALTS)
o o
o o
I
O SALTS OR SOLIDS
WATER MOLECULES
FIGURE VII - 26. SIMPLIFIED REVERSE OSMOSIS SCHEMATIC
707
-------
PERMEATE
TUBE
ADHESIVE BOUND
SPIRAL MODULE
PERMEATE
FLOW
FEED
CONCENTRATE
FLOW
BACKING MATERIAL
MESH SPACER
MEMBRANE
SPIRAL MEMBRANE MODULE
POROUS SUPPORT TUBE
WITH MEMBRANE
y.-v
'* BRACKISH
WATER
FEED FLOW
PRODUCT WATER
PERMEATE FLOW
BRINE
CONCENTRATE
FLOW
PRODUCT WATER
TUBULAR REVERSE OSMOSIS MODULE
SNAP
RING
"O" RING
SEAL
OPEN ENDS
OF FIBERS
r EPOXY
TUBE SHEET
POROUS
BACK-UP DISC
SNAP
RING
END PLATE
PERMEATE
END PLATE
DISTRIBUTOR TUBE '
HOLLOW FIBER MODULE
FIGURE VII - 27. REVERSE OSMOSIS MEMBRANE CONFIGURATIONS
708
-------
C
m
<
IS)
oo
CO
p-
c
o
A
m
O
J)
DO
m
O
n c
2o
a ฐ
" * m Z
n > r n
ฐ5
a n
Jr
m
r
i r Tr
C M
^SUL
! Z
5 3
z
> n
ป <*
i >
:ง
5
}
r^
* V
> z
r r ป
* *
p
>
Z
*
,
1 ,
n1
1...
II
11
II
II
En
1
I1
II
II
'i-.'iv^f'
lf-E_J
\
VKT-I
EO
/
MM
\
\
X
1
n
tt LJ n L_I ij i
1, !j i
? ซ ? II
r <>
.>>_ H 7-/illn__ r,, _OI ""
-W 'I ' ซ1C^""~ """" ""*
I ป < if
o >5 II J
x ^35 !' _ .
"!si" " i
i u> ป i !
i_ C ^5 JL
g-'op' ?
\" J
-* *-ซ!ซ. ป-ป ป
^l I, 6-IN. VITRIFIED PIPE LAID ]
(A tfh 1
Iฑ if a WITH OPEN JOINTS
5 z M
g W "ci ti rt
II "l
mJ*\ Pi _H
IOJH -u
C
n r-i r-ป r i f
\
^7*
/
f
V
,
/
*>
/
<ฃ.
/
-------
ULTRAFILTRATION
P 10-90 PSI
MEMBRANE
WATER SALTS
MEMBRANE
PERMEATE
I.
' v> o 'oป*o. '
o. . o ปo . \ . ปฐ
ED O 0 O CONCENT
o*
FEED
CONCENTRATE
o o ฐ
T
O OIL PARTICLES
DISSOLVED SALTS AND LOW-MOLECULAR-WEIGHT ORGANICS
FIGURE VII - 29. SIMPLIFIED ULTRAFILTRATION FLOW SCHEMATIC
710
-------
FABRIC OR WIRE
FILTER MEDIA
STRETCHED OVER
REVOLVING DRUM
DIRECTION OF ROTATION
ROLLER
SOLIDS SCRAPED
OFF FILTER MEDIA
CYLINDRICAL
FRAME
LIQUID FORCE
THROUGH
SOLIDS COLLECTION
HOPPER
INLET LIQUID
TO BE
FILTERED
TROUGH
FILTERED LIQUID
FIGURE VII-30. VACUUM FILTRATION
711
-------
TABLE VII-20
Summary of Treatment Effectiveness (mg/1)
ho
Pollutant
Parameter
Mean
114
115
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
Sb
As
Be
Cd
Cr
Cu
CN
Pb
Hg
Ni
Se
Ag
Th
Zn
Al
Co
F
Fe
Mn
P
O&G
TSS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
14
0
0
4
12
.70
.51
.30
.079
.080
.58
.07
.12
.06
.57
.30
.10
.50
.30
.11
.05
.5
.41
.21
.08
.0
L&S
Technology
System
One
Day
Max.
2.87
2.09
1.23
0.32
0.42
1.90
0.29
0.15
0.25
1.41
1.23
0.41
2.05
1.33
4.55
0.21
59.5
1.23
0.43
16.7
20.0
41.0
Ten
Day
Avg.
1.28
0.86
0.51
0.15
0.17
1.00
0.12
0.13
0.10
1.00
0.55
0.17
0.84
0.56
1.86
0.09
26.4
0.63
0.34
6.83
12.0
20.0
Thirty
Day
Avg.
1.14
0.83
0.49
0.13
0.12
0.73
0.11
0.12
0.10
0.75
0.49
0.16
0.81
0.41
1.80
0.08
23.5
0.51
0.27
6.60
10.0
15.5
Mean
0.47
0.34
0.20
0.049
0.07
0.39
0.047
0.08
0.036
0.22
0.20
0.07
0.34
0.23
0.74
0.034
9.67
0.28
0.14
2.72
2.6
One
Day
Max.
1.93
1.39
0.82
0.20
0.37
1.28
0.20
0.10
0.15
0.55
0.82
0.29
1.40
1.02
3.03
0.14
39.7
1.23
0.30
11.2
10.0
15.0
LS&F
Technology
System
Ten
Day
Avg.
0.86
0.57
0.34
0.08
0.15
0.61
0.08
0.09
0.06
0.37
0.37
0.12
0.57
0.42
1.24
0.07
17.6
0.23
4.6
10.0
12.0
Thirty
Day
Avg.
0.76
0.55
0.32
0.08
0.10
0.49
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.29
0.33
0.10
0.55
0.31
1.20
0.06
15.7
0.51
0.19
4.4
10.0
10.0
Sulfide
Precipitation
Filtration
One Ten Thirty
Day Day Day
Mean Max. Avg. Avg.
0.01 0.04 0.018 0.016
0.05 0.21 0.091 0.081
0.05 0.21 0.091 0.081
0.01 0.04 0.018 0.016
0.03 0.13 0.055 0.049
0.05 0.21 0.091 0.081
0.05 0.21 0.091 0.081
0.01 0.04 0.018 0.016
-------
TABLE VII-22
TREATABILITY RATING OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS
UTILIZING CARBON ADSORPTION
Priority Pollutant
* Removal
Rating
Priority Pollutant
1. acenaphthene H
2. acrolein L
3. acrylonitrile L
4. benzene M
5. benzidine H
6. carbon tetrachloride M
(tetrachloromethane)
7. chlorobenzene H
8. 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene H
9. hexachlorobenzene H
10. 1,2-dichloroethane M
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane M
12. hexachloroethane H
13. 1,1-dichloroethane M
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane M
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachlorethane H
16. chloroethane L
17. bis(chloromethyl) ether
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether M
19. 2-chloroethylvinyl ether L
(mixed)
20. 2-chloronaphthalene H
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol H
22. parachlorometa cresol H
23. chloroform (trichloromethane) L
24. 2-chlorophenol H
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene H
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene H
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene H
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine H
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene L
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene L
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol H
32. 1,2-dichloropropane M
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene M
(1,3-dichloropropene)
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol H
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene H
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene H
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine H
38.. ethylbenzene M
39. fluoranthene H
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether H
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether H
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether M
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane M
44. methylene chloride L
(dichloromethane)
45. methyl chloride (chloromethane) L
46. methyl bromide {bromomethane) L
47. bromoform (tribromomethane) H
48. dichlorobromomethane M
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.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
trichlorofluoromethane M
dichlorodifluoromethane L
chlorodibromomethane M
hexachlorobutadiene H
hexachlorocyclopentadiene H
isophorone H
naphthalene H
nitrobenzene H
2-nitrophenol H
4-nitrophenol H
2,4-dinitrophenol H
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol H
N-nitrosodimethylamine M
N-nitrosodiphenylamine H
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine M
pentachlorophenol H
phenol M
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate H
butyl benzyl phthalate H
di-n-butyl phthalate H
di-n-octyl phthalate H
diethyl phthalate H
dimethyl phthalate H
1,2-benzanthracene H
(benzo(a)anthracene)
benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-benzo- H
pyrene)
3,4-benzofluoranthene H
(benzo(b)fluoranthene)
11,12-benzofluoranthene H
(benzo(k)fluoranthene)
chrysene H
acenaphthylene H
anthracene H
1,12-benzoperylene (benzo H
(ghi)-perylene)
fluorene H
phenanthrene H
1,2,3,6-dibenzanthracene H
(dibenzo(a,h) anthracene)
indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene H
(2,3-o-phenylene pyrene)
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene M
toluene M
trichloroethylene L
vinyl chloride L
(chloroethylene)
PCB-1242 (Aroclor 1242) H
PCB-1254 (Aroclor 1254) H
PCB-1221 (Aroclor 1221) H
PCB-1332 (Aroclor 1232) H
PCB-1248 (Aroclor 1248) H
PCB-1260 (Aroclor 1260) H
PCB-1016 (Aroclor 1016) H
*Note Explanation of Removal Ratings
Category H (high removal)
adsorbs at levels > 100 mg/g carbon at C- = 10 mg/1
adsorbs at levels > 100 mg/g carbon at C < 1.0 mg/1
Category M (moderate removal)
adsorbs at levels ^. 100 mg/g carbon at C = 10 mg/1
adsorbs at levels ^100 mg/g carbon at C < 1.0 mg/1
Category L (low remova1)
adsorbs at levels < 100 mg/g carbon at C = 10 mg/1
adsorbs at levels < 10 mg/g carbon at C < 1.0 mg/1
C = final concentrations of priority pollutant at. equilibrium
713
-------
TABLE VII - 23
CLASSES OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ADSORBED ON CARBON
Organic Chemical Class
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Polynuclear Aromatics
Chlorinated Aromatics
Phenolics
Chorinated Phenolics
*High Molecular Weight Aliphatic and
Branch Chain hydrocarbons
Chlorinated Aliphatic hydrocarbons
*High Molecular Weight Aliphatic
Acids and Aromatic Acids
*High Molecular Weight Aliphatic
Amines and Aromatic Amines
*High Molecular Weight Ketones,
Esters, Ethers and Alcohols
Surfactants
Soluble Organic Dyes
Examples of Chemical Class
benzene/ toluene/ xylene
naphthalene/ anthracene
biphenyls
chlorobenzene, polychlorinated
biphenyls/ aldrin, endrin,
toxaphene, DDT
phenol/ cresol/ resorcenol
and polyphenyls
trichloropfrienol, pentachloro-
phenol
gasoline, kerosine
carbon tetrachloride,
perchloroethylene
tar acids, benzoic acid
aniline, toluene diamine
hydroquinone, polyethylene
glycol
alkyl benzene sulfonates
inethylene blue, indigo carmine
* High Molecular Weight includes compounds in the broad range of from
4 to 20 carbon atoms
714
-------
XXXX XXXX XXXX X XX
XX XX
V*
XXX X X X X X XXXX X X X X X XX XXX
5
XXX X
XXXXX X X X X XX XX XXX
I'XBBHXBXX BX X
XX X B X
B X B B
715
-------
9TZ.
x a xx x x a
x x x x x x ซ x x
XX X XX XXXXXX MXXXX X XXXXXXXXM X X X X X
X X
X X K
XX XXX XXX XXX
X XX X XXXX XXXXX
S ง
X XX XXX XX X XXX
XX XXX XXXX XX X
-------
5fi
XX X XXXX X XX XXX XXXX X X XX
X X X X X MXXXXX XX X XX XXX XX
I
XXX XXXXXXX X XXXXXXXX XXXXXX
XX X X X B B X X B X B B BX
717
-------
vj
(-
oo
TABU VH-28
PROCESS CONTROL TH3HGLDG1ES IN USE AT BAl'lldHY MANUHOURE PLANTS
HASTENATER RECYCLE AND REUSE J/ ' HATER USE REDUCTION PROCESS MODIFICATION
CCMBINBD Maun- FORMATION
TREATED DRY AIR SERGE DRY BATTERY CONTACT INCASE
EQUIPMENT HASTE POLTI/nON COUNTER- PLAQUE HASH COOLING (EXCEPT DR5f AMAL-
HASH & PASTE PRXISS SCRUBBER PLAQUE STREAMS CONTROL CURRENT SCRUB EEJMI- FTJMI- LEAD SUB- GAMATION MATERIAL
IDft tOMMTION SOLUTKN RINSES HASTE SCRUBBING IN-PROCESS TB3U3LDGY RINSE TJEOKECjUE NATION NATION CA3H3DRY PROCESS HtJLXMMf
Leclanche Subcategory
X X
X X
Lithium Subcategory
X
Magnesium Subcategory
Zinc Subcategory
X X
X XX
X
X X
XX X
X XX
X X
X
XX X
X XX X
NOTE: Each line represents one plant*
I/ Recycle or reuse following treatment Indicated byr 8.
-------
SECTION VIII
COST OF WASTEWATER CONTROL AND TREATMENT
This section presents estimates of the cost of implementation of
wastewater treatment and control options for each of the subcategories
included in the battery manufacturing category. The cost estimates
provide the basis for the determination of the probable economic
impact of regulation at different pollutant discharge levels on the
battery manufacturing category. These costs are also among the
factors required to be considered in developing effluent limitations
for BPT and BAT. In addition, this section addresses other factors
which must be considered in developing effluent limitations including
non-water quality environmental impacts of wastewater treatment and
control alternatives including air pollution, noise pollution, solid
wastes, and energy requirements.
To arrive at the cost estimates presented in this section, specific
wastewater treatment technologies and in-process control techniques
from among those discussed in Section VII were selected and combined
in wastewater treatment and control systems appropriate for each
subcategory. Investment and annual costs for each system were
estimated based on wastewater flows and raw waste characteristics for
each subcategory as presented in Section V. Cost estimates are also
presented for individual treatment technologies included in the waste
treatment systems.
COST ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY
Cost estimation is accomplished with the aid of a computer program
which accepts inputs specifying the treatment system to be estimated,
chemical characteristics of the raw waste streams treated, flow rates
and operating schedules. The program accesses models for specific
treatment components which relate component investment and operating
costs, materials and energy requirements, and effluent stream
characteristics to influent flow rates and stream characteristics.
Component models are exercised sequentially as the components are
encountered in the system to determine chemical characteristics and
flow rates at each point. Component investment and annual costs are
also determined and used in the computation of total system costs.
Mass balance calculations are used to determine the characteristics of
combined streams resulting from mixing two or more streams and to
determine the volume of sludges or liquid wastes resulting from
treatment operations such as sedimentation, filtration, flotation, and
oil separation.
Cost estimates are broken down into several distinct elements in
addition to total investment and annual costs: operation and
719
-------
maintenance costs, energy costs, depreciation, and annual costs of
capital. The cost estimation program incorporates provisions for
adjustment of all costs to a common dollar base on the basis of
economic indices appropriate to capital equipment and operating
supplies. Labor and electrical power costs are input variables
appropriate to the dollar base year for cost estimates. This section
discusses cost breakdown and adjustment factors as well as other
aspects of the cost estimation process.
Cost Estimation Input Data
The waste treatment system descriptions input to the cost estimation
program include both a specification of the waste treatment components
included and a definition of their sequences. For some components
such as holding tanks, retention times or other operating parameters
are also specified in the input, while for others, such as reagent mix
tanks and clarifiers, the parameters are specified within the program
based on prevailing design practice in industrial waste treatment.
The waste treatment system descriptions may include multiple raw waste
stream inputs and multiple treatment trains. For example, treatment
for lead subcategory manufacturing wastes includes segregation of
wastewater from grid pasting operations and separate settling and
recycle of these wastes in addition to chemical treatment of the
remaining process wastewater.
The input data set also includes chemical characteristics for each raw
waste stream specified as input to the treatment systems for which
costs are to be estimated. These characteristics are derived from the
raw waste sampling data presented in Section V. The pollutant
parameters which are presently accepted as input by the cost
estimation program are shown in Table VIII-1 (page 783). The values
of these parameters are used in determining materials consumption,
sludge volumes, treatment component sizes and effluent
characteristics. The list of input parameters is expanded
periodically as additional pollutants are found to be significant in
waste streams from industries under study and as additional treatment
technology cost and performance data become available. For -the
battery manufacturing category, individual subcategories commonly
encompass a number of widely varying waste streams which are present
to varying degrees at different plants. The raw waste characteristics
shown as input to waste treatment represent a mix of these streams
including all significant pollutants generated in the subcategory and
will not in general correspond precisely to process wastewater at any
existing plant. The process by which these raw wastes were defined is
explained in Sections IX and X.
The final input data set corresponds to the flow rates reported by
each plant in the category which were input to the computer to provide
cost estimates for use in economic impact analysis.
720
-------
System Cost Computation
A simplified flow chart for the estimation of wastewater treatment and
control costs from the input data described above is presented in
Figure VIII-1 (page 754). In the computation, raw waste
characteristics and flow rates are used as input to the model for the
first treatment technology specified in the system definition. This
model is used to determine the size and cost of the component,
materials and energy consumed in its operation, and the volume and
characteristics of the stream(s) discharged from it. These stream
characteristics are then used as input to the next component(s)
encountered in the system definition. This procedure is continued
until the complete system costs and the volume and characteristics of
the final effluent stream(s) and sludge or concentrated oil wastes
have been determined. In addition to treatment components, the system
may include mixers in which two streams are combined, and splitters in
which part of a stream is directed to another destination. These
elements are handled by mass balance calculations and allow cost
estimation for specific treatment of segregated process wastes such as
oxidation of cyanide bearing wastes prior to combination with other
process wastes for further treatment, and representation of partial
recycle of wastewater.
As an example of this computation process, the sequence of
calculations involved in the development of cost estimates for the
simple treatment system shown in Figure VII1-2 (page 755) may be
described. Initially, input specifications for the treatment system
are read to set up the sequence of computations. The subroutine
addressing chemical precipitation and clarification is then accessed.
The sizes of the mixing tank and clarification basin are calculated
based on the raw waste flow rate to provide 45 minute retention in the
mix tank and 4 hour retention with 610 1/hr m2 (159 gph/ft2) surface
loading in the clarifier. Based on these sizes, investment and annual
costs for labor, supplies and for the mixing tank and clarifier
including mixers, clarifier rakes and other directly related equipment
are determined. Fixed investment costs are then added to account for
sludge pumps, controls and reagent feed systems.
Based on the input raw waste concentrations and flow rates, the
reagent additions (lime, alum, and polyelectrolyte) are calculated to
provide fixed concentrations of alum and polyelectrolyte and 10
percent excess lime over that required for stoichiometric reaction
with the acidity and metals present in the waste stream. Costs are
calculated for these materials, and the suspended solids and flow
leaving the mixing tank and entering the clarifier are increased to
reflect the lime solids added and precipitates formed. These modified
stream characteristics are then used with performance algorithms for
the clarifier (as discussed in Section VII) to determine
concentrations of each pollutant in the clarifier effluent stream. By
721
-------
mass balance, the amount of each pollutant in the clarifier sludge may
be determined. The volume of the sludge stream is determined by the
concentration of TSS which is fixed at 4-5 percent based on general
operating experience, and concentrations of other pollutants in the
sludge stream are determined from their masses and the volume of the
stream.
The subroutine describing vacuum filtration is then called, and the
mass of suspended solids in the clarifier sludge stream is used to
determine the size and investment cost of the vacuum filtration unit.
Operating hours for the filter are calculated from the flow rate and
TSS concentration and determine manhours required for operation.
Maintenance labor requirements are added as a fixed additional cost.
The sludge flow rate and TSS content are then used to determine costs
of materials and supplies for vacuum filter operation including iron
and alum added as filter aids, and the electrical power costs for
operation. Finally, the vacuum filter performance algorithms are used
to determine the volume and characteristics of the vacuum filter
sludge and filtrate, and the costs of contract disposal of the sludge
are calculated. The recycle of vacuum filter filtrate to the chemical
precipitation-clarification system is not reflected in the
calculations due to the difficulty of iterative solution of such loops
and the general observation that the contributions of such streams to
the total flow and pollutant levels are in practice, negligibly small.
Allowance for such minor contributions is made in the 20 percent
excess capacity provided in most components.
The costs determined for all components of the system are summed and
subsidiary costs are added to provide output specifying total
investment and annual costs for the system and annual costs for
capital, depreciation, operation and maintenance, and energy. Costs
for specific system components and the characteristics of all streams
in the system may also be specified as output from the program.
In-Process Technologies
Costs calculated by the computer estimation procedure are dependent
upon discharge flows produced by plants in the category. The use of
in-process technology to achieve flow reduction is cost effective
because savings result from buying less water, recovering metals in
the solids, and selling concentrated process solutions. These savings
are not evaluated in the computer program. Reliance on the computer
estimation procedure without attention to in-process technologies
results in an overstatement of the cost required to achieve various
levels of environmental improvement.
For the subcategories sufficient data were available from plant visits
and dcp's to estimate costs of treatment which include plant-specific
722
-------
in-process controls. Since each plant has a different process flow
diagram, these calculations require extensive hand calculations to
provide the relevant instrumentation, holding tanks, and process
equipment appropriate to individual plants. Flows resulting from in-
plant technology were then used as input to the computer.
Treatment Component Models
The cost estimation program presently incorporates subroutines
providing cost and performance calculations for the treatment
technologies identified in Table VIII-2 {page 784.). These subroutines
have been developed from the best available information including on-
site observations of treatment system performance, costs, and
construction practices at a large number of industrial facilities,
published data, and information obtained from suppliers of wastewater
treatment equipment. The subroutines are modified and new subroutines
added as additional data allow improvements in treating technologies
presently available, and as additional treatment technologies are
required for the industrial wastewater streams under study. Specific
discussion of each of the treatment component models used in costing
wastewater treatment and control systems for the battery manufacturing
category is presented later in this section.
In general terms, cost estimation is provided by mathematical
relationships in each subroutine approximating observed correlations
between component costs and the most significant operational
parameters such as water flow rate, retention times, and pollutant
concentrations. In general, flow rate is the primary determinant of
investment costs and of most annual costs with the exception of
materials costs. In some cases, however, as discussed for the vacuum
filter, pollutant concentrations may also significantly influence
costs.
Cost Factors and Adjustments
Costs are adjusted to a common dollar base and are generally
influenced by a number of factors including: Cost of Labor, Cost of
Energy, Capital Recovery Costs and Debt-Equity Ratio.
Dollar Base - A dollar base of January 1978 was used for all costs.
Investment Cost Adjustment - Investment costs were adjusted to the
aforementioned dollar base by use of the Sewage Treatment Plant
Construction Cost Index. This cost is published monthly by the EPA
Division of Facilities Construction and Operation. The national
average of the Construction Cost Index for January 1978 was 288.0.
Supply Cost Adjustment - Supply costs such as chemicals were related
to the dollar base by the Wholesale Price Index. This figure was
723
-------
obtained from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, "Monthly Labor Review". For January 1978 the "Industrial
Commodities" Wholesale Price Index was 201.6. Process supply and
replacement costs were included in the estimate of the total process
operating and maintenance cost.
Cost o_f Labor - To relate the operating and maintenance labor costs,
the hourly wage rate for non-supervisory workers in water, stream, and
sanitary systems was used from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics Monthly publication, "Employment and Earnings". For
January 1978, this wage rate was $6.00 per hour. This wage rate was
then applied to estimates of operation and maintenance man-hours
within each process to obtain process direct labor charges. To
account for indirect labor charges, 10 percent of the direct labor
costs was added to the direct labor charge to yield estimated total
labor costs. Such items as Social Security, employer contributions to
pension or retirement funds, and employer-paid premiums to various
forms of insurance programs were considered indirect labor costs.
Cost oฃ Energy - Energy requirements were calculated directly within
each process. Estimated costs were then determined by applying an
electrical rate of 3.3 cents per kilowatt hour.
The electrical charge for January 1978 was corroborated through
consultation with the Energy Consulting Services Department of the
Connecticut Light and Power Company. This electrical charge was
determined by assuming that any electrical needs of a waste treatment
facility or in-process technology would be satisfied by an existing
electrical distribution system; i.e., no new meter would be required.
This eliminated the formation of any new demand load base for the
electrical charge.
Capital Recovery Costs - Capital recovery costs were divided into
straight line ten-year depreciation and cost of capital at a ten
percent annual interest rate for a period of ten years. The ten year
depreciation period was consistent with the faster write-off
(financial life) allowed for these facilities even though the
equipment life
-------
obtained by multiplying the initial investment by the capital recovery
factor. The annual depreciation of the capital investment was
calculated by dividing the initial investment by the depreciation
period N, which was assumed to be ten years. The annual cost of
capital is then equal to the annual capital recovery minus the
depreciation.
Debt-Equity Ratio - Limitations on new borrowings assume that debt may
not exceed a set percentage of the shareholders equity. This defines
the breakdown of the capital investment between debt and equity
charges. However, due to the lack of information about the financial
status of various plants, it was not feasible to estimate typical
shareholders equity to obtain debt financing limitations. For these
reasons, no attempt was made to break down the capital cost into debt
and equity charges. Rather, the annual cost of capital was calculated
via the procedure outlined in the Capital Recovery Costs section
above.
Subsidiary Costs
The waste treatment and control system costs for end-of-pipe and in-
process waste water control and treatment systems include subsidiary
costs associated with system construction and operation. These
subsidiary costs include:
administration and laboratory facilities
garage and shop facilities
line segregation
yardwork
land
engineering
legal, fiscal, and administrative
interest during construction
Administrative and laboratory facility investment is the cost of
constructing space for administration, laboratory, and service
functions for the wastewater treatment system. For these cost
computations, it was assumed that there was already an existing
building and space for administration, laboratory, and service
functions. Therefore, there was no investment cost for this item.
725
-------
For laboratory operations, an analytical fee of $90 (January 1978
dollars) was charged for each wastewater sample, regardless of whether
the laboratory work was done on or off site. This analytical fee is
typical of the charges experienced by EPA contractors during the past
several years of sampling programs. The frequency of wastewater
sampling is a function of wastewater discharge flow and is presented
in Table VIII-3 (page 785). This frequency was suggested by the EPA
Water Compliance Division.
For industrial waste treatment facilities being costed, no garage and
shop investment cost was included. This cost item was assumed to be
part of the normal plant costs and was not allocated to the wastewater
treatment system.
Line segregation investment costs account for plant modifications to
segregate wastes. The investment costs for line segregation included
placing a trench in the existing plant floor and installing the lines
in this trench. The same trench was used for all pipes and a gravity
feed to the treatment system was assumed. The pipe was assumed to run
from the center of the floor to a corner. A rate of 2.04 liters per
hour of wastewater discharge per square meter of area (0.05 gallons
per hour per square foot) was used to determine floor and trench
dimensions from wastewater flow rates for use in this cost estimation
process.
The yardwork investment cost item includes the cost of general site
clearing, intercomponent piping, valves, overhead and underground
electrical wiring, cable, lighting, control structures, manholes,
tunnels, conduits, and general site items outside the structural
confines of particular individual plant components. This cost is
typically 9 to 18 percent of the installed components investment
costs. For these cost estimates, an average of 14 percent was
utilized. Annual yardwork operation and maintenance costs are
considered a part of normal plant maintenance and were not included in
these cost estimates.
No new land purchases were required. It was assumed that the land
required for the end-of-pipe treatment system was already available at
the plant.
Engineering costs include both basic and special services. Basic
services include preliminary design reports, detailed design, and
certain office and field engineering services during construction of
projects. Special services include improvement studies, resident
engineering, soils investigations, land surveys, operation and
maintenance manuals, and other miscellaneous services. Engineering
cost is a function of process installed and yardwork investment costs
and ranges between 5.7 and 14 percent depending on the total of these
costs.
726
-------
Legal, fiscal and administrative costs relate to planning and
construction of waste water treatment facilities and include such
items as preparation of legal documents, preparation of construction
contracts, acquisition to land, etc. These costs are a function of
process installed, yardwork, engineering, and land investment costs
ranging between 1 and 3 percent of the total of these costs.
Interest cost during construction is the interest cost accrued on
funds from the time payment is made to the contractor to the end of
the construction period. The total of all other project investment
costs (process installed; yardwork; land; engineering; and legal,
fiscal, and administrative) and the applied interest affect this cost.
An interest rate of 10 percent was used to determine the interest cost
for these estimates. In general, interest cost during construction
varies between 3 and 10 percent of total system costs depending on the
total costs.
COST ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Table VII1-4 (page 786) lists the technologies which are incorporated
in the wastewater treatment and control options offered for the
battery manufacturing category and for which cost estimates have been
developed. These treatment technologies have been selected from among
the larger set of available alternatives discussed in Section VII on
the basis of an evaluation of raw waste characteristics, plant
characteristics (e.g. location, production schedules, product mix, and
land availability), and present treatment practices within the
subcategories addressed. Specific rationale for selection is
addressed in Sections IX, X, XI and XII. Cost estimates for each
technology addressed in this section include capital (investment)
costs and annual costs for depreciation, capital, operation and
maintenance, and energy.
Investment - Investment is the capital expenditure required to bring
the technology into operation. If the installation is a package
contract, the investment is the purchase price of the installed
equipment. Otherwise, it includes the equipment cost, cost of
freight, insurance and taxes, and installation costs.
Total Annual Cost - Total annual cost is the sum of annual costs for
depreciation, capital, operation and maintenance (less energy), and
energy (as a separate cost item).
Depreciation - Depreciation is an allowance, based on tax
regulations, for the recovery of fixed capital from an investment
to be considered as a non-cash annual expense. It may be
regarded as the decline in value of a capital asset due to
wearout and obsolescence.
727
-------
Capital - The annual cost of capital is the cost, to the plant,
of obtaining capital expressed as an interest rate. It is equal
to the capital recovery cost (as previously discussed on cost
factors) less depreciation.
Operation and Maintenance - Operation and maintenance cost is the
annual cost of running the wastewater treatment equipment. It
includes labor and materials such as waste treatment chemicals.
Operation and maintenance cost does not include energy (power or
fuel) costs because these costs are shown separately.
Energy - The annual cost of energy is shown separately, although
it is commonly included as part of operation and maintenance
cost. Energy cost has been shown separately because energy
requirements are a factor considered when developing effluent
limitations, and energy is important to the nation's economy and
natural resources.
Lime Precipitation and Settling (L&S)
This technology removes dissolved pollutants by the formation of
precipitates by reaction with added lime and subsequent removal of the
precipitated solids by gravity settling in a clarifier. Several
distinct operating modes and construction techniques are costed to
provide least cost treatment over a broad range of flow rates.
Because of their interrelationships and integration in common
equipment in some plants, both the chemical addition and solids
removal equipment are addressed in a single subroutine.
Investment Cost - Investment costs are determined for this technology
for continuous treatment systems and for batch treatment. The least
cost system is selected for each application. Continuous treatment
systems include controls, reagent feed equipment, a mix tank for
reagent feed addition and a clarification basin with associated sludge
rakes and pumps. Batch treatment includes only reaction-settling
tanks and sludge pumps.
Controls and reagent feed equipment: costs for continuous treatment
systems include a fixed charge of $9075 covering an immersion pH probe
and transmitter, pH monitor, controller, lime slurry pump, 1 hp mixer,
and transfer pump. In addition, an agitated storage tank sufficient
to hold one days operating requirements of a 30 percent lime slurry is
included. Costs for this tank are estimated based on the holding tank
costs discussed later in this section and shown in Figure VIII-16
(page 769). Lime feed to the slurry tank is assumed to be manual.
Hydrated lime is used and no equipment for lime slaking or handling is
included in these cost estimates. At plants with high lime
consumption mechanical lime feed may be used resulting in higher
728
-------
investment costs, but reduced manpower requirements in comparison to
manual addition.
Mix Tank: Continuous systems also include an agitated tank providing
45 minutes detention for reagent addition and formation of
precipitates.
Clarifier: The clarifier size is calculated based on a hydraulic
loading of 61, 1/hr m2 (15 gph/ft2) and a retention time of 4 hours
with a 20 percent allowance for excess flow capacity. Costs include
both the settling basin or tank and sludge collection mechanism.
Investment costs as a function of flow rate are shown in Figure VII1-3
(page 756). The type of construction used is selected internally in
the cost estimation program to provide least cost.
Sludge Pumps: A cost of $3202 is included in the total capital cost
estimates regardless of whether steel or concrete construction is
used. This cost covers the expense for two centrifugal sludge pumps.
To calculate the total capital cost for continuous lime precipitation
and settling, the costs estimated for the controls and reagent feed
system, mix tank, clarifier and sludge pump must be summed.
For batch treatment, dual above-ground cylindrical carbon steel tanks
sized for 8 hour retention and 20 percent excess capacity are used.
If the batch flow rate exceeds 5204 gph, then costs for fabrication
are included. The capital cost for the batch system (not including
the sludge pump costs) is shown in Figure VIII-4 (page 757). To
complete the capital cost estimation for batch treatment, a fixed
$3,202 cost is included for sludge pumps as discussed above.
Operation ฃ Maintenance Costs - The operation and maintenance costs
for the chemical precipitation and settling routine include:
1) Cost of chemicals added (lime, alum, and polyelectrolyte)
2) Labor (operation and maintenance)
3) Energy
CHEMICAL COST
Lime, alum and polyelectrolyte are added for metals and solids
removal. The amount of lime required is based on equivalent amounts
of various pollutant parameters present in the stream entering the
clarifier, or settling, unit. The methods used in determining the
lime requirements are shown in Table VIII-5 (page 787). Alum and
polyelectrolyte additions are calculated to provide a fixed
concentration of 200 mg/1 of alum and 1 mg/1 of polyelectrolyte.
LABOR
729
-------
Figure VII1-5 (page 758) presents the manhour requirements for the
continuous clarifier system. For the batch system, maintenance labor
is assumed negligible and operation labor is calculated from:
(man hours for operation) = 390 + (0.975) x (Ib. lime added per day)
ENERGY
The energy costs are calculated from the clarifier and sludge pump
horsepower requirements.
Continuous Mode. The clarifier horsepower requirement is assumed
constant over the hours of operation of the treatment system at a
level of 0.0000265 horsepower per 1 gph of flow influent to the clari-
fier. The sludge pumps are assumed operational for 5 minutes of each
operational hour at a level of 0.00212 horsepower per 1 gph of sludge
stream flow.
Batch Mode. The clarifier horsepower requirement is assumed to occur
for 7.5 minutes per operation hour at the following levels:
influent flow < 1042 gph; 0.0048 hp/gph
influent flow > 1042 gph; 0.0096 hp/gph
The power required for the sludge pumps in the batch system is the
same as that required for the sludge pumps in the continuous system.
Given the above requirements, operation and maintenance costs are
calculated based on the following:
$6.00 per man hour + 10 percent indirect labor charge
$41.26/ton of lime
$44.91 ton of alum
$3.59/lb of polyelectrolyte
$0.033/kilowatt-hour of required electricity
Sulfide Precipitation and Settling
This technology removes dissolved pollutants by the formation of
precipitates by reaction with sodium sulfide, sodium bisulfide, or
ferrous sulfide and lime, and subsequent removal of the precipitates
by settling. As discussed for lime precipitation and settling the
addition of chemicals, formation of precipitates, and removal of the
precipitated solids from the wastewater stream are addressed together
in cost estimation because of their interrelationships and commonality
of equipment under some circumstances.
Investment Cost - Capital cost estimation procedures for sulfide
precipitation and settling are identical to those for lime
730
-------
precipitation and settling as shown in Figures VIII-3 and VIII-4.
Continuous treatment systems using concrete and steel construction and
batch treatment systems are costed to provide a least cost system for
each flow range and set of raw waste characteristics. Cost factors
are also the same as for lime precipitation and settling.
Operation and Maintenance Costs - Costs estimated for the operation
and maintenance of a sulfide precipitation and settling system are
also identical to those for lime precipitation and settling except for
the cost of treatment chemicals. Lime is added prior to sulfide
precipitation to achieve an alkaline pH of approximately 8.5-9 and
will lead to the precipitation of some pollutants as hydroxides or
calcium salts. Lime consumption based on both neutralization and
formation of precipitates is calculated to provide a 10 percent excess
over stoichiometric requirements. Sulfide costs are based on the
addition of ferrous sulfate and sodium bisulfide (NaHS) (on a 2:1
ratio by weight) to form a 10 percent excess of ferrous sulfide over
stoichiometric requirements for precipitation. Reagent additions are
calculated as shown in Table VIII-6 (page 788). Addition of alum and
polyelectrolyte is identical to that shown for lime precipitation and
settling as are labor (in Figure VII-5) and energy rates.
The following rates are used in determining operating and maintenance
costs for this technology.
$6.00 per man hour + 10 percent indirect labor charge
$44.91/ton of alum
$3.59/lb of polyelectrolyte
$41.26/ton of lime
$0.27/lb of sodium bisulfide
$143.74/ton of ferrous sulfate
$0.033/kilowatt-hour of electricity
Mixed-Media Filtration
This technology provides removal of suspended solids by filtration
through a bed of particles of several distinct size ranges. As a
polishing treatment after chemical precipitation and settling
processes, mixed-media filtration provides improved removal of
precipitates and thereby improved removal of the original dissolved
pollutants.
Investment Cost - The size of the mixed-media filtration unit is based
on 20 percent excess flow capacity and a hydraulic loading of 0.5
ft2/gpm. The capital cost, presented in Figure VIII-6 (page 759) as a
function of flow rate, includes a backwash mechanism, pumps, controls,
media and installation.
731
-------
Operation And Maintenance - The costs shown in Figure VIII-b for
annual costs includes contributions of materials, electricity and
labor. These curves result from correlations made with data obtained
from a major manufacturer. Energy costs are estimated to be 3 percent
of total O&M.
Membrane Filtration
Membrane filtration includes addition of sodium hydroxide to form
metal precipitates and removal of the resultant solids on a membrane
filter. As a polishing treatment, it minimizes solubility of metal
and provides highly effective removal of precipitated hydroxides and
sulfides.
Investment Cost - Based on manufacturer's data, a factor of $52.6 per
1 gph flow rate to the membrane filter is used to estimate capital
cost. Capital cost includes installation.
Operation and Maintenance Cost - The operation and maintenance costs
for membrane filtration include:
1) Labor
2) Sodium Hydroxide Added
3) Energy
Each of these contributing factors are discussed below.
LABOR
2 man-hours per day of operation are included.
SODIUM HYDROXIDE ADDITION
Sodium hydroxide is added to precipitate metals as hydroxides or to
insure a pH favorable to sulfide precipitation. The amount of sodium
hydroxide required is based on equivalent amounts of various pollutant
parameters present in the stream entering the membrane filter. The
method used to determine the sodium hydroxide demand is shown below:
POLLUTANT ANaOH
Chromium, Total 0.000508
Copper 0.000279
Acidity 0.000175
Iron, DIS 0.000474
Zinc 0.000268
Cadmium 0.000158
Cobalt 0.000301
Manganese 0.000322
732
-------
Aluminum
Sodium Hydroxide Per Pollutant (Ib/day)
(GPH) x Pollutant Concentration (mg/1)
ENERGY
The energy required is as follows:
two 1/2 horsepower mixers operating
operational hour
two one horsepower pumps operating
operational hour
0.000076
= ANaOH x Flow Rate
34 minutes per
37 minutes per
one 2(T horsepower pump operating 45 minutes per operational hour
Given the above requirements, operation and maintenance costs are
calculated based on the following:
$6.00 per man-hour + 10 percent indirect labor charge
$0.11 per pound of sodium hydroxide required
$0.033 per kilowatt-hour of energy required
Calculated costs in the battery category as a function of flow rate
for membrane filtration are presented in Figure VIII-7.
Reverse Osmosis (RO)
This technology achieves the concentration of dissolved organic and
inorganic pollutants in wastewater by forcing the water through semi-
permeable membranes which will not pass the pollutants. The water
which permeates the membranes is relatively free of contaminants and
suitable for reuse in most manufacturing process operations. A number
of different membrane types and constructions are available which are
optimized for different wastewater characteristics (especially pH and
temperature). Two variations, one suited specifically to recovery of
nickel plating solutions/ and the other of more general applicability
are addressed in cost and performance models.
Investment Cost - Data from several manufacturers of RO equipment is
summarized in the cost curve shown in Figure VIII-8 (page 761). The
cost shown includes a prefilter, chemical feed system, scale inhibitor
tank, high pressure pump, and permeators. Installation is also
included. Two different systems, one using cellulose acetate
membranes suitable for nickel plating bath recovery, and one using
polyamide membranes which are tolerant of a wider pH and temperature
range are addressed. The polyamide resin systems are applicable to
treatment of battery manufacturing wastewaters.
733
-------
Operation and Maintenance Cost - Contributions to operation and
maintenance costs include:
LABOR
The annual labor requirement is shown in Figure VIII-9 (page 762).
Labor cost is calculated using a $6.00 per hour labor rate plus a 10
percent indirect labor charge.
. MATERIALS
The annual cost of materials used in operation and maintenance of the
reverse osmosis unit is shown in Figure VIII-10 (page 763). The major
component of the materials cost is the cost of replacement of
permeator modules which are assumed to have a 1.5 year service life
based on manufacturers' data.
POWER
The power requirements for reverse osmosis unit is shown in Figure
VI11-11 (page 764). This requirement is assumed to be constant over
the operating hours of the system being estimated. The energy cost is
determined using a charge of $0.033 per kilowatt-hour.
Ion Exchange
This technology achieves the concentration of inorganic pollutants in
wastewater by exchanging ions on the surface of the ion exchange resin
with ions of similar charge from the waste stream in which the resin
is immersed. The contaminants in the waste stream are exchanged for
harmless ions of the resin. The water is then suitable for reuse in
most manufacturing process operations. A number of different resins
are available which are optimized for different wastewater
characteristics.
Investment cost, and operation and maintenance cost are comparable to
those discussed above under "Reverse Osmosis." The costs are
summarized in the cost curve shown in Figure VII1-8.
Vacuum Filtration
Vacuum filtration is widely used to reduce the water content of high
solids streams. In the battery manufacturing industry, this
technology is applied to dewatering sludge from clarifiers, membrane
filters and other waste treatment units.
Investment Cost - The vacuum filter is sized based on a typical
loading of 14.6 kilograms of influent solids per hour per square meter
of filter area (3 Ib/ft2-hr). The curves of cost versus flow rate at
734
-------
TSS concentrations of 3 percent and 5 percent are shown in Figure
VIII-12 (page 765). The capital cost obtained from this curve
includes installation costs.
Operation and Maintenance Cost - Contributions to operation and
maintenance costs include:
LABOR
The vacuum filtration labor costs may be determined for off-site
sludge disposal or for on-site sludge disposal. The required
operating hours per year varies with both flow rate and the total
suspended solids concentration in the influent stream. Figure VIII-13
(page 766) shows the variance of operating hours with flow rate and
TSS concentration. Maintenance labor for either sludge disposal mode
is fixed at 24 manhours per year.
MATERIALS
The cost of materials and supplies needed for operation and
maintenance includes belts, oil, grease, seals, and chemicals required
to raise the total suspended solids to the vacuum filter. The amount
of chemicals required (iron and alum) is based on raising the TSS
concentration to the filter by 1 mg/1. Costs of materials required as
a function of flow rate and unaltered TSS concentrations is presented
in Figure VIII-14 (page 767).
ENERGY
Electrical costs needed to supply power for pumps and controls is
presented in Figure VII1-15 (page 768). As the required horsepower of
the pumps is dependent on the influent TSS level, the costs are
presented as a function of flow rate and TSS level.
Holding Tanks
Tanks serving a variety of purposes in wastewater treatment and in-
process control systems are fundamentally similar in design and
construction and in cost. They may include equalization tanks,
solution holding tanks, slurry or sludge holding tanks, mixing tanks,
and settling tanks from which sludge is intermittently removed
manually or by sludge pumps. Tanks for all of these purposes are
addressed in a single cost estimation subroutine with additional costs
for auxilliary equipment such as sludge pumps added as appropriate.
Investment Costs - Costs are estimated for either steel or concrete
tanks. Tank construction may be specified as input data, or
determined on a least cost basis. Retention time is specified as
input data and, together with stream flow rate, determines tank size.
735
-------
Capital costs for concrete and steel tanks sized for 20 percent excess
capacity are shown as functions of volume in Figure VIII-16 (page
769)-
Operation and Maintenance Costs - For all holding tanks except sludge
holding tanks, operation and maintenance costs are minimal in
comparison to other system O&M costs. Therefore only energy costs for
pump and mixer operation are determined. These energy costs are
presented in Figure VII1-17 (page 770).
For sludge holding tanks, additional operation and maintenance labor
requirements are reflected in increased O&M costs. The required
manhours used in cost estimation are presented in Figure VIII-18 (page
771). Labor costs are determined using a labor rate of $6.00 per
manhour plus 10 percent indirect labor charge.
Where tanks are used for settling as in lime precipitation and
clarification batch treatment, additional operation and maintenance
costs are calculated as discussed specifically for each technology.
JDH Adjustment (Neutralization)
The adjustment of pH values is a necessary precursor to a number of
treatment operations and is frequently required to return waste
streams to a pH value suitable for discharge following metals
precipitation. This is typically accomplished by metering an alkaline
or acid reagent into a mix tank under automatic feedback control.
Investment Costs - Figure VIII-19 (page 772) presents capital costs
for pH adjustment as a function of the flow rate going into the units.
The coat calculations are based on steel or concrete tanks with a 15
minute retention time and an excess capacity of 20 percent. Tank
construction is selected on a least cost basis. Costs include a pH
probe and control system, reagent mix tanks, a mixer in the pH
adjustment tank, and system installation.
Operation and Maintenance Costs - Contributions to operation and
maintenance costs include:
LABOR
The annual manhour requirement is presented as a function of flow rate
in Figure VIII-20 (page 773). The cost of labor may be calculated
using a labor rate of $6.00 per hour plus a 10 percent indirect labor
charge.
MATERIALS
736
-------
Sodium hydroxide or sulfuric acid is added according to the stream pH,
and acidity or alkalinity. The amount of lime or acid required may be
calculated by the procedure shown in Table VIII-7 {page 789). The
cost of lime or acid added may be determined using the rates of $0.11
per pound of sodium hydroxide and $70.0 per ton of sulfuric acid.
ENERGY
Power, required for a mixer, is based on a representative installation
with 1-turnover per minute. The daily horsepower requirement is 3 hp
per 10,000 gph flow rate. The energy cost may be calculated using the
rates of .8 kilowatts per horsepower and $.033 per kilowatt-hour.
Contract Removal
Sludge, waste oils, and in some cases concentrated waste solutions
frequently result from wastewater treatment processes. These may be
disposed of on-site by incineration, landfill or reclamation, but are
most often removed on a contract basis for off-site disposal. System
cost estimates presented in this report are based on contract removal
of sludges and waste oils. In addition, where only small volumes of
concentrated wastewater are produced, contract removal for off-site
treatment may represent the most cost-effective approach to water
pollution abatement. Estimates of solution contract haul costs are
also provided by this treatment component and may be selected in place
of on-site treatment on a least-cost basis.
Investment Costs - Capital investment for contract removal is zero.
Operating Costs - Annual costs are estimated for contract removal of
total waste streams or sludge and oil streams as specified in input
data. Sludge and oil removal costs are further divided into wet and
dry haulage depending upon whether or not upstream sludge dewatering
is provided. The use of wet haulage or of sludge dewatering and dry
haulage is based on least cost as determined by annualized system
costs over a ten year period. Wet haulage costs are always used in
batch treatment systems and when the volume of the sludge stream is
less than 100 gallons per day. Both wet sludge haulage and total
waste haulage differ in cost depending on the chemical composition of
the water removed. Wastes are classified as cyanide bearing,
hexavalent chromium bearing, or oily and assigned different haulage
costs as shown below.
Waste Composition Haulage Cost
>.05 mg/1 CN- $0.45/gallon
>.l mg/1 Cr+ซ $0.20/gallon
Oil & grease > TSS $0.12/gallon
All others $0.16/gallon
737
-------
Dry sludge haul costs are estimated at $0.12/gallon and 40 percent dry
solids in the sludge.
Carbon Adsorption
This technology removes organic and inorganic pollutants and suspended
solids by pore adsorption, surface reactions, physical filtering by
carbon grains, and in some cases as part of a biological treatment
system. It typically follows other types of treatment as a means of
polishing effluent. A variety of carbon adsorption systems exist:
upflow, downflow, packed bed, expanded bed, regenerative and
throwaway. Regeneration of carbon requires an expensive furnace and
fuel. As a general criteria, it is not economically feasible to
install a thermal regeneration system unless carbon usage is above
1000 Ib per day.
Investment Costs - Capital investment costs estimated for carbon
adsorption systems applied to battery manufacturing wastewater are
provided in Figure VII1-21 (page 774) and assume a packed bed
throwaway system. All equipment costs are based on the EPA Technology
Transfer Process Design Manual, Carbon Adsorption and include a
contactor system, a pump station, and initial carbon. Costs for
carbon adsorption are highly variable and it is usually cost effective
to pretreat waste before using carbon adsorption. The high cost of
removing a small amount of a given priority pollutant results from the
requirement that the system be sized and operated to remove all
organics present which are more easily removed than the species of
interest. Removal efficiencies depend upon the type of carbon used,
and a mixture of carbon types may be cost beneficial. In regenerative
systems removal efficiencies achieved by regenerated carbon are vastly
different from fresh carbon. Equipment sizing is based on dynamic (as
opposed to carbon isotherm) studies.
Operation and Maintenance Costs - The chief operation and maintenance
costs are labor, replacement carbon, and electricity for the pump
station. Annual costs determined for battery manufacturing
applications are shown in Figure VIII-21 (page 774). Carbon usage
selected to provide 99 percent removal of each organic priority
pollutant is determined from a reciprocal carbon efficiency of an
appropriate mix of carbons (bituminous and lignite) estimated at 0.2
ft3 of fresh unregenerated (virgin) carbon per pound of organics
provided by the influent. Carbon is costed at $1.19/lb and
electricity at $0.033/kw hr.
Chromium Reduction
This technology provides chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium
under acid conditions to allow subsequent removal of the trivalent
738
-------
form by precipitation as the hydroxide. Treatment may be provided in
either continuous or batch mode, and cost estimates are developed for
both. Operating mode for system cost estimates is selected on a least
cost basis.
Investment Costs - Cost estimates include all required equipment for
performing this treatment technology including reagent feed, equipment
reaction tanks, mixers and controls. Different reagents are provided
for batch and continuous treatment resulting in different system
design considerations as discussed below.
For both continuous and batch treatment, sulfuric acid is added for pH
control. A 90-day supply is stored in the 25 percent aqueous form in
an above-ground, covered concrete tank, 0.305 m(l ft) thick.
For continubus chromium reduction the single chromium reduction 'tank
is sized as an above-ground cylindrical concrete tank with a 0.305 m
(1 ft) wall thickness, a 54 minute retention time, and 20 percent
excess capacity factor. Sulfur dioxide is added to convert the
influent hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form.
The control system for continuous chromium reduction consists of:
1 immersion pH probe and transmitter
1 immersion ORP probe and transmitter
1 pH and ORP monitor
2 slow process controllers
1 sulfonator and associated pressure regulator
1 sulfuric acid pump
1 transfer pump for sulfur dioxide ejector
2 maintenance kits for electrodes, and miscellaneous
electrical equipment and piping
For batch chromium reduction, the dual chromium reduction tanks are
sized as above-ground cylindrical concrete tanks, 0.305 m (1 ft)
thick, with a 4 hour retention time, an excess capacity factor of 0.2.
Sodium bisulfite is added to reduce the hexavalent chromium.
A completely manual system is provided for batch operation.
Subsidiary equipment includes:
1 sodium bisulfite mixing and feed tank
1 metal stand and agitator collector
1 sodium bisulfite mixer with disconnects
1 sulfuric acid pump
1 sulfuric acid mixer with disconnects
2 immersion pH probes
1 pH monitor, and miscellaneous piping
739
-------
Capital costs for batch and continuous treatment systems are presented
in Figure VIII-22 (page 775).
Operation and Maintenance - Costs for operating and maintaining
chromium reduction systems are determined as follows:
Labor
The labor requirements are plotted in Figure VIII-23 (page 776).
Maintenance of the batch system is assumed negligible and s.o it is not
shown.
Chemical Addition
For the continuous system, sulfur dioxide is added according to the
following:
(Ib S02/day) = (15.43) (flow to unit-MGD) (Cr + ซ mg/1 )
In the batch mode, sodium bisulfite is added in place of sulfur
dioxide according to the following:
(Ibs NaHS03/day) = (20.06) (flow to unit-MGD) (Cr + ซ mg/1)
Energy
Two horsepower is required for chemical mixing. The mixers are
assumed to operate continuously over the operation time of the
treatment system.
Given the above requirements, operation and maintenance costs are
calculated based on the following:
$6.00 per manhour + 10 percent indirect labor charge
$380/ton of sulfur dioxide
$20/ton of sodium bisulfite
$0. 033/kilowatt hour of required electricity
Vapor Recompression Evaporation
Vapor recompression evaporation is used to increase energy efficiency
by allowing heat to be transferred from the condensing water vapor to
the evaporating wastewater. The heat contained in the compressed
vapor is used to heat the wastewater, and energy costs for system
operation are reduced.
Costs for this treatment component related to flow are displayed in
Figure VIII-24 (page 777).
740
-------
In-Process Treatment and Control Components
A wide variety of in process controls has been identified for
application to battery manufacturing wastewaters, and many of these
require in process treatment or changes in manufacturing plants and
capital equipment for which additional costs must be estimated. For
most of these in-process controls, especially recirculation and reuse
of specific process streams, the required equipment and resultant
costs are identical to end-of-pipe components discussed above. The
recirculation of amalgamation area wash water requires the removal of
mercury for which costs are estimated based on the sulfide
precipitation and settling system previously discussed. Other area
wash water costs are based on the holding tank costs associated with
sizing assumptions discussed for each treatment technology sequence
within each subcategory.
In-process costs were estimated separately for the lead subcategory
and include the following:
Dehydrated Batteries. Figure VII1-25 (page 778) shows the in-process
costs for dehydrated batteries which includes the recirculation of
rinsewater, scrubber water, and seal or ejector water. Figure VIII-26
(page 779) plots the labor costs for the countercurrent rinsing of
dehydrated battery electrodes.
Line Segregation. Figure VII1-27 (page 780) displays costs associated
with line segregation and piping changes for both dehydrated and other
(wet and damp) batteries.
Battery Wash. Figure VIII-28 (page 781) illustrates the costs
associated with recirculation of battery wash wastewater.
Slow Rate Charging. The use of slow charging rates for lead acid
batteries eliminates the use of contact cooling water, reduces the
need for wet scrubbers and battery rinsing, and is compatible with
single fill operation. Its implementation requires the provision of
additional floor area and charging racks to accommodate a larger
inventory of batteries on-charge simultaneously. Instantaneous power
demand, and therefore the size of required rectification and control
equipment are unchanged.
Investment Cost - Required capital expenditures are estimated
based on erection of a building to provide 0.8 square feet of
floor area per pound of batteries produced per hour to allow for
an increase in the time on-charge of 6 days. This area is based
on approximately 50 Ib per square foot for the batteries
themselves and a 40 percent packing density in the charging area
and six high stacking of the batteries.
741
-------
Building costs are shown as a function of lead used in batteries
in Figure VIII-29 (page 782). Twenty percent is included in
these costs to allow for installation of charging racks and
necessary services. Annual costs of capital for the building are
estimated based on a 25 year capital recovery rather than the 10
year period used for waste treatment equipment. This is
consistent with normal accounting practices.
Operation and Maintenance - Required handling of batteries and
electric power requirements are not affected by this process
change. Further, batteries on slow-rate charge require minimal
attention. Therefore, no operating and maintenance costs are
calculated for this in process control technique.
Summary of Treatment and Control Component Costs. Costs for each of
the treatment and control components discussed above as applied to
process wastewater streams within the battery manufacturing category
are presented in Tables VIII-8 to VIII-20 (pages 790-802). Three
levels of cost are provided for each technology representative of
median, low, and high raw waste flow rates encountered within the
category.
TREATMENT SYSTEM COST ESTIMATES
Estimates of the total cost of wastewater treatment and control
systems for battery manufacturing process wastewater are made by
incorporating the treatment and control components discussed above.
BPT or PSES Option 0 System Cost Estimates
Cadmium Subcateqory - The option 0 treatment system for this sub-
category, shown in Figure IX-1 (page 845), consists of oil skimming
(if necessary) lime precipitation and settling of all process
wastewater for the removal of nickel, cadmium and other toxic metals,
and includes a vacuum filter for dewatering the clarifier sludge.
Rationale for selection of this system is presented in Section IX.
Assumptions used in sizing system components are those discussed for
the individual treatment components.
Data from dcps and plant visits were evaluated to determine the
existing in-process treatment technologies for wastewater
conservation, and the actual and achievable loading levels. These
technologies include recycle or reuse of process solutions,
segregation of non-contact cooling water from process wastewater and
control of electrolyte drips and spills. The in-process costs reflect
additional controls required for water use reduction at high flow
plants.
742
-------
Calcium Subcateqory - The option 0 treatment system, shown in Figure
IX-2 (page 846.), consists of the treatment of two streams. The first
waste stream is settled to remove asbestos, barium chromate and
suspended zirconium powder, reduced to insure that no slightly soluble
barium chromate provides hexavalent chromium, and then merged with the
second wastewater stream from cell testing. The combined stream is
treated with lime to precipitate dissolved metals. The precipitate is
removed, and the water is neutralized in the sedimentation tank before
being discharged. The sludge from sedimentation is filtered, and the
filtrate is recycled to the lime precipitation tank. Contract hauling
of the solid wastes from the treatment is more economical than on-site
disposal for the low flows encountered in the calcium subcategory.
Lead Subcateqory - The option 0 treatment and control system for the
lead subcategory is shown in Figure IX-3 (page 847). it includes
segregation of process wastewater resulting from paste application,
multi-stage settling of this waste stream, and subsequent reuse of
both the water and the settled solids in the pasting operation. For
the balance of the process wastewater, the treatment includes skimming
for the removal of oil and grease, precipitation with lime, and
settling for the removal of lead and other metals. Carbonate, which
is not specifically costed as an additive, improves the effectiveness
of treatment for lead (see Section VII). The cost associated with
carbonate addition is negligible for this treatment system. The
sludge from the clarifier is dewatered by vacuum filtration, and the
filtrate is recycled to the lime precipitation tank.
Each of the settling tanks used for pasting wastewater recirculation
is sized to provide one hour of retention. Assumptions used in
costing other system components are those presented in the individual
technology discussions. System cost estimates include an allowance
for segregating paste application wastewater.
Leclanche Subcateqory - Option 0 for this subcategory achieves zero
discharge of process wastewater pollutants by the application of in-
process control techniques. No costs are incurred in most plants in
the subcategory because no process wastewater is presently produced.
Cost estimates for the remaining plants reflect holding tanks, pumps,
piping, and treatment facilities needed to achieve recycle of process
wastewater from paste setting and from equipment and tool washing
operations. Paste setting wastewater is treated by lime or sulfide
(ferrous sulfide) precipitation prior to recycle, and equipment wash
wastewater is treated in settling tanks. In some cases, where the
reported volume of process wastewater was small, estimated costs
reflect contract removal of the wastes rather than treatment and
recycle.
Lithium Subcateqory - The option 0 treatment for this subcategory, as
shown in Figure IX-4 (page 848.), includes grouping of wastes into
743
-------
three streams. Stream A resulting from heat paper production is
settled to remove asbestos, barium chromate and zirconium powder
suspension. Hexavalent chromium in this stream is then reduced to the
trivalent state. Metals are precipitated by lime addition, and the
precipitate along with the solid particulates are removed in a
clarifier. The resulting sludge is dewatered by vacuum filtration,
and the filtrate is recycled to the lime precipitation tank.
Treatment for Stream B resulting from all cathode and ancillary
operations except heat paper production and air scrubber wastewaters
includes precipitation with lime or acid addition, and settling.
The process wastewater from Stream C, air scrubbers, is first aerated
to oxidize sulfur, and then treated with lime to precipitate metals.
The precipitates along with solid particulates are removed by
settling. Contract hauling of all wastes from this subcategory is
used when there are low flows and hauling is less costly than
treatment.
Magnesium Subcateqory - The option 0 treatment for this subcategory
presented in Figure IX-5 (page 849) includes grouping wastes into
three streams. Wastewater from heat paper production (Stream A) is
settled in a tank to remove asbestos, barium chromate and zirconium,
and then treated for the reduction of hexavalent chromium to the
trivalent state. The final treatment includes precipitation of
chromium and any other metals by lime addition, settling of the
precipitate along with suspended solids and vacuum filtration of the
sludge following settling. The filtrate is recycled to the chemical
precipitation tank.
For Stream B, wastewater from silver chloride cathode production and
spent process solution are first oxidized by means of potassium
permanganate to reduce the COD level. This stream is then treated
along with the wastewater from cell testing, and floor and equipment
wash for precipitation of heavy metals (by means of lime or acid
addition), followed by settling and vacuum filtration of the sludge.
The filtrate is recycled to the chemical precipitation tank.
The process wastewater from Stream C, air scrubbers, is first treated
by lime for precipitation of metals, and then settling of the
precipitate and solid particulates, that are dewatered by means of a
vacuum filter. The filtrate is recycled to the precipitation tank.
Contract hauling of the solid wastes from this treatment is usually
more economical than on-site disposal for the low flows encountered in
the magnesium subcategory.
Zinc Subcateqory. The option 0 wastewater treatment and control
system for this subcategory includes skimming for the removal of oil
and grease, lime or acid addition for the precipitation of metals,
744
-------
sedimentation of the precipitate along with solid participates, and
vacuum filtration of the sludge. The filtrate is recycled to the
chemical precipitation treatment tank. In the draft development
document distributed for comment, this option included sulfide
precipitation and filtration. This option was changed to L&S
technology because of problems associated with sulfide precipitation
at existing plants and the fact that filters are less costly with flow
reduction, evaluated as a BAT (PSES) option.
In-process control technologies included at option 0 for this sub-
category include the following: reuse of process solutions,
segregation of non-contract cooling water, segregation of organic-
bearing cell cleaning wastewater, control of electrolyte drips and
spills, elimination of chromates in cell washing, and flow controls
for rinse waters.
BAT (PSES) Treatment System Cost Estimates - Existing Sources
The following discussion of cost estimates for treatment options is
based on data from existing sources. Rationale for the selection of
the BAT options are discussed in Section X and the PSES options are
discussed in Section XII.
Cadmium Subcategory - Costs were estimated for three options of
treatment and control considered appropriate for BAT and PSES.
Option 1
As shown in Figure X-l (page 938), end-of-pipe treatment for option 1
is the same as the option 0 treatment with the addition of a number of
in-process control techniques to limit the volume of process
wastewater and pollutant loads to treatment. The in-process control
technology recommended for option 1, in addition to that listed for
option 0, include: recycle or reuse of pasted and pressed powder anode
wastewater, use of dry methods to clean floors and equipment, control
of rinse flow rates, recirculation of wastewater from air scrubber,
dry cleaning of impregnated electrodes, reduction of the cell wash
water use, countercurrent rinse of silver and cadmium powder, and
countercurrent rinse for sintered and electrodeposited anodes and
cathodes.
Costs for recirculation of scrubber solutions are based on the
provision of tanks providing 2 hours retention of the scrubber
discharge. No costs are determined for control of rinse flow rates
since this can be accomplished with minimum manpower and manual flow
control values which are present on most units or available at low
cost. Similarly, no costs were estimated for the use of dry brushing
processes since these are observed to be used in existing plants on a
745
-------
competitive basis with wet brushing techniques. Estimates include
costs for the segregation of two scrubber discharge streams. Cost
estimation for multistage countercurrent rinses are based on present
rinse flow and production rates and considerations previously
discussed for this in-process technique. Costs for reuse of final
product wash water after cadmium powder precipitation are based on
provision of a tank for retention of final wash water from one batch
of product for use in early rinses of the next batch.
Option 2
As shown in Figure X-2 (page 939), end-of-pipe treatment provided for
cadmium subcategory wastes at option 2 is identical to that provided
at option 1, except that the effluent from settling is filtered in
option 2 and that^the backwash from polishing filter is recycled to
the precipitation tank. In-process control techniques for option 2
are identical to those recommended for option 1.
Option 3
End-of-pipe treatment for option 3 includes concentration of process
wastewater using reverse osmosis prior to chemical precipitation,
settling and filtration for final treatment. Permeate from the
reverse osmosis unit is reused in the process. As shown in Figure X-3
(page 940), before reverse osmosis, wastewater is skimmed to remove
oil and grease, treated with lime or acid to form metal precipitates,
and then filtered to remove precipitates and solids. Initial
precipitation and filtration steps protect the permeators. Sludge is
dewatered in a vacuum filter. In-process control techniques at option
3 include improved process control on cadmium powder precipitation to
eliminate the need for rework of this product in addition to the in-
process controls discussed as option 2.
Option 4
As shown in Figure X-4 (page 941), option 4 end-of-pipe treatment
includes oil skimming, chemical precipitation, settling filtration,
and ion exchange (or reverse osmosis) prior to vapor recompression
evaporation of the ion exchange regenerant (or reverse osmosis brine).
The sludge from settling is dewatered by vacuum filtration, and the
filtrate is recycled to the chemical precipitation tank. Distillate
or permeate from the evaporation unit is returned to the production
process for reuse. In-process control technologies include all those
discussed for options 2 and 3 as well as the elimination of discharge
from the impregnation rinse.
Calcium Subcateqory - Costs were estimated for two options of
treatment and control considered appropriate for BAT and PSES.
746
-------
Option 1
At option 1, end-of-pipe treatment is identical to that provided for
option 0 with the addition of a mixed-media filter prior to discharge.
This filter is intended to act as a polishing unit on the treated
waste stream. The filter backwash is returned to the treatment
system. A schematic of the system is provided in Figure X-5 (page
942) .
Option 2
This level of treatment is similar to option 1 except that the waste
stream from heat paper production is recycled back to the process. A
schematic of the system is provided in Figure X-6 (page 943).
Lead Subcategory - Costs were estimated for four options of treatment
and control considered appropriate for BAT and PSES.
Option 1
As shown in Figure X - 7 (page 944) Option 1, end-of-pipe treatment is
identical to that provided for option 0, but additional in-process
control techniques significantly reduce the volume of wastewater which
is treated and discharged. In-process controls included in option 1,
in addition to those listed for option 0, include low rate charge in
case, recirculation of air scrubber water, control of spills,
countercurrent rinse of electrodes after open formation, elimination
of process water for plate dehydration, water rinse of batteries prior
to detergent wash, and countercurrent rinse of batteries or reuse of
battery rinse water.
Cost estimates for in-process controls include paste recirculation
costs included at option 0, costs for additional plant floor space to
allow low rate charging of batteries, and tanks for retention of 2
hours flow from wet scrubbers on formation operations to allow
recirculation and eventual use of the scrubber bleed in acid cutting.
Recirculation tanks providing one hour retention to allow reuse of
battery rinse water and eventual use of the discharge in acid cutting,
tanks providing for retention and reuse of wastewater from dehydration
vacuum ejectors or vacuum pump seals, and countercurrent rinses for
dehydrated battery electrodes are also included in cost estimates.
Additional in-process control techniques applicable as option 1 for
which no specific costs are estimated or which are alternatives to the
control techniques chosen as a basis for cost estimates, are discussed
in Section VII.
Option 2
747
-------
As shown in Figure X-8 (page 945), treatment is identical to option 1
with the addition of filtration following settling. The backwash from
the filter is recycled to the precipitation tank.
Assumptions in costing the end-of-pipe treatment components are those
discussed for the individual technologies. In-process control costs
are the same as option 1.
Option 3
As shown in Figure X-9 (page 946), the end-of-pipe treatment system
provided for this level of treatment and control is identical to that
provided for option 2 except that chemical precipitation is performed
by means of sulfide addition instead of lime and carbonate addition,
and membrane filtration is used instead of mixed-media filtration to
recover unsettled precipitates and solid particulates from the
sedimentation tank. In-process control techniques are identical to
those included at option 1.
Option 4
End-of-pipe treatment for option 4 includes concentration of process
wastewaters using reverse osmosis prior to treatment identical to that
provided at option 3. Permeate from the reverse osmosis unit is
reused in the process. As shown in Figure X-10 (page 947), prior to
reverse osmosis, wastewater is skimmed to remove oil and grease,
treated with lime and carbonate to form metal precipitates, and then
filtered to remove precipitates and solids.
Assumptions in costing end-of-pipe treatment components are those
presented in individual technology discussions. In-process control
costs are identical to those estimated for option 1.
Leclanche Subcategory - Only one option is considered for BAT (PSES)
for this subcategory. This option is identical to BPT (PSES) option 0
and achieves zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants by the
application of in-process control technology.
Lithium Subcateqory - Costs were estimated for three options of
treatment and control presented for evaluation as BAT and PSES.
Option 1
This level of treatment is similar to that prescribed for option 0
except that the wastewaters from Streams A and B are passed through a
polishing filter after settling. Stream C is unchanged from option 0.
The schematic for this system is provided in Figure X-ll (page 948).
The filter backwash is returned to waste treatment.
748
-------
Option 2
As shown in Figure X-12 (page 949) option 2 treatment is identical to
option 1 treatment except that Stream A wastewater is treated in a
settling tank for the removal of solids, and then recycled to the
process.
Option 3
At this level of treatment and control shown in Figure X-13 (page
950)/ treatment identical to option 2 is provided, except that Stream
C process wastewater originating from air scrubbers is filtered
following aeration, precipitation and settling.
Magnesium Subcateqory - Costs were estimated for three options of
treatment and control presented for evaluation as BAT and PSES.
Option 1
This level of treatment is similar to that prescribed for option 0
except that the effluent originating from Stream A is filtered
following precipitation and settling. The backwash from the filter is
recycled to the chemical precipitation tank. The schematic for this
system is provided in Figure X-14 (page 951). The additional
recommended in-process technology includes countercurrent cascade
rinse for silver chloride cathodes in Stream B.
Option 2
Option 2 treatment is identical to option 1 except that Stream A
wastewater is treated in a settling tank for the removal of solids,
and then recycled to the process and sedimentation discharge in option
1 treatment of Stream B is filtered. No in-process control technology
is recommended. Stream C treatment is unchanged.
Option 3
Option 3 is identical to option 2 treatment except that on Stream B a
carbon adsorption unit is used instead of the oxidizer in option 2
treatment of the silver chloride cathode production wastewater and
spent process solution, and sedimentation effluent in option 2
treatment of Stream C wastewaters is filtered before discharge. A
schematic of option 3 is shown in Figure X-16 (page 953).
Zinc Subcateqory - Costs were estimated for three options of treatment
and control presented for evaluation as BAT and PSES.
Option 1
749
-------
This level of treatment and control combines end-of-pipe treatment as
specified for option 0 with additional in-process control techniques
to reduce wastewater flow rates and pollutant loads discharged to
treatment. Additional in-process controls include countercurrent
rinse of amalgamated zinc powder, formed zinc electrodes, electro-
deposited silver powder, formed silver oxide electrodes, silver
peroxide, impregnated nickel cathodes, and silver etching grids; as
well as recirculation of amalgamation area floor wash water,
elimination of electrolyte preparation spills, and dry cleanup or wash
water reuse for floor and equipment. The schematic for the system is
shown in Figure X-17 (page 954).
Cost estimates include provision of eight tanks, associated pumps and
piping to provide retention of rinse waters from wet amalgamation
operations allowing countercurrent rinsing in which water is used in
an earlier rinse stage on each batch of amalgam produced, and water
from only the first rinse is discharged to treatment. Treatment and
recycle costs for amalgamation area wash water are based on batch
treatment using lime or ferrous sulfide and are discussed under lime
or sulfide precipitation and settling. Cost estimates are also
provided for countercurrent rinses as described in the general
discussion of that technology. No costs are estimated for dry clean
up of general plant floor areas.
Option 2
Option 2 is identical to option 1 except that the settled effluent
from option 2 is treated by filtration. A schematic of option 2 is
shown in Figure X-18 (page 955). No additional in-process control
techniques beyond those listed for option 1 are recommended.
Option 3
Option 3 is identical to option 2, except chemical precipitation is
performed by sulfide addition rather than lime addition, and membrane
filtration is used instead of mixed-media polishing filtration.
Additional in-process controls include elimination of wastewater from
gelled amalgam. Costs for gelled amalgam equipment wash are estimated
based on provision of pumps and piping as discussed for line
segregation costs. A schematic for option 3 is provided in Figure X-
19 (page 956).
Option 4
End-of-pipe treatment for option 4 includes concentration of process
wastewaters using reverse osmosis prior to sulfide precipitation,
settling and filtration. Permeate from the reverse osmosis is reused
in the process. As shown in Figure X-20 (page 957), prior to reverse
osmosis, wastewater is skimmed to remove oil and grease, treated with
750
-------
lime to form precipitates, and then filtered to remove precipitates
and solids. Additional recommended in-process technology includes
amalgamation by dry processes which eliminates all wastewater from
amalgamation.
NSPS (PSNS) Treatment System Cost Estimates - New Source
The suggested treatment options and estimated costs for new sources
are identical to the treatment options for existing sources. Each
option is discussed above. Rationale for the selection of new source
options is discussed in Sections XI and XII. Cost estimates overstate
the actual costs a new source would incur because new sources will be
able to plan and implement both in-process modifications and end-of-
pipe treatment without any retrofitting costs. Additionally, new
sources will be able to plan and implement more cost saving systems
such as resource recovery of metal and process solutions.
Use oฃ Cost Estimation Results
The costing methodology and recommended treatment system options were
used primarily to estimate compliance costs for the implementation of
treatment in the category. Costs for each plant were calculated for
what additional equipment would be needed at an existing site for the
treatment options. Contract hauling costs were estimated for plants
when hauling would be less costly than installing treatment. In this
category actual costing is plant specific and is dependent upon what
processes a plant is using. The results of estimating compliance
costs for the category are tabulated in Table X-62 (page 1008). Plants
which were known to be closed were eliminated from summation.
The cost results were also used for the economic impact analysis (See
"Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed Effluent Standards and
Limitations for the Battery Manufacturing Industry"). For this
analysis cost estimates were broken down for each facility (location
for producing final battery products, i.e., alkaline manganese, silver
oxide-zinc) and cost results were expressed in dollars per pound of
battery produced.
Finally, this section can be used to estimate costs for alternatives
to the options presented by using the component graphs for investment
and annual costs based on varying flows.
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Energy and non-water quality aspects of all of the wastewater
treatment technologies described in Section VII are summarized in
Tables VIII-20 and VIII-21 (pages 802 and 803 ). These general energy
requirements are listed, the impact on environmental air and noise
pollution is noted, and solid waste generation characteristics are
751
-------
summarized. The treatment processes are divided into two groups,
wastewater treatment processes on Table VII1-20 and sludge and solids
handling processes on Table VIII-21.
Energy Aspects
Energy aspects of the wastewater treatment processes are important
because of the impact of energy use on our natural resources and on
the economy. Table VIII-22 summarizes the battery manufacturing
category and subcategory energy costs which would result at existing
plants with the implementation of the different technology options.
Energy requirements are generally low, although evaporation can be an
exception if no waste heat is available at the plant. Thus, if
evaporation is used to avoid discharge of pollutants, the influent
water rate should be minimized. For example, an upstream reverse
osmosis, ion exchange, or ultrafiltration unit can drastically reduce
the flow rate of wastewater to an evaporation device.
Non-Water Quality Aspects
It is important to consider the impact of each treatment process on
water scarcity and air, noise and radiation, and solid waste pollution
of the environment to preclude the development of a more adverse
environmental impact.
Consumptive Water Loss - Where evaporative cooling mechanisms are
used, water loss may result and contribute to water scarcity problems,
a concern primarily in arid and semi-arid regions. This regulation
does not require substantial evaporative cooling and recycling which
would cause a significant consumptive water loss.
Air - In general, none of the liquid handling processes causes air
pollution. With sulfide precipitation, however, the potential exists
for evolution of hydrogen sulfide, a toxic gas. Proper control of pH
in treatment eliminates this problem. Incineration of sludges or
solids can cause significant air pollution which must be controlled by
suitable bag houses, scrubbers or stack gas precipitators as well as
proper incinerator operation and maintenance. Implementation of
sulfide technology at existing plants is costly because of the
additional retrofitting a plant would have to do to create a safe
working environment. Due to their high content of volatile heavy
metals, (eg. cadmium and mercury) sludges from battery manufacturing
wastewater treatment are not amenable to incineration except in
retorts for metals recovery.
752
-------
Noise and Radiation - None of the wastewater treatment processes
causes objectionable noise levels and none of the treatment processes
has any potential for radioactive radiation hazards.
Solid Waste - Costs for treatment sludge handling were included in the
computer cost program and are included in the compliance cost summary.
In addition, the cost impact that wastewater treatment will have on
the battery manufacturing category in terms of satisfying RCRA
hazardous waste disposal criteria was analyzed for the lime and settle
technology. The RCRA costs for disposing of hazardous wastewater
treatment sludges are presented by subcategory, in Table VII1-23 (page
805). Only indirect dischargers are shown because no hazardous waste
disposal costs would be incurred by direct dischargers. Many existing
plants recover the metals from the sludges. The costs for indirect
dischargers can be summarized as follows:
o Only seven plants (all in the Leclanche and Zinc
subcategories) of the 253 plants in the battery
manufacturing category data base would incur RCRA costs
because of the disposal of hazardous sludges from wastewater
treatment.
o The annual cost for disposal of hazardous sludges from
wastewater treatment is estimated at $34,000.
Lime precipitation and settling produces a sludge with a high solids
content, consisting of calcium salts, which in some instances has a
potential economic benefit. The recovery potential for the principal
toxic metals(s) contained in the wastewater treatment sludge from lime
precipitation was also considered. Recovery of nickel and cadmium
from the cadmium subcategory sludge has a potential economic benefit.
In fact, most cadmium subcategory plants already reclaim wastewater
treatment sludges.
The RCRA related costs presented above are based on lime and settle
treatment costs and wastewater loadings provided in this document, on-
site disposal costs developed in an EPA report and contact with
hazardous waste disposal tranporters and operators. These costs were
developed using the following four-steps process: (1) the total amount
of wastes for each battery manufacturing plant and the total
subcategory were determined; (2) the waste constituents were then
evaluated according to RCRA criteria to determine whether they would
be characterized as hazardous; (3) the amount of waste characterized
as hazardous was then used to determine whether off-site or on-site
disposal was the preferred alternative based on disposal site cost
curves; and (4) the disposal cost was calculated on a dollar-per-pound
of battery produced basis and presented as the incremental cost
resulting from hazardous sludge disposal.
753
-------
NON-RECYCLE
SYSTEMS
INPUT
A) RAW WASTE DESCRIPTION
B) SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
C) "DECISION" PARAMETERS
D) COST FACTORS
PROCESS CALCULATIONS
A) PERFORMANCE - POLLUTANT
PARAMETER EFFECTS
B) EQUIPMENT SIZE
C) PROCESS COST
(RECYCLE SYSTEMS)
CONVERGENCE
A) POLLUTANT PARAMETER
TOLERANCE CHECK
(NOT WITHIN
TOLERANCE LIMITS)
(WITHIN TOLERANCE LIMITS)
COST CALCULATIONS
A) SUM INDIVIDUAL PROCESS
COSTS
B) ADO SUBSIDIARY COSTS
C) ADJUST TO DESIRED
DOLLAR BASE
OUTPUT
A) STREAM DESCRIPTIONS -
COMPLETE SYSTEM
B) INDIVIDUAL PROCESS SIZE
AND COSTS
C) OVERALL SYSTEM INVESTMENT
AND ANNUAL COSTS
FIGURE VIII-1
SIMPLIFIED LOGIC DIAGRAM
SYSTEM COST ESTIMATION PROGRAM
754
-------
CHEMICAL
ADDITION
HAW WASTE
(PLOW. TSS, LEAD.
ZINC. ACIDITY)
SEDIMENTATION
EFFLUENT
SLUDGE
RECYCLE
SLUDGE
(CONTRACTOR
REMOVED)
FIGURE VIII - 2. SIMPLE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM
755
-------
10"
CO
QC
o
o
o
10J
100
10
100
10J
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-3
PREDICTED PRECIPITATION AND SETTLING COSTS
CONTINUOUS
10* 10!
O DENOTES FLOW LIMITS OBSERVED FOR
THIS TREATMENT FOR THE LEAD
SUBCATEGORY
-------
CO
ec
o
a
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE \I\\\-A
PREDICTED COSTS FOR PRECIPITATION AND SETTLING
BATCH
O DENOTES FLOW LIMIT ( *0) OBSERVED FOR
THIS TREATMENT IN THE BATTERY
INDOSTRY (NON LEAD SUBCATEGORY).
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS MAY DIFFER BECAUSE
OF VARIATION IN OPERATING HOURS.
ALL COMPUTER SELECTED TREATMENT WAS
BATCH.
-------
REQUIRED LABOR (HOURS/YEAR)
ง
ง
ui
CO
o
X
m
3D
m
o
m
<
o
a
O
CO
o
53
CO
-------
I
i/J
DC
ui
t/j
o
CJ
10
100 10J
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-6
PREDICTED COSTS OF MIXED-MEDIA FILTRATION
10"
10s
O DENOTES FLOW LIMIT (=ฃ0) OBSERVED FOR THIS
TREATMENT IN THE BATTERY INDUSTRY.
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS MAY DIFFER BECAUSE OF
VARIATION IN OPERATING HOURS.
-------
I
V)
DC
O
a
a
CJ
10
100
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
<
-^
1
oc
o
CJ
O DENOTES FLOW LIMITS FOR THIS TREATMENT
IN THE BATTERY CATEGORY.
FIGURE VIII-7
MCMDDAMC Cll TDATIOM COCTC
-------
10J
i
V)
QC
O
CJ
UJ
CO
UJ
10J
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
FIGURE VIII-8
REVERSE OSMOSIS OR ION EXCHANGE INVESTMENT COSTS
-------
Z9L
LABOR REQUIREMENTS (HOURS/YEAR)
en
m
9
CA
m
CA
e
a
o 2
m e
ฃ2 m
e>
m I
O
a
fat
-j
S
si
ซn
m
i
3
i
-------
10"
I 10s
V)
ec
a
o
- in4
Ul
<
10J
3.785
37.85
378.5
3785
37850
378500
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-10
REVERSE OSMOSIS OR ION EXCHANGE MATERIAL COSTS
-------
10ฐ
100
x
Q
Ul
CC
oc
-J CC
<* s
^ 1
a.
10
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
FIGURE VIII-11
REVERSE OSMOSIS OR ION EXCHANGE POWER REQUIREMENTS
-------
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 50.000 mg/l
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 30,000 mg/l
3.785
37.85
378.S
3785
37850
378500
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-12
VACUUM FILTRATION INVESTMENT COSTS
-------
99Z.
REQUIRED LABOR (HOURS/YEAR)
<
>
fa)
ซ
en
00
O =
30
O
C
5
m
m
I
x
3D
fat
ซJ
01
-------
108
I
c/s
ec
o
a
a.
a.
LU
ioa
10J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 50.000 mg/l
H
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 30,000 mg/l
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
FIGURE VIII-14
VACUUM FILTRATION MATERIAL COSTS
-------
10"
CO
cc
a
a
00
o
cc
K-
CJ
10a
10J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 50,000 mg/l
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 30,000 m|/l
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
FIGURE VIII-15
VACUUM FILTRATION ELECTRICAL COSTS
-------
I
CO
oc
CO
CO
iO
JCJ
12000
120000
1200000
VOLUME (LITERS)
COST = 41.93 x VOLUME (LITERS) ฐ'5344
RETENTION TIME = 12 HOURS
FIGURE VIII-16
HOLDING TANK INVESTMENT COSTS
-------
103
<
n
I
oc
o
a
a
u
u
GC
U
10J
100
168
1680
16,800
168,000
1.680,000
16.800,000
VOLUME (LITERS)
RETENTION TIME = 7 DAYS
FIGURE VIII-17
HOLDING TANK ELECTRICAL COSTS
-------
10a
s
oc
3
o
oc
o
00
a
^j ut
-J S
M 3
a
1U
oc
10J
3.785
37.85
378.5
3785
37850
378500
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-18
HOLDING TANK LABOR REQUIREMENTS
-------
V)
QC
O
Q
to
O
O
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-19
NEUTRALIZATION INVESTMENT COSTS
10a
DENOTES FLOW LIMIT (^0) OBSERVED FOR
THIS TREATMENT IN THE NON-LEAD
SUBCATEGORIES OF THE BATTERY INDUSTRY.
INDIVIDUAL PLANTS MAY DIFFER BECAUSE OF
VARIATION IN OPERATING COSTS.
-------
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
FIGURE VIII-20
NEUTRALIZATION LABOR REQUIREMENTS
-------
105
<
^
I
oc
CO
o
CJ
10J
10
100
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
1000
FIGURE VIII-21
CARBON ADSORPTION COSTS
-------
01 2
3.785
37.85
378.S
3785
37850
378500
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
FIGURE VIII-22
CHEMICAL REDUCTION OF CHROMIUM
INVESTMENT COSTS
-------
10*
CO
cc
a
o
x
oc
o
oa
=>
z
100
10
BATCH (OPERATION)
CONTINUOUS (OPERATION)
CONTINUOUS
(MAINTENANCE)
MINIMUM CONTINUOUS PROCESS MAINTENANCE
3.785
37.85
378.5 3785
FLOW RATE (1/HR)
37850
378500
BATCH MAINTENANCE EQUALS 0 HOURS
FIGURE \l\\\-23
ANNUAL LABOR FOR CHEMICAL REDUCTION OF CHROMIUM
-------
1x10'
Vป
>
K
<
1x10
1000
WASTE FLOW (gph)
10000
FIGURE VIII -24
COSTS FOR VAPOR RECOMPRESSION EVAPORATION
777
-------
<
-*
I
DC
O
Q
oo
ASSOCIATED ANNUAL COST
TOTAL LEAD USED IN DEHYDRATED BATTERIES (k|/br)
FIGURE VIII-25
LEAD SUBCATEGORY - DEHYDRATED BATTERY IN - PROCESS CONTROL COSTS
-------
oc
<
o
a
CO
o
CJ
10a
106 10'
BATTERY PRODUCTION (POUNDS/YEAR)
FIGURE VIII-26
LABOR FOR COUNTERCURRENT RINSES DEHYDRATED BATTERIES
-------
CO
cc
o
o
-J ฃ
CO 00
o 5?
10J
100
10
100 10"
TOTAL LEAD USED IN BATTERIES (k|/hr)
DHY. DEHYDRATED BATTERIES
FIGURE VIII-27
IN PROCESS PIPING AND SEGREGATION COSTS FOR THE LEAD SUBCATEGORY
-------
TOTAL LEAD USED IN BATTERIES (kg/hr)
FIGURE VIII-28
HOLDING TANK COSTS
FOR BATTERY WASH WATER RECYCLE - LEAD SUBCATEGORY
-------
00
N)
CO
QC
o
o
fc
o
10
100 1000
TOTAL LEAD USED \H WET OR DAMP BATTERIES (k|/hr)
10000
FIGURE VIII-29
IN PROCESS COSTING FOR SLOW CHARGING BATTERIES LEAD SUBCATEGORY
-------
TABLE VIII-1
COST PROGRAM POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Parameter, Units
Flow, MGD
pH, pH units
Turbidity, Jackson Units
Temperature, degree C
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/1
Residual Chlorine, mg/1
Acidity, mg/1 CaCO3
Alkalinity, mg/1 CaCO3
Ammonia, mg/1
Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/1
Color, Chloroplatinate units
Sulfide, mg/1
Cyanides, mg/1
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/1
Phenols, mg/1
Conductance, micromhos/cm
Total Solids, mg/1
Total Suspended Solids, mg/1
Settleable Solids, mg/1
Aluminum, mg/1
Barium, mg/1
Cadmium, mg/1
Calcium, mg/1
Chromium, Total,
Copper, mg/1
Fluoride, mg/1
Iron, Total, mg/1
Lead, mg/1
Magnesium, mg/1
Molybdenum, mg/1
Total Volatile Solids, mg/1
mg/1
Parameter, Units
Oil, Grease, mg/1
Hardness, mg/1 CaCO3
Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg/1
Algicides, mg/1
Total Phosphates, mg/1
Polychlorobiphenyls, mg/1
Potassium, mg/1
Silica, mg/1
Sodium, mg/1
Sulfate, mg/1
Sulfite, mg/1
Titanium, mg/1
Zinc, mg/1
Arsenic, mg/1
Boron, mg/1
Iron, Dissolved, mg/1
Mercury, mg/1
Nickel, mg/1
Nitrate, mg/1
Selenium, mg/1
Silver, mg/1
Strontium, mg/1
Surfactants, mg/1
Beryllium, mg/1
Plasticizers, mg/1
Antimony, mg/1
Bromide, mg/1
Cobalt, mg/1
Thallium, mg/1
Tin, mg/1
Chromium, Hexavalent, mg/1
783
-------
TABLE VII1-2
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY SUBROUTINES
Spray/Fog Rinse
Countercurrent Rinse
Vacuum Filtration
Gravity Thickening
Sludge Drying Beds
Holding Tanks
Centrifugation
Equalization
Contractor Removal
Reverse Osmosis
Chemical Reduction of Chrom.
Chemical Oxidation of Cyanide
Neutralization
Clarification (Settling Tank/Tube Settler)
API Oil Skimming
Emulsion Breaking (Chem/Thermal)
Membrane Filtration
Filtration (Diatomaceous Earth)
Ion Exchange - w/Plant Regeneration
Ion Exchange - Service Regeneration
Flash Evaporation
Climbing Film Evaporation
Atmospheric Evaporation
Cyclic Ion Exchange
Post Aeration
Sludge Pumping
Copper Cementation
Sanitary Sewer Discharge Fee
Ultrafiltration
Submerged Tube Evaporation
Flotation/Separation
Wiped Film Evaporation
Trickling Filter
Activated Carbon Adsorption
Nickel Filter
Sulfide Precipitation
Sand Filter
Pressure Filter
Mixed-media Filter
Sump
Cooling Tower
Ozonation
Activated Sludge
Coalescing Oil Separator
Non Contact Cooling Basin
Raw Wastewater Pumping
Preliminary Treatment
Preliminary Sedimentation
Aerator - Final Settler
Chlorination
Flotation Thickening
Multiple Hearth Incineration
Aerobic Digestion
Lime Precipitation (metals)
784
-------
TABLE VII1-3
WASTEWATER SAMPLING FREQUENCY
Wastewater Discharge
(liters per day) Sampling Frequency
0 - 37,850 once per month
37,850 - 189,250 twice per month
189,250 - 378,500 once per week
378,500 - 946,250 twice per week
946,250+ thrice per week
785
-------
TABLE VIII-4
WASTE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR BATTERY MANUFACTURING CATEGORY
Hydroxide Precipitation and Settling; Batch Treatment
Hydroxide Precipitation and Settling, Continuous Treatment
Sulfide Precipitation and Settling; Batch Treatment
Sulfide Precipitation and Settling; Continuous Treatment
Mixed-media Filtration
Membrane Filtration
Reverse Osmosis
Ion Exchange
Vacuum Filtration
Holding and Settling Tanks
pH Adjustment (Neutralization)
Contract Removal
Aeration
Carbon Adsorption
Chrome Reduction
Vapor Recompression Evaporator
786
-------
TABLE VIII-5
LIME ADDITIONS FOR LIME PRECIPITATION
Lime Addition
Stream Parameter kg/kg (Ib/lb)
Acidity (as CaCO3) 0.81
Aluminum 4.53
Antimony 1.75
Arsenic 2.84
Cadmium 2.73
Chromium 2.35
Cobalt 1.38
Copper 1.28
Iron (Dissolved) 2.19
Lead 0.205
Magnesium 3.50
Manganese 1.48
Mercury 0.42
Nickel 1.45
Selenium 3.23
Silver 0.39
Zinc 1.25
787
-------
TABLE VIII-6
REAGENT ADDITIONS FOR SULFIDE PRECIPITATION
Stream Parameter
Ferrous Sulfide Requirement
kg/kg (Ib/lb)
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium (Hexavalent)
Chromium (Trivalent)
Cobalt
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Tin
Zinc
0.86
2.41
1.86
2.28
1.64
1.52
0.47
0.24
1.65
0.45
0.81
1.48
Sodium Bisulfide Requirement
Ferrous Sulfate Requirement
Lime Requirement
0.65 x Ferrous Sulfide Requirement
1.5 x Ferrous Sulfide Requirement
0.49 x FeS04(lb) + 3.96 x NaHS(lb)
+ 2.19 x Ib of Dissolved Iron
788
-------
TABLE VIII-7
NEUTRALIZATION CHEMICALS REQUIRED
A
Chemical Condition o
Lime pH less than 6.5 .00014
Sulfuric Acid pH greater than 8.5 .00016
(Chemical demand, Ib/day) = Ao x Flow Rate (GPH) x Acidity
(Alkalinity, mgCaCO3/l)
789
-------
TABLE VIII-8
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
HYDROXIDE PRECIPITATION AND SETTLING
System flow rate;
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Ehergy costs
BATCH
4
8
18090
1134
1809
2706
0.001
BATCH
23890
101000
54630
3428
5463
4491
17.72
CONTINUOUS
56780
360000
72620
4557
7262
8815
61.29
Total annual costs:
$ 8650
$ 13400
$ 20700
790
-------
TABLE VIII-9
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
SULFIDE PRECIPITATION AND SETTLING
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Energy Costs
BATCH
4
8
3722
234
372
824
0.031
BATCH
95
600
6101
383
610
2488
2.33
BATCH
6529
13800
31060
1949
3106
3351
107
Ibtal annual costs:
$ 1430
$ 3484
$ 8513
791
-------
TABLE VIII-10
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost;
SULFIDE PRECIPITATION AND SETTLING
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Qiergy costs
TDtal annual costs:
CONTINUOUS
5677
24000
26820
1683
2682
6615
4.88
CONTINUOUS
10740
45400
32300
2027
3230
9780
8.84
CONTINUOUS
19240
122000
39030
2449
3903
20331
23.36
$ 10980
$ 15050
$ 26710
792
-------
TABLE VIII-11
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
Least cost:
MIXED-MEDIA FILTRATION
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Energy costs
CONTINUOUS
4
8
261
16
26
6065
284
CONTINUOUS
5195
10980
21470
1347
2147
6065
284
CONTINUOUS
17348
110000
44800
2811
4480
6065
284
Total annual costs:
$ 6391
$ 9843
$ 13640
793
-------
TABLE VIII-12
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
Lsast cost:
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Ehergy costs
MEMBRANE FILTRATION
CONTINUOUS CONTINUOUS
26
112
367
23
37
3128
1650
380
2412
5280
CONTINUOUS
1223
7755
16970
331
527
3300
2610
1065
1697
3406
2694
Total annual costs:
$ 4838
$ 6769
$ 8862
794
-------
TABLE VIII-13
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
Least cost:
REVERSE OSMOSIS
System flow rate: 1/hr
gal/day
Investment:
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Qiergy costs
Total annual costs:
CONTINUOUS
4
8
2707
170
270
419
75
CONTINUOUS
182
768
15080
946
1508
799
335
CONTINUOUS
16180
102600
145100
9102
14510
40080
5895
$ 934
$ 3587
$ 69580
795
-------
TABLE VIII-14
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
System flow rate: 1/hr
gal/day
Investment:
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Ehergy costs
VACUUM FILTRATION
CONTINUOUS CONTINUOUS
25
168
106
210
25220
25220
CONTINUOUS
326
1377
25220
1582
1582
2522
2522
3990
5179
1582
2522
5940
Ibtal annual costs:
$ 8094
$ 9283
$ 10040
796
-------
TABLE VIII-15
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
System flow rate: 1/hr
gal/day
Investment:
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Ehergy costs
HOLDING AND SETTLING TANKS
CONTINUOUS CONTINUOUS
Tbtal annual costs:
8
700
44
70
50
$ 164
151
640
1180
CONTINUOUS
3406
7200
3592
74
118
225
359
107
75
$ 300
$ 660
797
-------
TABLE VIII-16
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
Least cost:
pH ADJUSTMENT (NEUTRALIZATION)
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Ehergy costs
CONTINUOUS
4
8
106
7
11
11
0.008
CONTINUOUS
261
552
891
56
89
120
0.536
CONTINUOUS
5267
33400
4144
260
414
1190
34
Total annual costs:
$ 29
$ 266
$ 1898
798
-------
TABLE VIII-17
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
System flow rate: 1/hr
gal/day
Investment:
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Biergy costs
AERATION
CONTINUOUS
53
223
800
50
80
0
101
CONTINUOUS
466
984
1191
75
119
0
52
Ibtal annual costs:
$ 231
$ 245
$
799
-------
TABLE VIII-18
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process:
least cost:
CARBON ADSORPTION
System flow rate: 1/hr
gal/day
Investment:
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Biergy costs
45
192
14630
918
1463
491
0.88
466
984
26180
1643
2618
1767
4.49
Total annual costs:
$ 2873
$ 6033
$
8QO
-------
TABLE VIII-19
WATER TREATMENT COMPONENT COSTS
Process;
least cost;
CHRCME REDUCTION
System flow rate:
Investment:
1/hr
gal/day
Annual costs:
Capital costs
Depreciation
Operating & Maintenance
costs (excluding energy)
Energy costs
Total annual costs:
BATCH
26
56
7853
423
785
7
108
BATCH
61
128
8355
524
835
16
103
BATCH
3406
7200
19970
1253
1997
891
103
$ 1393
$ 1479
$ 4244
-------
vra-2o
NUMUBll CJOMUmr MML35 CF MAfflBW
00
o
NJ
PHJCRJ3
Chemical Reduction
Clarificatian
Flotation
Chemical Oddation by
Chlorine
Oxidation by Oaona
Chemical Precipitation
Sedimentation
Deep Bad
Ion fiochange
Adsorption
Evaporation
Raveiae Oemosis
Ultrafiltratlon
Membrane Filtration
Electrochemical
Chromium Reduction
Electrochemical
O minium Regeneration
Mcr^^w,
Power
Mi
1000 liters
1.0
0.01-.3
0.1-3.2
1.0
0.3
0.5-5.0
1.02
0.1-3.2
0.10
0.5
0.1
3.0
1.25-3.0
1.25-3.0
0.2-0.8
2.0
Fuel
2.5*
Mixing
Sludge Collector
Drive
Racdrculatlon
SUM
Mixing
Mixing
OBone Generation
Paddles, Mixers
IPim^jB' ^^iT 1iPtjtx?f
Drive
Mtlai JIM iJi
$ DBOvMBBIi
PHI*
"*
Punp0f Bvaporate
During Ragenetation
Ewปซ4liWBter
Rlyi Pressure Punp
Hl^i Pressure Ptnp
High Proonucc Pvap
Regeneration, Puip
NDNWOTR OUttJ-nr BCTCT
Air Pollution
NIB IB
Njntt
None
None
None
None
None
Nonet Possible
H 8 Evolution
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Noise Pollution
None
Mm ie
Nune
None
None
None
None
None
Not
Objectionable
None
Not
Objectionable
Not
Objectionable
Not
Objectionable
None
Nune
Solid Waste
Nune
uuncenuauici
Concentrated
Concentrated
None
None
Concentrated
Concentrated
None
None/Haste
Carbon
Cta Kjei itxaL& v
DewBtered
Dilute
Dilute
Cot njฃi kLL A Lฃ
Dilute
ObnoentrHte
OonoGntrabRa
None
Sbltd Ifeste
Cunnentration
% Drj- Solids
5-50 (oil)
1-10
3-5
110
1-3
Variable
R/A
40
1-40
1-40
1-40
1-3
* 10 BHJ/1000 liters
-------
Vni-21
NCNWfflER QURLTiy ASPECTS OF SLDDGE AND SCUDS HANXJNG
00
o
u>
PPCX'JSS
Sludge Thickening
Pressure Filtration
Sand Bed Drying
Vacuum Filter
Centrirugation
landfill
lagccning
ENERGY MdQUJJfcMNIS
Rower
kwh
ton dry solids
29-930
21
16.7-66.8
0.2-98.5
""^
Fuel
kwh
ton dry solids
35
20-980
36
Ehergy Use
gdrnner, Sludge
Rake Drive
High Pressure
Puops
Renoval ErjiipruiL
Vacuum Punp,
Dotation
Rotation
Haul, landfiU
1-10 Mile Trip
Removal Equipment
NCNWOER QUALHY JM&CF
Air PoUuticn
lirpact
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Noise Pollution
Ihpact
None
None
None
Not
Cftijectionable
Not
Objectionable
None
None
Solid Waste
Concentrated
Dewatered
Dewatered
Dewatered
Dewatered
Dewatered
Devatered
Solid Waste
Concentration
% Dry Solids
4-27
25-50
15-40
20-40
15-50
NA
3-5
-------
TABLE VIII-22
BATTERY CATEGORY ENERGY COSTS AND REQUIREMENTS
Cadmium Subcategory
Direct
Indirect
Total
Calcium Subcategory
Direct
Indirect
Total
Lead Subcategory
Direct
Indirect
Total
00 Leclanche Subcategory
ฐ Direct
Indirect
Total
Lithium Subcategory
Direct
Indirect
Total
Magnesium Subcategory
Direct
Indirect
Total
Zinc
Direct
Indirect
Total
Category
Direct
Indirect
Total
BPT/PSES-0
COSTS
(*)
46.3
1,998.7
2,045.0
316.0
316.0
7,462.5
52,450.0
59,912.5
2,584.0
2,584.0
100.0
372.0
472.0
202.0
383.0
585.0
655.0
3,705.0
4,360.0
8,465.8
61,808.7
70,274.5
BPT/PSES-O BAT-l/PSES-1 BAT-l/PSES-1 BAT-2/PSES-2
REQUIREMENTS COSTS REQUIREMENTS COSTS
(kWh) ($) (kwh) (*)
1,403.0
60,566.7
61,969.7
9,575.8
9,575.8
226,136.4
1,589,393.9
1,815,530.3
78,303.0
78,303.0
3,030.3
11,272.7
14,303.0
6,724.2
11,606.1
17,727.3
19,848.5
112,272.7
132,121.2
257,142.4
1,872,990.9
2,129,530.3
596.0
1,644.0
2,240.0
884.0
884.0
4,289.0
23,766.3
28,055.3
100.0
656.0
756.0
486.0
951.0
1,437.0
871.0
4,347.0
5,218.0
6,342.0
32,248.3
38,590.3
18,060.6
49,818.2
67,878.8
26,787.9
26,787.9
129,969.7
720,190.9
350,160.6
3,030.0
19,878.8
22,909.1
14,727.3
28,818.2
43,545.5
26,393.9
131,727.3
158,121.2
192,181.5
977,221.3
669,403.1
944.1
1,863.0
2,807.1
208.0
208.0
31,194.0
209,510.0
240,704.0
100.0
603.0
703.0
486.0
770.0
1,256.0
4,497.0
19,290.0
23,787.0
37,221.1
232,244.0
269,465.1
BAT-2/PSES-2 BAT-3/PSES-3
REQUIREMENTS COSTS
(kwh) ($)
28,608.5
56,454.5
85,063.0
6,303.0
6,303.0
945,272.7
6,348,787.9
7,294,060.6
3,030.3
18,272.7
21,303.0
14,727.3
23,333.3
38,060.6
136,272.7
584,545.5
720,818.2
1,127,911.5
7,037,696.9
8,165,608.4
3,265.0
7,292.0
10,557.0
208.0
208.0
31,194.0
209,510.0
240,704.0
100.0
603.0
703.0
386.0
798.0
1,184.0
4,497.0
19,290.0
23,787.0
39,442.0
237,701.0
277,143.0
BAT-3/PSES-3 BAT-4/PSES-4 BAT-4/PSES-4
REQUIREMENTS COSTS REQUIREMENTS
(kwh) ($) (kwh)
98,939.4
220,969.7
319,999.1
6,303.0
6,303.0
945,272.7
6,348,787.9
7,294,060.6
3,030.3
18,272.7
21,303.0
11,697.0
24,181.8
35,878.8
136,272.7
584,545.5
720,818.2
1,195,212.1
7,203,060.6
8,398,362.7
41,421.0 1,255,181.8
203,100.0 6,154,545.5
244,521.0 7,409,727.3
2,312.9 70,087.9
10,293.4 311,921.2
12,606.3 382,009.1
43,733.9 1,325,269.7
213,393.4 6,466,466.7
257,127.3 7,791,736.4
-------
TABLE VIII- 23
INDIRECT DISCHARGERS - L & S TREATMENT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGE RCRA
DISPOSAL COSTS
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
$/lb of BATTERf
SUBCATEGORY
Cadmium
Calcium
Lead
Leclanche
Lithium
Magnesium
Zinc
PSES-0
0
0
0
14,450
0
0
2,400
PSES
0
0
0
14,450
0
0
2,700
PSES-0
0
0
0
0.00011
0
0
0.00006
PSES
0
0
0
0.00011
0
0
0.00007
805
-------
-------
SECTION IX
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
This section defines the effluent characteristics attainable through
application of the best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT) for each subcategory within the battery manufacturing
category. BPT reflects the performance of existing treatment and
control practices at battery manufacturing plants of various sizes,
ages, and various manufacturing processes. Particular consideration
is given to the treatment in-place at plants within each subcategory.
The factors considered in defining BPT include the total cost of the
application of technology in relation to the effluent reduction
benefits from such application, the age of equipment and facilities
involved, the processes employed, non-water quality environmental
impacts (including energy requirements), and other factors considered
appropriate by the Administrator. In general, the BPT technology
level represents the average of the best existing practices at plants
of various ages, sizes, processes or other common characteristics.
Where existing practice is universally 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 transferrable and by a reasonable prediction that
the technology will be capable of achieving the prescribed effluent
limits. (See Tanner's Council of America V. Train Supra). BPT
focuses on end-of-pipe treatment rather than process changes or
internal controls, except where such practices are common throughout
the category.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BPT
The battery manufacturing category was examined to identify the
processes used, wastewater generated, and treatment practices employed
in battery manufacturing operations. After preliminary
subcategorization and collection of additional information using both
dcp forms and specific plant sampling and analysis, the total
information about the category was evaluated. On the basis of this
evaluation, the subcategorization was revised as described in Section
IV to reflect the anode materials, since specific anode metals can be
combined with many cathode materials, and the electrolytes used in
battery manufacturing. Each subcategory was further subdivided into
discrete manufacturing process elements as shown in Table IV-1 (page
161). These process elements are the basis for defining production
normalized flows and pollutant raw waste concentrations. All
information was then evaluated to determine an appropriate BPT.
Specific factors considered for BPT are:
-------
Each subcategory encompasses several manufacturing elements
each of which may or may not generate process wastewater.
These elements are divided into groups for anode
manufacture, cathode manufacture, and ancillary (or all
other) operations considered to be part of battery
manufacturing. A plant usually is active in one or more
anode process element, one or more cathode process element,
and in one or more ancillary operations. Process elements
within the subcategory are combined in a variety of ways at
battery manufacturing plants.
Wastewater streams from different elements within each
subcategory usually share similar pollutant characteristics,
have similar treatment requirements and are often treated in
combined systems.
The most significant pollutants present in battery process
wastewater are generally different in each subcategory.
Combined treatment or discharge of wastewater from different
subcategories occurs quite infrequently.
Most wastewater streams generated in this category are
characterized by high levels of toxic metals.
Treatment practices vary extensively in the category and
also within the subcategories. Observed category practices
include: chemical precipitation of metals as hydroxides,
carbonates, and sulfides; amalgamation; sedimentation;
filtration; ion exchange; and carbon adsorption.
Other factors which must be considered for establishing effluent
limitations based on BPT have already been addressed by this document.
The age of equipment and plants involved and the processes employed
are taken into account and discussed in Section IV. Non-water quality
impacts and energy requirements are discussed in Section VIII.
In making technical assessments of data, processes and treatment
technology both indirect and direct dischargers have been considered
as a single group. An examination of plants and processes did not
indicate any process or product differences based on wastewater
destination. This has also been followed in describing applicable
technology options with initial description made for direct
dischargers, and indirect discharger applications largely described by
reference to the direct discharge descriptions. Hence, treatment
technologies for BPT (and BAT) are described in substantial detail for
all subcategories even though there may be no direct discharge plants
in that subcategory.
808
-------
For each of the seven subcategories, a specific approach was followed
for the development of BPT mass limitations. To account for
production and flow variability from plant to plant, a unit of
production or production normalizing parameter (pnp) was determined
for each element which could then be related to the flow from the
element to determine a production normalized flow. Selection of the
pnp for each process element is discussed in Section IV and summarized
in Table IV-1 (page 161). Each process element within the subcategory
was then analyzed, (1) to determine whether or not operations included
in the element generated wastewater, (2) to determine specific flow
rates generated, and (3) to determine the specific production
normalized flows (mean, median) for each process element. This
analysis is discussed in general and summarized for each subcategory
in Section V.
Normalized flows were analyzed to determine which flow was to be used
as part of the basis for BPT mass limitations. The selected flow
(sometimes referred to as a BPT regulatory flow or, BPT flow) reflects
the water use controls which are common practices within the category
based upon dcp and plant visit data. Significant differences between
the mean and median reflect a data set which has skewed or biased a
wide range of points. When one data point (for a small data set) or
several data points (for a large uniform data set) have an abnormally
high flow (improper water control) or unusually low flow (extensive
in-process control or process variation), the average or mean may not
represent category practice. In cases where there was evidence that
data was atypical, use of the median value was considered as a means
of minimizing the impact of one point (on a small data base) or
several points (on the larger data base). In general, the mean or
average production normalized flow is used as a part of the basis for
BPT mass limitations. In those cases where the median rather than
mean normalized flow was used as the BPT flow, specific rationale for
its use is presented in the subcategory discussion. Factors
considered in using the median values include: numerical variations
between the mean and median, absolute size of mean and median value
within a process element, relative importance of the size of an
element to the total subcategory, and an analysis of specific atypical
numbers.
The general assumption was made that all wastewaters generated within
a subcategory were combined for treatment in a single or common
treatment system for that subcategory even though flow and sometimes
pollutant characteristics of process wastewater streams varied within
the subcategory. Since treatment systems considered at BPT were
primarily for metals and suspended solids removal, and existing plants
usually had one common treatment system in-place, a common treatment
system for each subcategory is reasonable. Both treatment in-place at
battery plants and treatment in other categories having similar
wastewaters were evaluated. The BPT treatment systems considered
809
-------
require chemical precipitation, and settling. These treatment systems
when properly operated and maintained, can reduce various pollutant
concentrations to specific .levels for each pollutant parameter.
Derivation of these concentrations achievable by specific treatment
systems are discussed in Section VII and summarized in Table VI1-20
(page 712).
The overall effectiveness of end-of-pipe treatment for the removal of
wastewater pollutants is improved by the application of water flow
controls within the process to limit the volume of wastewater
requiring treatment. The controls or in-process technologies
recommended at BPT include only those measures which are commonly
practiced within the category or subcategory and which reduce flows to
meet the production normalized flow for each process element.
For the development of effluent limitations, mass loadings were
calculated for each process element within each subcategory. This
calculation was made on an element by element basis primarily because
plants in this category are active in various process elements,
process element production varies within the plants, and pollutants
generated and flow rates can vary for each process element. The mass
loadings (milligrams of pollutant per kilogram of production unit -
mg/kg) were calculated by multiplying the BPT normalized flow (I/kg)
by the concentration achievable using the BPT treatment system (mg/1)
for each pollutant parameter considered for regulation at BPT. The
BPT normalized flow is based on the average of all applicable data
rather than the average of the best plants. This was done to provide
a measure of operating safety for BPT treatment operations.
The following method is used to calculate compliance with the BPT
limitation. The allowable mass discharge for each process element is
determined by multiplying the allowable mass discharge limitation
(mg/kg) for that process element by its level of production (in kg of
production normalizing parameter). The allowable mass discharge for a
plant is then calculated by summing the individual mass discharge
allowances of the process elements performed at the plant. The actual
mass discharge of the plant is calculated by multiplying the effluent
concentration of the regulated pollutant parameters by the total plant
effluent flow. The actual mass discharge can then be compared against
the allowable mass discharge.
Reasonableness of the limitations was determined in several ways. The
approach generally used to determine reasonableness was to evaluate
the treatment effectiveness numbers for lime and settling systems
(already discussed in Section VII) and the reported discharge flows
for each plant as compared with the flow the plant would need to
comply with the BPT mass limitations. BPT treatment effectiveness
numbers were determined to be reasonable based upon engineering and
statistical analysis, as discussed in Section VII. When operating
810
-------
hours and plant processes varied throughout the year, the annual flow,
as opposed to hourly flow, was used as the rate for comparison. The
actual annual flow for each plant was then compared with the
calculated annual flow necessary for BPT compliance. BPT flows were
considered reasonable if most of the plants in the subcategory were
meeting their BPT flow.
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS FOR REGULATION
The pollutant parameters selected for regulation in each subcategory
were selected because of their frequent presence at treatable
concentrations in wastewaters from the process elements. In general,
pollutant parameters selected are primarily metals and suspended
solids. No organic pollutants (except for cyanide) are considered for
BPT regulation in this category. pH is selected as a treatment
control parameter. As discussed in Section VII, the importance of pH
control for metals removal cannot be overemphasized. Even small
excursions away from the optimum pH range (in most cases 8.8 - 9.3)
can result in less than optimum functioning of the system. To
accommodate this operating pH range (8.8 - 9.3) without requiring a
final pH adjustment the effluent pH range is shifted from the commonly
required 6.0 - 9.0 to 7.5 to 10.0.
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
The cadmium subcategory includes the manufacture of cadmium anode
batteries such as nickel-cadmium, silver-cadmium, and mercury-cadmium
batteries. Of these, nickel-cadmium batteries account for almost all
of the production in the subcategory. Sixteen process elements
identified in Table IV-1 (page 161) are manufacturing activities
included within this subcategory. Thirteen of these process elements,
as shown in Figure V-2 (page 262), generate a wastewater discharge;
the other three do not. Normalized flows and production normalizing
parameters for these elements are summarized in Table V-ll (page 337).
BPT end-of-pipe treatment for this subcategory is illustrated in
Figure IX-1 (page 845). The treatment system consists of oil
skimming, pH adjustment (chemical precipitation) followed by settling.
Lime, sodium hydroxide, or acid is used to adjust the pH to a level
that promotes adequate precipitation. The optimum pH for
precipitation of metals from cadmium subcategory waste streams is
typically about 9.3; however, higher values may prove to be
appropriate for some waste streams. Proper pH control will enhance
the settling of both metal precipitates and suspended solids.
Treatment system performance for some wastewater streams in this
subcategory may be significantly improved by the addition of iron
salts as an aid in the removal of toxic metals, particularly nickel.
This technology, sometimes called iron coprecipitation, is described
in Section VII. Where required for acceptable effluent this technique
811
-------
is included in BPT. An effective settling device for use in the BPT
system is a clarifier; however, similar results can be achieved using
other settling devices or by filtration. In some cases, provisions of
an oil skimmer may also be required to achieve acceptable effluent
quality.
The lime and settle technology set forth as BPT for this subcategory
was selected primarily because the treatment system components are
generally used in the subcategory. Process wastewaters from the
cadmium subcategory are predominantly alkaline, and seven presently
operating plants reported settling treatment (see Table V-30 page
356). Four of these plants also reported subsequent filtration.
On-site observations, however, indicated that the settling was often
inadequate and that filtration was used as a primary solids removal
device, rather than as polishing filtration where it is most
effective. Consequently alkaline precipitation and settling without
polishing filtration corresponds more closely to the actual present
practice in the cadmium subcategory.
BPT water flow controls do not require any significant modification of
the manufacturing process or process equipment for their
implementation. The in-process technologies practiced in the
subcategory and recommended at BPT include:
Recycle or reuse of process solutions (already practiced by
6 plants).
Segregation of non-contact cooling water from process water
(necessary for effective treatment).
Control of electrolyte drips and spills (observed at various
plants visited).
Table IX-1 (page 851) presents the normalized discharge flows which
form part of the basis for mass discharge limitations for each process
element. These normalized flows are equal to the mean normalized
flows presented in Table V-l1 and represent the average level of water
use presently achieved by plants active in each process element. They
therefore correspond to internal controls which are common industry
practice.
Pollutant characteristics of process wastewater from the process
elements in this subcategory are essentially similar because all
contain toxic metals especially cadmium and nickel. The raw
wastewater characteristics from nine process elements are presented in
Tables V-l2 through V-27 (Pages 338-353) and Tables V-l36 and V-l37
(pages 476-477). The remaining four process elements (cell washing,
electrolyte preparation, cadmium hydroxide production, and nickel
hydroxide production) were not characterized by sampling. Based on
raw materials used and the nature of these process operations, their
process wastewaters are expected to be similar to those resulting from
812
-------
other process elements. Cell washing wastewaters are not expected to
contain high concentrations of pollutants other than the ones already
considered for regulation. Flows from electrolyte preparation are
minimal (normalized mean flow of 0.08 I/kg) and are not expected to
contain unusually high concentrations of any toxic pollutants. Any
contaminants in the wastewater from this process element would likely
be similar to others found within the subcategory. Process
wastewaters from cadmium hydroxide production and nickel hydroxide
production are expected to be similar to process wastewaters from
cadmium impregnation and nickel impregnation, respectively, because of
the similarity in raw materials involved, the chemical reactions
occurring, and the nature of the water use.
Specific manufacturing process elements at each plant will affect the
overall pollutant characteristics of the combined process wastewater
flowing to one end-of-pipe treatment system. Some loss in pollutant
removal effectiveness may result where waste streams containing
specific pollutants at treatable levels are combined with other
streams in which these same pollutants are absent or present at very
low concentrations. Although process wastewater streams with
different raw waste concentrations will be combined for end-of-pipe
treatment, the treatment effectiveness concentrations can be achieved
with the recommended treatment technologies as discussed in Section
VIII.
Total subcategory raw waste characteristics are needed to evaluate the
pollutant removals which would be achieved by implementing the
recommended treatment technologies. Total raw waste characteristics
from sampled plants alone do not represent the total subcategory. To
present raw waste for the total subcategory the following methodology
was used. For pollutants in each process element the mean raw waste
concentration (from sampling data in Section V) was multiplied by the
total wastewater flow for the process. The annual mass of pollutants
generated by each process was summed and divided by the total
subcategory flow to obtain the subcategory raw waste concentrations.
The results of these calculations are shown in Table X-2 (page 959).
All process element raw wastewater samples and calculated total raw
waste concentrations were evaluated to determine which pollutants
should be considered for regulation. Tables VI-1 and VI-2 (pages 566
and 571) summarize this analysis and list the pollutants that should
be considered. Pollutant parameters which were found frequently or at
high concentrations in process element waste streams in this
subcategory, and are regulated at BPT are cadmium, nickel, silver,
zinc, cobalt, oil and grease, and TSS. Silver is regulated for the
process elements associated with silver cathode production only. pH
is also selected for regulation as a control parameter. Other
pollutants which appeared at lower concentrations and were considered,
but not selected for regulation at BPT, are expected to be
813
-------
incidentally removed by the application of BPT technology. With the
application of lime and settle technology, combined with oil skimming
when necessary, the concentration of regulated pollutants should be
reduced to the concentration levels presented in Table VII-20 (page
712). Pollutant mass discharge limitations based on BPT are
determined by multiplying the process element BPT flows summarized in
Table IX-1 by the achievable effluent concentration levels for lime
and settle technology from Table VII-20. For process elements
relating to silver cathodes, waste streams will generally need to be
treated separately to comply with the BPT mass limitations for the
silver processes; because the silver limitation cannot be achieved when
these wastewaters are combined with other process wastewaters.
Separate treatment is presently practiced by plants within the
subcategory who recover and reuse the silver. The results of this
computation for all process elements and regulated pollutants in the
cadmium subcategory are summarized in Tables IX-2 to IX-14 (page
852-858). To alleviate some of the monitoring burden, several process
elements which occur at most plants and have the same pnp are combined
in one regulatory table. Table IX-10A (page 856) is the combined
table for Tables IX-7 to IX-10. These limitation tables list all the
pollutants which were considered for regulation and those proposed for
regulation are *'d.
The mass discharge limitations are reasonable based on the
demonstrated ability of the selected BPT to achieve the effluent
concentrations presented. As discussed in Section VII, the effluent
concentrations shown are, in fact, achieved by many plants with
wastewater characteristics similar to those from the cadmium
subcategory by the application of lime and settle technology with a
reasonable degree of control over treatment system operating
parameters.
To confirm the reasonableness of these limitations for this
subcategory, the Agency compared them to actual performance at cadmium
subcategory plants. Since plants presently discharge wastewaters from
various process elements and BPT is projected on a single end-of-pipe
treatment from multiple process elements, this comparison must be made
on the basis of the total plant rather than a process element. This
was accomplished by calculating total process wastewater discharge
flow rates for each plant in the subcategory based on available
production information and the normalized process element flows shown
in Table IX-1. These calculated effluent flow rates were then
compared to flow rates actually reported or measured. Effluent
concentrations were also compared to those attainable by lime and
settle technology as presented in Table VII-20. Finally total plant
mass discharges were compared to BPT limitations for plants which, on
the basis of effluent flow rates and concentrations, were potentially
meeting BPT mass discharge limitations.
814
-------
As a first step in this comparison, cadmium subcategory process
wastewater flow rates from each plant were compared to the flow rates
upon which mass limitations for the plant would be based. In order to
minimize the effects of irregular operating schedules for some process
operations, this comparison was made on the basis of annual flows. To
calculate actual annual process wastewater discharge flows, the
discharge flow rate (1/hr) from each process element at the plant was
multiplied by the hours of production activity reported for the
process element. The resultant process element annual discharge flows
were summed to determine the total plant discharge flow. In some
cases, the only available data were combined flow rates for several
process elements as reported in dcp's; these combined flow rates were
then multiplied by plant production hours to determine the total
contribution from these process elements to the plant's annual process
wastewater discharge. Production information from each plant was used
to determine an annual calculated BPT flow for comparison to the
actual values. The total annual production (in terms of pnp) for each
process element was determined and multiplied by the normalized flow
shown for that process element in Table IX-1 to determine the BPT flow
for the process element at the plant. Flows for each process element
were summed to obtain a total plant BPT flow. Table IX-15 (page 859 )
presents a comparison of these values.
Nine of thirteen cadmium subcategory plants in the data base (6 of 10
currently active plants) were found to produce annual process
wastewater volumes equal to or lower than those upon which BPT
pollutant mass discharge limitations would be based. Two other plants
produced process wastewater discharges only one percent larger than
those used in calculating BPT mass discharge limitations. This
analysis supports the thesis that the flow basis for BPT mass
discharge limitations is reasonable and reflects techniques widely
practiced in the subcategory.
Most plants have BPT equivalent or more sophisticated treatment
systems in place, but few plants in the cadmium subcategory presently
apply BPT effectively. Two plants which produce wastewater and
discharge treat cadmium subcategory process wastewater and achieve
effluent concentrations equivalent to those used to determine mass
discharge limitations for BPT technology. Three plants which treat
wastewater and discharge can readily comply with the BPT technology by
some upgrading and by properly operating their treatment systems. Two
additional plants comply with this technology by process selection and
are not generating a wastewater discharge. Treatment performance at
the three remaining active cadmium subcategory plants could not be
evaluated because of the limited amount of data submitted, however all
three of these plants have the BPT equivalent or better technology
in-place.
815
-------
On-site observations (discussed in Section V) have shown that existing
systems in the subcategory are inadequately maintained and operated.
Consequently, it is necessary to base BPT mass discharge limitations
on the transfer of demonstrated technology performance from other
industrial categories. The limitations based on this transfer are
reasonable based on the general attainment of the flow levels used as
the basis for BPT within the cadmium subcategory and on the basis of
effluent concentrations achieved at many industrial plants treating
similar process wastewater streams containing primarily metals, oil
and grease, and TSS.
In the establishment of BPT, the cost of application of technology
must be considered in relation to the effluent reduction benefit from
such application. The quantity of pollutants removed by BPT and the
total costs of application of BPT were determined by consideration of
wastewater flow rates and treatment costs for each plant in the
cadmium subcategory. Pollutant reduction quantities are shown in
Table X-4 (page 962 ) for the total subcategory and Table X-5 (page
963) for direct dischargers. Treatment costs are shown in Table X-62
(page 1008). The capital cost of BPT as an increment above the cost of
in-place treatment is estimated to be $390,562 for the cadmium
subcategory ($60,472 for direct dischargers only). Annual cost of BPT
for the subcategory is estimated to be $98,690 ($23,065 for direct
dischargers only). The quantity of pollutants removed by the lime and
settle system for this subcategory is estimated to be 474,910 kg/yr
(341,700 for direct dischargers) including 193,500 kg/yr of toxic
pollutants (139,200 for direct dischargers only). The pollutant
reduction benefit is worth the dollar cost of required BPT.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
Currently there are no direct discharging plants in this subcategory
and therefore no BPT (or BAT) will be established. This discussion of
the BPT technology option is presented here for consistency and
completeness and will form the basis for new source discussions in
Section XI, and pretreatment discussions in Section XII.
This subcategory encompasses the manufacture of calcium anode
batteries, such as thermal batteries, which are used primarily for
military applications. Three plants presently manufacture this type
of battery and the total production volume is limited. Eight process
elements identifed in Table IV-1 (page 161) are manufacturing
activities included within this subcategory. Since the cell anode
material, calcium, reacts vigorously with water, water use and
discharge in this subcategory is limited. Only two of the process
elements, as shown in Figure V-8 (page 269), generate a wastewater
discharge; the other six do not. Normalized flows for these elements
are summarized in Table V-34 (page 360).
816
-------
The end-of-pipe treatment technology for the calcium subcategory was
selected after a review of the manufacturing processes involved and
the wastewaters generated. This review showed that the construction
of calcium anode cells generates two distinct wastewater streams which
differ in their initial treatment requirements. The first step in
treatment technology for the calcium subcategory is the segregation of
the two waste streams for separate treatment. A schematic diagram of
the end-of-pipe treatment system selected to treat these wastewaters
is presented in Figure IX-2 (page 846). The chromium-bearing
wastewater from heat paper production is first settled to remove
undissolved constituents including zirconium metal, asbestos and
barium chromate. After settling, chemical reduction is provided to
convert the hexavalent chromium in the waste stream to the trivalent
form which may be effectively removed by precipitation as the
hydroxide.
Following pretreatment of the heat paper production waste stream, the
wastewater is combined with wastewater from cell leak testing. The
combined stream is treated with lime and then clarified by settling.
The sludge which accumulates during settling must be removed to ensure
continued effective operation of the settling device. A vacuum filter
is included in the lime and settle treatment system to reduce the
water content of the sludge and minimize the quantity of material
requiring disposal. The resulting filtrate is returned for further
treatment and the sludge disposed in a secure landfill.
The chromium reduction and lime and settle technology set forth for
heat paper production in this subcategory has been transferred from
other categories with chromium wastes, because treatment in this
subcategory is universally inadequate or lacking. Chromium-containing
heat paper production wastewaters are not treated at one plant, and
are only pH adjusted and settled at another. (See Table V-37, page
363). Hence, transfer of technology from another category is
necessary and reasonable. Chromium reduction followed by lime and
settle technology is a widely used treatment system of proven
effectiveness on essentialy similar wastewaters. No in-process
technologies are recommended at the BPT treatment level since no in-
process control is practiced within the subcategory.
Table IX-16 (page 860) presents the normalized discharge flows which
form part of the basis for mass discharge limitations for each process
element. For heat paper production and cell testing associated with
thermal battery production, data were combined from the calcium,
lithium and magnesium subcategories since manufacturing processes and
wastewaters generated from these elements are identical. The
normalized flow used for mass limitations is equal to the median flow
for heat paper manufacture because one plant (which was not visited,
but contacted twice) had a normalized flow more than fifty times (more
recently reduced to thirty times) greater than the flows achieved by
817
-------
other plants for this process element. In this case, the median flow
is believed to more accurately represent what is common practice for
this process element and is used as the basis for mass limitations for
the heat paper production and cell testing elements.
Pollutant characteristics of the process wastewater from heat paper
production {Table V-35, Page 361) are essentially similar and can
include asbestos, chromium and iron. No sampling data are available
on the cell testing waste stream because testing which is done
intermittently was not being done at the time of sampling. As cell
testing exposes water to the same materials as are inside the cell,
all testing water is assumed to be the same as heat paper wastewater.
The volume of water generated by this process is minimal in comparison
to heat paper production (about 0.2 percent) and has a negligible con-
tribution to the overalj. raw wastewater characteristics of the calcium
subcategory. Total raw" wastewater characteristics calculated from
process element raw waste characteristics and total wastewater flow
from each process element are shown in Table X-17 (Page 970).
For the purpose of selecting pollutant parameters for limitations with
lime and settle technology the raw wastewaters were examined for
pollutants found frequently at treatable concentrations. Only
chromium and TSS were noted at levels great enough for effluent
limitations. Chromium appears in high concentrations due to the use
of barium chromates in the manufacture of heat paper. TSS is selected
because of its high concentrations in heat paper manufacture
wastewater. Proper pH control is also specified to ensure the
efficient performance of the lime and settle treatment.
The effluent concentrations of the pollutants considered for
regulation attainable through the use of lime and settle technology
are listed in Table VII-20 (page 712). When these concentrations are
combined with the BPT technology flows from each process element as
shown in Table IX-16, the mass of pollutant allowed to be discharged
per unit of production normalizing parameter can be calculated. Table
IX-17 (page 861) shows the effluent limitations derived from this
calculation, and is presented as guidance for state or local pollution
control agencies because discharges from this subcategory are not
proposed for national regulation at BPT.
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
The lead subcategory includes the manufacture of a large variety of
battery types, almost all of which are made of the same principal raw
materials: lead, lead oxides and sulfuric acid electrolyte. The
plants within the subcategory vary widely in their wastewater
discharge volumes, reflecting process variations and a variety of
water use controls and water management practices. All eleven lead
subcategory process elements identified in Table IV-1 (page i6l)
818
-------
generate process wastewater. Specific wastewater sources are
identified in Figure V-10 (page 271). Normalized flows for these
elements are summarized in Table V-39 (Page 365). This subcategory
differs from the other six in that the same production normalizing
parameter (total lead use) can be used for all process elements since
water use is related to lead use.
BPT end-of-pipe technology for this subcategory is illustrated in
Figure IX-3 (page 847). The treatment system consists of oil
skimming, pH adjustment or chemical precipitation, and settling.
Caustic, sodium carbonate, or lime is added to adjust the pH to a
level that promotes adequate precipitation. The optimum pH range for
precipitation of metals, especially lead, from lead subcategory waste
streams is 8.8-9.3. Carbonate ion in addition to hydroxide may be
required to promote the effective precipitation of lead. Carbonate
precipitation is similar to hydroxide precipitation in terms of metals
removal, and the treated effluent from carbonate precipitation is
compatible for use in lead recovery processes. Alternatively,
treatment system performance can be improved by evaluating other
precipitation technologies. Sulfide precipitation is more effective
than hydroxide precipitation at removing lead because of the lower
solubility of lead sulfide. Also, iron coprecipitation, which
involves the addition of iron salts to a precipitation and settling
system, can enhance the removal efficiency of the system. However,
since the presence of iron salts in recycled waters could be
detrimental to lead subcategory processes, the use of iron
coprecipitaton would most likely be limited to the treatment of waste
streams which are to be discharged. Proper pH control will enhance
the settling of both metal precipitates and suspended solids.
Clarifiers can achieve required effluent concentrations; however,
comparable effluent concentrations can be achieved in tanks or lagoons
or by filtration. In some cases, provisions of an oil skimmer may
also be required to achieve acceptable effluent quality.
The sludge which accumulates during settling must be removed to ensure
continued effective operation of the settling device. A vacuum filter
is included in the BPT system to reduce the water content of the
sludge and minimize the quantity of material requiring disposal. The
resulting filtrate is returned for further treatment, and the sludge
should be sent to metal recovery or to a secure landfill.
Lime and settle (chemical precipitation) technology was considered as
BPT following a careful review of collected information characterizing
process wastewater, present treatment practices, and present
manufacturing practice. Removal of metals, the primary requirement in
treating lead subcategory process wastewater, can be achieved by
chemical precipitation and settling. This technology is similar to
that presently in-place at plants which treat their wastewaters. As
summarized in Table IX-18 (page 862!), the most frequently reported
819
-------
end-of-pipe systems in this subcategory were equivalent to pH
adjustment and settling or pH adjustment and filtration (51 plants);
nine others reported the use of filtration following pH adjustment and
settling. pH adjustment only or no pH adjustment with treatment was
practiced at 48 plants, and 74 plants reported no treatment in-place.
On the basis of more than 20 plant visits and an evaluation of
effluent data submitted, which was discussed in Section V, the Agency
concluded that existing treatment facilities in the subcategory
generally were improperly designed, maintained, or operated. In fact,
those plants which had filtration units in place, used them generally
as primary solids removal units and not as polishing filters designed
to achieve low effluent pollutant concentrations. Based on the
observation that most plants already have BPT end-of-pipe systems
in-place, the selected BPT is reasonable. As an alternative to
reducing effluent concentrations to meet discharge limitations, the
discharge flow can be reduced by either substitution of dry processes
or by the reuse of treated or untreated wastewater.
BPT water flow controls do not require any significant modification of
the manufacturing process or process equipment for their
implementation. The in-process control techniques recommended at BPT
eliminate pollutant discharge from the pasting elements, significantly
reduce pollutant discharges for other process elements, and are
commonly practiced in this subcategory. These are:
ซ Elimination of process wastewater discharge from paste
preparation and application areas by collection, settling,
and reuse (practiced by 55 plants)
Collection and reuse of spent formation acid (practiced by
73 plants)
The establishment of a closed loop system for the paste processing and
area washdown wastewater is a common practice among lead subcategory
plants. Settling the wastewater allows for the removal of solids
which can be either re-introduced into the paste formulation process
or sold to a smelter for the recovery of lead. After settling, the
wastewater can be used either in paste formulation or pasting area
floor and equipment washdown.
The reuse of formation acid is a common practice among the lead
subcategory plants and is economically beneficial. Contamination of
the electrolyte acid is minimized by limiting spillage and
implementing effective acid collection techniques during
post-formation dumping. Once the waste electrolyte solution is
collected, it is combined with fresh sulfuric acid and water to
achieve the acid quality required for process reuse.
820
-------
Table IX-19 (page 863) presents the normalized discharge flows that
form part of the basis for the pollutant mass discharge limitations
for each process element. These normalized flows are generally equal
to the median normalized flows presented in Table V-39 (Page 365) and
are indicative of half of the plants active in a particular process
element. Median statistical analysis was used for this subcategory
because of the nature of the data base. The median is considered to
be the common industry practice for all process elements except floor
wash and battery repair where the mean is used. For the lead
subcategory, which is a large data base, the use of the median values
more realistically reflects where zeroes are in fact, representative
of common industry practice. Table IX-20 (page 864.) summarizes the
number of plants included in each process element, the number which
have zero discharge, and how zero discharge is achieved. Therefore
the use of the median in this subcategory is reasonable.
Process wastewater from leady oxide production was reported at twelve
plants (ten of which were operated by two companies) out of a total of
thirty-four plants which provided specific water use information for
this process element. Wastewater was reported to originate in leakage
and shell cooling on ball mills, contact cooling in oxide grinding and
wet scrubbers for air pollution control. Most plants perform these
operations using only non-contact cooling water and dry bag houses for
pollution control and therefore produce no wastewater. The BPT flow
for the process element is the median or zero discharge of process
wastewater pollutants based upon the fact that 64.7 percent of the
plants produce no wastewater.
The paste preparation and application process element also has a
median discharge flow of zero, because 51 of the 95 plants active in
this process element discharge no process wastewater from this
operation. The collection, settling and recycling of the wastewater
is included in the BPT technology for the lead subcategory.
Less than 10 percent (8 of 89) of the plants supplying data reported
wastewater discharge from plate curing. The wastewater in every case
was a result of steam curing. The predominant industry practices of
curing in covered stacks or in humidity controlled rooms achieve
results equal to those from steam curing and produce no wastewater.
Therefore, BPT flow for this process element is based on zero
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
The closed formation process includes three distinct elements: single
fill formation and double fill formation (which are collectively known
as closed formation of wet batteries), and fill and dump formation
(also known as closed case formation of damp batteries). The closed
formation process generates wastewater from the use of contact cooling
water and the rinsing of battery cases. The amount of contact cooling
821
-------
water used is dependent upon the charging rate, as discussed in
Section V.
In the single fill operation, the battery is filled with acid of such
specific gravity that, after formation, the electrolyte will be
suitable for shipment and operation of the battery. For this process,
36 of the 40 plants supplying data reported no discharge. Based on
this, the BPT flow is equal to the median discharge flow or zero
discharge. This is indicative of common industry practice.
Even though the final shipping status is different for the double fill
and fill and dump processes (wet with electrolyte vs. damp without
electrolyte), the generation of process wastewater and the pollutant
characteristics are essentially similar. In the double fill formation
process, the batteries are filled with a low specific gravity
electrolyte, charged, and the electrolyte dumped. The batteries are
then filled with a higher specific gravity electrolyte and boost
charged before shipment. The fill and dump formation process is the
same except that final electrolyte is dumped before shipment. For the
purpose of developing a BPT flow, the data for the two processes can
be combined. For consistency in the subcategory the median (0.45
I/kg) is used as the BPT flow.
The open case formation process element contains two different
processes - open case formation of dehydrated batteries and open case
formation of wet batteries. The median normalized discharge flow of
9.0 I/kg was selected as the BPT flow for the open case formation of
dehydrated batteries. The median flow was selected because 50 percent
of the plants are currently discharging at or below this level which
is considered to be common industry practice. The BPT flow for the
open formation of wet batteries is based on the median which is zero
discharge of process wastewater. Five of the seven plants supplying
data reported no discharge of wastewater from this operation.
Wastewater was generated in the other two plants by spills and wet
scrubbers used for fume control. These wastewaters can be eliminated
through good housekeeping practices and the use of dry bag houses,
where necessary, for fume control.
The battery wash process element produces wastewater as a result of
two different operations - washing with detergent and washing with
water only. Nearly all of the plants active in this process element
(57 of 60) reported wastewater discharge. The median normalized
discharge flow, 0.72 I/kg, is used as a flow basis for determining the
BPT flow for this process element. The median was chosen because 50
percent of the plants are currently maintaining this flow which is
considered to be common industry practice. Those plants currently
discharging at a flow greater than the median could reduce their flows
by recycling the water from the washing with water only operation.
822
-------
Floor washing generates wastewater at five plants within the lead
subcategory. The mean normalized discharge flow, 0.41 I/kg, for this
process element is used as the BPT flow because no plants reported
zero discharge from floor washing.
Although most plants within the lead subcategory have some type of
battery repair operation, only three plants reported wastewater
generated by a battery repair operation. The mean normalized
discharge flow for this operation is 0.14 I/kg and is used as the BPT
flow because no plants reported zero discharge from battery repair.
The mean represents common industry practice and is therefore the BPT
flow selected.
Pollutant characteristics of process elements in the subcategory are
similar; all have in common the presence of metals, especially lead
and TSS. Specific raw waste characteristics from seven process
elements are described in Section V and displayed in Tables V-40 to
V-50 (pages 366-376). The remaining process elements, leady oxide
production, curing, single fill closed formation and wet batteries
open formation were not specifically characterized by sampling. Based
on raw materials used and the nature of these process operations,
wastewater characteristics throughout this subcategory are similar,
and therefore the sampling of each process element is not essential
for defining mass limitations.
Specific manufacturing process elements at each plant will not affect
the overall pollutant characteristics of wastewater flowing to a
common treatment system in this subcategory. The specific flows from
the process to the treatment system will, however, affect the mass
discharges allowable at each plant. Total raw waste characteristics
for all plants sampled in the subcategory are presented in Table V-54
(page 384).
The selection of pollutant parameters for regulation was dependent
upon the frequent presence of a pollutant at treatable concentrations
in the wastewater. Tables VI-1 and VI-2 summarize the pollutants
considered for regulation. The pollutants which showed up at
treatable concentrations in the wastewaters from the process elements
of the lead subcategory include chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc,
iron, oil and grease, and TSS. However, because chromium, nickel, and
zinc are found in smaller quantities and will be incidently removed by
lime and settle treatment, they are not regulated at BPT. Copper,
lead, iron, oil and grease, and TSS, along with the pH, are the
pollutant parameters selected for BPT regulation. With the
application of lime and settle technology, the concentration of
regulated pollutants should be reduced to the concentration levels
presented in Table VII-20 (page 712). Pollutant mass discharge
limitations based on BPT are determined by multiplying the process
element normalized flows summarized in Table IX-19, by the achievable
823
-------
effluent concentrations for lime and settle technology from Table VII-
20. The results of this computation for all process elements and
regulated pollutants in the lead subcategory are summarized in Tables
IX-21 to IX-25 (pages 865-867). These limitation tables list all the
pollutants which were considered for regulation and those proposed for
regulation are *'d.
The pollutant mass discharge limitations are reasonable based on the
demonstrated ability of the selected BPT to achieve the effluent
concentrations presented. As discussed in Section VII, the effluent
concentrations shown, are in fact, achieved by many plants with
wastewater characteristics (metals, oil and grease, TSS) similar to
those from the lead subcategory, by the application of lime and settle
technology with a reasonable degree of control over treatment system
operating parameters.
To confirm the reasonableness of these limitations for this
subcategory, the Agency compared them to actual performance at lead
subcategory plants by first looking at plant flows. Because BPT is
common end-of-pipe treatment from multiple process elements, total
plant performance is compared rather than performance from each
process element. This was accomplished by calculating total process
wastewater discharge flow rates for each plant in the subcategory
based on available production information and on the normalized
process element BPT flows shown in Table IX-19. These calculated BPT
flow rates were then compared to effluent flow rates actually reported
or measured. Effluent concentrations were also compared to those
attainable by lime and settle (L&S) technology as presented in Table
VII-20. Finally total plant pollutant mass discharges were compared
to BPT limitations for plants which, on the basis of effluent flow
rates and concentrations, were potentially meeting BPT mass discharge
limitations.
As a first step in this comparison, lead subcategory process
wastewater flow rates from each plant were compared to the flow rates
upon which mass limitations for the plant would be based. Since
operating schedules are generally regular in this subcategory, this
comparison was made on the basis of hourly flows. To calculate actual
process wastewater discharge flows, the discharge flow rate (1/hr)
from each process element at the plant was multiplied by the hours of
production activity reported for the process element. The resultant
process element annual discharge flows were summed to determine the
plant total. In some cases, combined flow rates from several process
elements reported in dcp's were the only available data; these
combined flow rates were then multiplied by plant production hours to
determine the total contribution from several process elements to the
plant's annual process wastewater discharge. Production information
from each plant was used to determine an hourly BPT flow for
comparison to these actual values. The total annual pnp was
824
-------
determined and multiplied by the normalized flow shown for the process
element in Table IX-19 to determine the BPT flow for the process
element at the plant. Table IX-26 presents a comparison of these
values.
Fifty-one plants reported zero discharge of process wastewater from
the lead subcategory and were, therefore, complying with the BPT flow
and limitations. Twenty-eight additional plants were identified that
produce total wastewater discharge flows less than those used in
calculating BPT mass discharge limitations. Sixteen of the twenty-
eight have BPT treatment systems (L&S technology) in-place, and nine
of these sixteen submitted effluent data which is summarized in Table
IX-27 (page 873). Plants which had pH adjustment and filtration were
considered to have treatment equipment in-place that is equivalent to
BPT (lime and settle). However, the filtration systems were usually
used only for primary solids removal. Only one plant submitted data
indicating that it would comply with the average lead concentration
values; however, its TSS concentration was significantly high,
indicating a poorly maintained settling system. On the basis of the
data submitted, operational factors which influence treatment
performance could only be evaluated for the plants submitting pH data.
As discussed in Section VII, pH should be maintained at 8.8-9.3 for
the most efficient removal of pollutants. Plant A reported a pH value
of 7.5, below the level required for adequate lead precipitation, and
Plant G reported a pH value of 11.2 which would cause lead to
redissolve.
Lead subcategory treated wastewater values (ph, lead and TSS) vary
considerably among plants indicating that treatment systems vary in
design and operating practices. This was also evident at plants that
were sampled. The three plants that had BPT equivalent treatment
systems in-place and submitted the best effluent data were visited for
sampling. Two of these plants were maintaining flows in compliance
with BPT, and one was not. As shown in Table IX-27, plant C was not
maintaining pH within an acceptable range, and consequently was not
meeting lead concentrations for BPT technology. The filtration system
at this plant was used as a primary solids removal device and was not
operating effectively at the time of sampling, resulting in high TSS
concentrations. Sampling data at this plant did not support the
plant's dcp data for lead concentration and showed that the plant was
not complying with its permit which allowed a maximum of 1.0 mg/1 of
lead to be discharged. With proper pH control and the addition of
settling tanks with adequate retention time, this plant would be
expected to comply with its permit and BPT limitations. Plant G not
only had the same operational problems as plant C (improper pH control
and no settling with filtration), but also the treatment system was
being overloaded to almost triple its design capacity, due to
increased production. This plant could readily comply with BPT
limitations by maintaining proper pH control and by either limiting
825
-------
flows to the treatment system to design levels only, or enlarging the
treatment system. Plant J, which was also sampled, had pH adjustment
and settling in-place, and appeared to maintain pH within the
effective removal range better than any other plant. This particular
plant, however, was not practicing in-process BPT technology and did
not comply with BPT flows for the processes practiced at the plant.
Other lead plants which were visited, but not sampled supported the
conclusions reached from evaluation of submitted data and sampling
data. Several plants were maintaining the BPT process flows and also
had BPT or better end-of-pipe treatment systems in-place which allowed
the plants to reuse the water and thus achieve zero discharge of
wastewater pollutants. Other plants appeared to have the same
operational problems {no pH control and overloaded treatment systems)
as the three sampled plants previously mentioned. Two additional
plants were sampled to characterize process wastewaters; however, both
of these plants achieved zero discharge of wastewater pollutants by
methods other than BPT technology such as treated wastewater reuse, or
contractor hauling and evaporation.
In summary, the above discussion shows that 79 plants currently comply
with BPT flows, and that of the 110 plants with treatment in-place,
the most common treatment system was based on lime and settle
technology. However, when evaluating treatment system performance at
plants with BPT treatment and BPT flow, the data was indicative of
inadequate treatment system design and operating practices. In
particular, close pH control was not practiced at BPT lead subcategory
plants. Because lime and settle treatment practices in the lead
subcategory are generally inadequate the effectiveness of lime and
settle technology must be transferred from other industrial categories
with similar wastewaters. From the data and information collected, it
appears that most lead subcategory plants can comply with BPT with
only minimal changes in their present practices, such as wastewater
flow control and better pH control. Therefore, the selected BPT level
is reasonable.
In the establishment of BPT, the cost of application of technology
must be considered in relation to the effluent reduction benefits from
such application. The quantity of pollutant removal by BPT is dis-
played in Table X-23 (page 976) for the total subcategory and Table X-
24 for direct dischargers only. Treatment costs are shown in Table X-
62 (page 1008). The capital cost of BPT as an increment above the cost
of in-place treatment equipment is estimated to be $7,957,703
($656,400 for direct dischargers) for the lead subcategory. Annual
costs of BPT for the lead subcategory are estimated to be $2,547,740
($253,816 for direct dischargers). The quantity of pollutants removed
by the lime and settle system for this subcatgory is estimated to be
7,644,074 kg/yr (917,291 for direct dischargers) including 1,061,998
826
-------
kg/yr of toxic metals (127,440 for direct dischargers). The pollutant
reduction benefit is worth the dollar cost of required BPT.
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
Currently, there are no direct discharging plants in this subcategory
and therefore no BPT (or BAT) will be established. This discussion of
zero discharge technology is presented here for consistency and
completeness and will form the basis for new source discussions in
Section XI and pretreatment discussions in Section XII.
The Leclanche subcategory includes the manufacture of the zinc anode,
acid electrolyte batteries such as the conventional carbon-zinc
Leclanche cell or "dry cell" (cylindrical, rectangular, and flat),
silver chloride-zinc cells, and carbon-zinc air cells. Nine process
elements identified in Table IV-I (page 161) are manufacturing
activities included within the Leclanche subcategory. Four of these
process elements, as shown in Figure V-18 (page 279), generate a
wastewater discharge/ the other seven do not. Normalized flows for
these elements are summarized in Table V-62 (page 400).
Treatment technology for this subcategory is the implementation of
in-process treatment and controls to eliminate process wastewater
discharge. Information collected to characterize manufacturing
practices, wastewater sources, and present treatment and control
practices was carefully reviewed to define treatment options. Table
V-73 (page 411) summarizes present treatment practices which indicate
that zero discharge is presently common practice within the
subcategory.
The elimination of most wastewater discharges does not require
significant modification of the manufacturing process or process
equipment. In-process technologies practiced in the subcategory and
recommended for zero discharge include:
Wastewater recycle and reuse
Water use control
Good housekeeping
Process modifications for some waste streams
For wastewater recycle and reuse, wastewater sources which are
encountered in this subcategory can be segregated into two groups:
those that are related to mercury use and those that are related to
other metals use (manganese and zinc). Paste separators, both cooked
and uncooked, pasted paper separators, and equipment and utensils
which are used to mix or transport mercury-containing materials are
827
-------
included in the mercury use group. The other group includes paste
separators and equipment and utensils which are not related to mercury
use. Segregation of streams in the mercury use group is important for
effective treatment as well as wastewater recycle and reuse. Since
wastewater would contain only the constituents used in these processes
(primarily mercury) recycle is practical. When all process
wastewaters are combined, the contaminants from other
processes/primarily zinc and manganese, prevent recycle. All waste
streams in this subcategory can be recycled and reused, whether with
or without treatment, as deemed necessary by the individual plant.
This in-process technology is presently implemented at plants within
the subcategory.
Water use within plants can be controlled and good housekeeping
techniques can be practiced to substantially reduce the amount of
water used. Water use can be eliminated by using dry cleanup
procedures or by minimizing spills and keeping production areas clean.
These techniques are presently practiced, especially for equipment and
floor cleaning processes.
Mechanical and production practices vary from plant to plant, and in
some instances within the subcategory, wastewater is discharged from
equipment and area cleanup. If all other in-process techniques cannot
be implemented at a plant, another alternative is to consider
implementation for process modifications. The final alternative is to
implement all available in-process practices and contract haul the
wastes to a secure landfill or sell for metals reclamation.
Wastewater characteristics of Leclanche subcategory process elements
are similar in that they contain metals (primarily mercury and zinc),
oil and grease, and TSS. These characteristics are presented for all
process elements in Tables V-63 to V-66 (page 401 - 404) and Tables
V-68 to V-71 (pages 406 - 409).
No discharge was selected primarily because 12 of the 19 existing
plants are presently achieving no discharge. Most of these plants
achieve zero discharge by employing manufacturing processes, operating
practices, and maintenance procedures which do not result in the
generation of process wastewater. The remaining plants which
presently discharge wastewater could accomplish zero discharge by
using in-process treatment and technology practices.
At plants where paste is prepared and applied to cells containing
paste separators or to paper for use as cell separator material,
equipment is periodically washed down with water as part of normal
maintenance. Wastewater from equipment cleaning usually contains the
paste constituents, including ammonium chloride, zinc and mercury.
This water is retained and reused in subsequent paste equipment
washing. The build-up of contaminants in the wash water is controlled
828
-------
by using a portion of the wash stream in paste preparation. Of the
six plants supplying data for paste preparation, three plants which
use mercury in the mix have reported no process wastewater discharge.
One plant has recently discontinued this process, but before changing
processes was practicing segregation, recycle and reuse. The second
plant is presently practicing segregation, recycle and reuse, and the
third plant does not generate any process wastewater since its
equipment is not washed. The other three plants do not practice
recycle or reuse. Two of these plants use less than 10 gallons a day
of process water and do not have mercury in their paste processes.
The third plant presently uses mercury and discharges water from paste
equipment washing.
Water is used at one plant in the cooked paste separator process
element, to supply heat for setting paste separators. As a result of
contact with machinery used to convey the cells and occasional
spillage from cells, this water becomes contaminated with oil and
grease, paste constituents (zinc, ammonium chloride and mercury) and
manganese dioxide particulates. These contaminants do not interfere
with the use of this water for heat transfer to the outside of
assembled cells. Wastewater discharge from this operation results
from manufacturing conveniences, maintenance of the equipment, and
from dragout of water on the cells and conveyors. Discharge from each
of these process sources can be eliminated by recycle and reuse of the
water. Water drawdown from the paste setting tanks during breaks in
production serves to prevent overcooking of the paste separators in
cells left in the tanks during these periods. Discharge resulting
from the tank drawdown and from emptying tanks for maintenance can be
eliminated without loss of productivity by providing a tank to hold
the drawdown water during the break. The water can later be pumped
back into the process tanks. These practices will eliminate the
wastewater discharge and the energy requirement for heating water used
in the paste setting tanks. Dragout from paste setting tanks which is
presently treated and discharged can be collected and returned to the
process tank for recycle. This practice will eliminate wastewater
discharge and reduce the amounts of oil and grease (from the process
machinery) in wastewater from the paste setting process.
Process wastewater generated by cooking to "set" the paste separator
may be eliminated entirely by substitution of a low temperature
setting paste. This is presently practiced by one plant.
Alternatively, paper separators can be used in accordance with
prevailing practice at other Leclanche subcategory plants.
Water used for equipment and floor cleaning in assembly as well as
electrolyte preparation areas was reported at seven Leclanche
subcategory plants. One plant which was recycling equipment cleaning
water has discontinued production. The six remaining plants presently
do not practice any substantial in-process technologies to completely
829
-------
eliminate wastewater discharge. Water use and subsequent discharge
can be substantially reduced by the implementation of water use
controls or eliminated by the substitution of dry equipment cleanup
procedures. Eight plants which were visited, presently employ some
dry equipment and floor cleaning techniques. The assumption is made
that other plants not visited and reporting zero discharge of process
wastewater are also practicing dry equipment and floor cleaning
techniques. One plant which was visited and is presently discharging
substantial volumes of equipment cleaning water, claimed that zero
discharge could be achieved through in-process controls, treatment and
recycle. Where the quality of the water is essential for final
product performance, wastewater can be segregated, treated and reused.
Existing treatment at the four plants which treat and discharge
wastewater can be used for this purpose. In the unlikely event that
all process water cannot be reused after in-process technologies are
implemented, resulting wastewaters can be contractor hauled to an
approved landfill or sold for metals reclaimation if appropriate.
As shown in the above discussion, zero discharge for the Leclanche
subcategory is reasonable. This level of control is presently
achieved by 12 plants and is viable for the remaining seven plants.
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
Currently, the discharge by direct dischargers of process wastewater
from this subcategory is small (less than 4 million 1/yr) and the
quantity of toxic pollutants is also small (less than 220 kg/yr).
Because of the small quantities, the Agency has elected not to
establish national BPT (and BAT) limitations for this subcategory.
Applicable technologies, and potential limitations are set forth as
guidance should a state or local pollution control agency desire to
establish such limitations. Detailed discussions on technology
presented here will form the basis for new source discussions in
Section XI and XII.
The lithium subcategory includes the manufacture of lithium anode
batteries, including thermal batteries and other high cost, low volume
special purpose batteries, such as those used in heart pacemakers,
lanterns, watches, and for military applications. Fifteen process
elements identified in Table IV-I (page 161) are manufacturing
activities included within this subcategory. Since the cell anode
material, lithium, reacts vigorously with water, water use and
discharge in this subcategory is limited. Eight of these process
elements, as shown in Figure V-21 (page 282), generate a wastewater
discharge; the other seven do not. Normalized flows for these
elements are summarized in Table V-76 (page 414).
End-of-pipe treatment for this subcategory is illustrated in Figure
IX-4 (page 848). Since no lithium subcategory plants presently have
830
-------
adequate treatment systems in-place (See Table V-80, page 418),
treatment technology is transfered from other similar industrial
categories. Three separate treatment systems are shown to account for
the processes and waste streams currently encountered. Lithium cell
manufacturers do not use processes at any one plant which produce
waste streams for all three treatment systems.
The first treatment system is for plants producing lithium anode
thermal batteries and generating process wastewater from heat paper
production only. This waste stream is treated separately because of
the chromium and large quantities of suspended solids present in the
raw waste stream, as is discussed in the calcium subcategory on page
817.
The second treatment system is for plants generating process
wastewater from lead iodide cathode production, iron disulfide cathode
production, cell testing, lithium scrap disposal, and floor and
equipment wash. Treatment includes chemical precipitation with lime
and settling. A clarifier can be used as a settling device. This
treatment system is identical to the first except for the chromium
reduction steps. Settled solids are treated identically as the first
treatment system, by dewatering in a vacuum filtration unit. As an
alternative, for the plants with heat paper production and one or more
of the second system process elements, wastewaters can be combined
following chromium pretreatment; however, additional pollutant
parameters would be regulated.
The third treatment system is for plants generating process wastewater
from air scrubbers located in various production areas, such as sulfur
dioxide preparation, thionyl chloride preparation, electrolyte
preparation, battery filling, and assembly areas. Initially these
wastewaters are aerated to reduce the oxygen demand, then neutralized
since thionyl chloride and sulfur dioxide streams form hydrochloric
and sulfuric acid, respectively. The neutralized waste stream is
settled prior to discharge because of the formation of precipitates
and suspended solids. Settled solids are removed and contractor
hauled to a secure landfill. These solids are not expected to be
hazardous.
BPT water flow controls do not require any significant modification of
the manufacturing process or process equipment for their
implementation. There are no in-process technologies recommended at
BPT.
Table IX-28 (page 874) presents the normalized discharge flows which
form part of the basis for mass discharge limitations for each process
element. These normalized flows are equal to the mean normalized
flows presented in Table V-76 (page 414) (except for heat paper
production which was discussed under the calcium subcategroy) and
831
-------
represent the average level of water use presently achieved by plants
active in each process element. These flows correspond to internal
controls which are common industry practices.
Pollutant characteristics of process wastewater from the process
elements in this subcategory are related to the three separate
treatment systems. Heat paper production wastewaters, which were
described under the calcium subcategory and characterized in Table
V-35 (page 361), contain treatable levels of chromium as well as TSS.
This element was separated for separate treatment because of the
presence of chromium in the wastewater.
The lead iodide cathode production, iron disulfide cathode production,
lithium scrap disposal, cell testing and floor and equipment wash
process elements contain pollutants such as iron, lead and TSS. These
pollutants can be treated by chemical precipitation and settling
technology, which is the second treatment system. The iron disulfide
cathode production element was sampled since it was expected to
contain the most pollutants and comprised a large percentage of the
wastes streams considered for this treatment system. The raw waste
characteristics are shown in Table V-77 (page 415). The lithium scrap
disposal area was also sampled and characteristics are summarized in
Table V-79 (page 417). The second largest contributing waste stream,
the lead iodide cathode production element was not sampled, but one
plant reported that it contained lead. The wastewater was contractor
hauled. For the lead iodide, cell testing and floor and equipment
wash process elements, no pollutants in addition to those detected in
the iron disulfide stream are expected to be present in the
wastewaters.
The cell wash wastewater stream which was characterized by plant
supplied data, contains high levels of COD. This is expected since
acetonitrile, used as a raw material, contains cyanide. Because the
flow from this process is low (less than 55 gallons per week) and the
waste stream contains organics, this waste stream is contractor hauled
for disposal and zero discharge is proposed.
The wastewater from the air scrubbers process element, which are
treated by the third treatment system, are expected to be acidic and
contain some suspended solids. These streams were not sampled,
however by evaluating raw materials and plant data, the conclusions
reached concerning the raw waste characteristics are reasonable.
Specific manufacturing process elements at each plant will affect the
pollutant characteristics and the treatment system used. Total
subcategory raw waste characteristics and total wastewater flow from
each process element are summarized in Table X-30 (page 982).
832
-------
All process element raw wastewater samples and plant data were
evaluated to determine which pollutants should be considered for
regulation. Tables VI-1 and VI-2 (Page 566 and 571) summarize this
analysis and lists the pollutants that should be considered.
Pollutant parameters found frequently, or at high concentrations, in
process element waste streams in this subcategory include chromium,
lead, iron, and TSS. These parameters, along with pH, should be
regulated as appropriate for the process elements included in the
separate treatment systems. Chromium, TSS and pH should be regulated
when only heat paper production wastewater is treated. When cathode
and all ancillary operations except scrubber wastewater are treated,
chromium, lead, iron, TSS and pH should be regulated. Air scrubber
wastewater is segregated from other process wastewater and treated for
TSS and pH only.
Other pollutants which appeared at lower concentrations and were
considered, but not considered for regulation should be incidentally
removed by the application of lime and settle technology. With the
application of chromium reduction and chemical precipitation and
settling technology, the concentration of regulated pollutants should
be reduced to the concentration levels presented in Table VI1-20 (page
712). Pollutant mass discharge limitations based on lime and settle
technology are determined by multiplying the process element
normalized flows, summarized in Table IX-28, by the achievable
effluent concentration levels for lime and settle technology. One
limitation is presented for floor and equipment wash, cell testing,
and lithium scrap disposal because of the small amounts of wastewater
generated. The results of this computation for all process elements
and selected pollutants for specific process elements in the lithium
subcategory are summarized in Table IX-29 to IX-33 (pages 875 - 877).
These tables are presented as guidance for state or local pollution
control agencies agencies because discharges from this subcategory are
not proposed for national regulation at BPT.
The pollutant mass discharge limitations are reasonable based on the
demonstrated ability of the selected BPT technologies to achieve the
effluent concentrations presented. As discussed in Section VII, the
effluent concentrations shown are achieved by many plants with
wastewater characteristics (metals, TSS) similar to those from the
lithium subcategory by the application of lime and settle technology
with a reasonable degree of control over treatment system operating
parameters.
To determine the reasonableness of these proposed mass limitations,
the Agency examined the available effluent data, the treatment systems
in place, and the processes conducted at each plant in the
subcategory. As discussed in the calcium subcategory, no plants have
lime and settle treatment in place for the heat paper production
process element. Therefore, for the one lithium subcategory plant
833
-------
active in this process element, reasonableness is based upon the
proven effectiveness of lime and settle technology in other industrial
categories with similar wastewater characteristics. Of the two plants
active in the lead iodide cathode production, iron disulfide cathode
production, cell washing, cell testing, floor and equipment wash, and
lithium scrap disposal process elements, one plant does not have a
complete, effective treatment system in place for all of these
elements, and the other contractor hauls their wastes. The first
plant does not pH adjust and settle all process element streams, and
the second only settles the wastewater before contractor removal. Two
plants, active in the air scrubber element, treat process wastewaters
by pH adjustment only. This treatment alone is not considered to
represent the selected treatment technology, since pH adjustment
causes precipitates to form in the wastewater which should be settled
before discharge. The reasonableness of this technology is again
based on proven effectiveness in other industrial categories with
similar wastewater characteristics.
The data collected indicates that plants active in the subcategory do
not have adequate treatment in place. Therefore, treatment technology
is transferred from other industrial categories which treat
wastewaters containing such pollutants as chromium, lead, iron and
TSS.
If the application of lime and settle technology at a specific plant
does not result in sufficiently low effluent concentrations to meet
mass discharge regulations, there are alternative technologies
available, such as sulfide precipitation, carbonate precipitation and
ferrite coprecipitation (with hydroxide precipitation) which may
achieve lower effluent concentrations than hydroxide precipitation. A
more simple way of meeting the discharge limitations would be to
reduce the discharge flow either through process modification or in-
process flow controls. Alternatively, plants with significantly small
volumes of wastewater (less than 50 gallons per week) can consider
contractor removal to a secure, approved landfill.
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
Currently, the discharge by direct dischargers of process wastewater
from this subcategory is small (less than 4 million 1/yr) and the
quantity of toxic pollutants is also small (less than 220 kg/yr).
Because of the small quantities, the Agency has elected not to
establish national BPT (and BAT) limitations for this subcategory.
Applicable technologies, and potential limitations are set forth as
guidance should a state or local pollution control agency desire to
establish such limitations. Detailed discussions on technology
presented here will form the basis for new source discussion in
Section XI and pretreatment discussions in Section XII.
834
-------
The magnesium subcategory includes the manufacture of magnesium anode
batteries, such as magnesium carbon batteries, and reserve and thermal
batteries, which are activated by electrolyte addition or by
initiation of a chemical reaction to raise the cell temperature to
operating levels. Of these, magnesium carbon batteries account for 85
percent of the production in the subcategory. Sixteen process
elements identified in Table IV-I (page 161) are manufacturing
activities included within this subcategory. Seven of these process
elements, as shown in Figure V-23 (page 284), generate a wastewater
discharge; the other nine do not. Normalized flows for these elements
are summarized in Table V-82 (page 420;).
End-of-pipe treatment for this subcategory is illustrated in Figure
IX-5 (page 849). Since no plants in the subcategory are effectively
treating the wastewater (See Table V-85 page 423), technology is
transfered from other industrial categories with similar pollutants.
Three separate treatment systems are shown to account for the
processes and waste streams currently combined and encountered in the
subcategory at present. Magnesium cell manufacturers at any one plant
do not conduct manufacturing processes which produce all of the
identified wastewater streams for all three treatment systems.
The first treatment system is for wastewaters from the silver chloride
cathode processes in which silver or silver chloride is treated in
process solutions. The batch dumps of the solutions are bled into the
rinsewaters from the operations and sent to treatment. In order to
reduce the oxygen demand of the organic laden wastes, the wastewater
is pretreated with potassium permanganate. When this oxidation
process is complete, the water is subjected to chemical precipitation
with lime or acid and settling. As in the second system, settled
solids are removed and dewatered in a vacuum filtration unit. For
plants with silver chloride production and cell testing, or floor and
equipment washing process elements, wastewaters are combined following
permanganate pretreatment. For plants with only cell testing or floor
and equipment wash, pretreatment is not necessary.
The second treatment system is for plants producing magnesium anode
thermal batteries and generating process wastewater from heat paper
production. The system is identical to the system discussed and
described in the calcium subcategory on page 817.
The third treatment system is for plants generating process wastewater
from air scrubbers. Treatment includes chemical precipitation with
lime or acid, and settling to remove metals and suspended solids. A
clarifier can be used as a settling device. Settled solids are
removed and dewatered in a vacuum filtration unit. Solids are removed
for disposal, and the filtrate is recycled back to the chemical
precipitation tank. For plants with heat paper production and air
scrubbers, the wastewater streams are segregated.
835
-------
BPT water flow controls do not require any significant modification of
the manufacturing process or process equipment for their
implementation. In-process flow control is recommended for the silver
chloride cathodes surface reduced process element. On-site visits
indicated that rinse water was left flowing continuously in two tanks
regardless of whether the process used two rinses or not.
Consequently, twice the amount of water was used than was necessary
and fifty percent of the observed flow is believed to represent the
average process flow.
Table IX-34 (page 878) presents the normalized discharge flows
which form part of the basis for pollutant mass discharge limitations
for each process element. These normalized flows are equal to the
mean normalized flows presented in Table V-82 (except for heat paper
production, which was discussed under the calcium subcategory and the
silver chloride cathode surface reduced process discussed above) and
represent the average level of water use presently achieved by plants
active in each process element. These flows correspond to internal
controls which are common industry practice. ,
Pollutant characteristics of process wastewater from the process
elements in this subcategory are related to the three separate
treatment systems. Heat paper wastewaters and treatment
characteristics were discussed in the calcium subcategory. Air
scrubber wastewater is expected to only contain treatable levels of
TSS. The cell testing and floor and equipment wash process elements
should contain pollutants such as metals and TSS which can be treated
by chemical precipitation and settling technology. These process
elements were not characterized by sampling. However, by evaluating
raw materials and plant data, no pollutants, other than those detected
in other waste streams sampled in this subcategory, are expected to be
present. The characteristics for the silver chloride cathode
processes are presented in Table V-7 (page 324), and Table V-84 (page
422) These elements were separated for pretreatment because of the
presence of COD in the wastewaters.
Specific manufacturing process elements at each plant will affect the
pollutant characteristics and the treatment system used. Total
subcategory raw waste characteristics and total wastewater flow from
all process elements are summarized in Table X-36 (page 988).
All process element raw wastewater samples and plant data were
evaluated to determine which pollutants should be considered for
regulation. Table VI-1 and VI-2 (pages 566 and 571) summarize this
analysis and list the pollutants that should be considered. Pollutant
parameters which were found at high concentrations in process element
waste streams from this subcategory and should be regulated include
chromium, lead, silver, iron, COD, and TSS. These parameters, along
with pH, are considered for regulation. Specific pollutants
336
-------
considered depend on processes practiced at each plant. Other
pollutants which appeared at lower concentrations and were considered,
but not selected for regulation should be incidentally removed by the
application of the selected treatment technology. With the
application of chromium reduction, oxidation, chemical precipitation
and settling technology, the concentration of the selected pollutants
should be reduced to the concentration levels presented in Table
VII-20 (page 712). Mass discharge limitations based on the discussed
lime and settle treatment are determined by multiplying the process
element normalized flows summarized in Table IX-34 , with the
achievable effluent concentration levels for lime and settle
technology from Table VII-20. The results of this computation for all
process elements and considered pollutants and pollutant parameters in
the magnesium subcategory are summarized in Tables IX-35 to IX-40
(pages 879 - 881). These tables are presented as guidance for state
or local pollution control agencies because discharges from this
subcategory are not proposed for national regulation at BPT.
As discussed in Section VII, the effluent concentrations shown are
achieved by many plants with wastewater characteristics (metals, TSS)
similar to those from the magnesium subcategory, by the application of
lime and settle technology with a reasonable degree of control over
treatment system operating parameters.
To determine the reasonableness of these mass limitations, the Agency
examined the processes conducted, the available effluent data, and the
treatment systems in place at each plant in the subcategory. As
discussed in the calcium subcategory, no plants have BPT in place for
the heat paper production process element. Therefore, for the one
magnesium subcategory plant active in this process element,
reasonableness is based upon the proven effectiveness of BPT
technology in other industrial categories with similar wastewater
characteristics. For the silver chloride cathode production
wastewater streams, no plant has BPT in place. Neither the one plant
that produces silver chloride cathodes nor the other that is capable
of producing them oxidizes the solution waste stream prior to
treatment. Therefore, reasonableness is based on the proven
effectiveness of the BPT technology in other industrial categories
with similar (high COD, metals and TSS) wastewater characteristics.
Air scrubber wastewater is generated at a plant which does not treat
the process wastewater. Cell testing is also generated at a plant
which does not treat process wastewater/however, the plant does have a
BPT system in place which can be used for treatment. Reasonableness
for these technologies is based on the proven effectiveness of the
technologies in other industrial categories with similar wastewater
characteristics. All but one plant, which reported a discharge from
floor and equipment wash, have a treatment system in place, but do not
treat the wastewater. Proven effectiveness for the technology is
transferred from other industrial categories.
837
-------
Although the effluent limitations are based on the application of
chemical precipitation and settling technology, there are alternative
technologies available, such as sulfide precipitation, carbonate
precipitation and ferrite coprecipitation (with hydroxide
precipitation), which may achieve lower effluent concentrations than
lime precipitation. A simpler way of meeting the mass limitations
would be to reduce the discharge flow either through process
modification or in-process flow controls. Alternatively, plants with
significantly small volumes of wastewater (less than 50 gallons per
week) can consider contractor removal to a secure, approved landfill.
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
The zinc subcategory includes the manufacture of a variety of zinc
anode batteries such as alkaline manganese, silver oxide-zinc,
mercury-zinc, carbon zinc-air depolarized, and nickel-zinc.
Twenty-five process elements identified in Table IV-I (page 161) are
manufacturing activities included within this subcategory. Sixteen of
these elements, as shown in Figure V-25 (page 286), generate a
wastewater discharge, the other nine do not. Normalized flows for
these elements are summarized in Table V-87 (page 426 ).
BPT end-of-pipe treatment for the zinc subcategory, as shown in Figure
IX-6 (page 850) consists of chemical precipitation and sedimentation.
Wastewaters are skimmed for oil and grease removal and have hexavalent
chromium reduced as necessary. Sludges are dewatered in a vacuum
filter. This system was selected following a review of data submitted
by plants in the subcategory, observations at plants which were
visited, analytical results, and industry comments on the draft
development document circulated in September, 1980. As shown in Table
V-141 (page 481), plants in the subcategory reported various treatment
systems in place, ranging from pH adjustment only to innovative carbon
adsorption and ion exchange systems. Observations at plants
indicated, however, that these treatment systems were either
rudimentary, improperly operated, or installed during or after data
collection activities before performance could be evaluated
completely. Most plants can, at present, comply wit-h the limitations
based on this technology with little or no treatment system
modification. Treatment effectiveness, however, is transferred from
other industrial categories with similar wastewater (toxic metals,
TSS, oil and grease) because of inadequate treatment system control
and operation.
Sulfide precipitation, sedimentation and filtration was initially
selected for BPT as being the average technology already in-place.
Also, zinc subcategory wastewaters contain metals, particularly
mercury. Mercury is less soluble as a sulfide than as a hydroxide.
Consequently, lower concentrations of mercury could be achieved by
using sulfide rather than hydroxide precipitation. The system was not
838
-------
selected primarily because (1) sulfide precipitation may produce a
toxic and reactive sludge which would cause significant difficulties
with disposal and (2) lime precipitation is a more widely applied
technology at the present time, and that its effectiveness has
consequently been more thoroughly demonstrated in industrial
wastewater treatment.
In addition to end-of-pipe technology for the removal of wastewater
pollutants, BPT includes the application of controls within the
process to limit the volume of wastewater requiring treatment. Those
controls which are included in BPT are generally applied in the
subcategory at the present time, and do not require any significant
modification of the manufacturing process, process equipment or
product for their implementation. They are discussed in detail in
Section VII. In-process control technologies upon which BPT
limitations are based include:
Recycle or reuse of process solutions used for material
deposition, electrode formation, and cell washing (already
practiced by 4 plants)
Segregation of noncontact cooling and heating water from
process wastewater streams (necessary for effective
treatment)
Control of electrolyte drips and spills (observed at various
plants visited)
Segregation of organic-bearing cell cleaning wastewater (at
various plants visited, these wastewaters were segregated
and contractor hauled)
Elimination of chromate cell cleaning wastewater (common
industry practice as reported and observed is the use of
non-chromium cell cleaning solutions)
Control of process water use in rinsing to correspond to
production requirements (already practiced by 5 plants).
As discussed in Section VII, a large number of in-process control
techniques could be used in addition to the water use controls
specifically identified as BPT. Many of these, including multistage
and countercurrent rinses, are presently practiced at plants in this
subcategory.
Table IX-41 (page 882) presents the normalized discharge flows which
form part of the basis for mass discharge limitations for each process
element. These flows are in most cases equal to the mean normalized
flows presented in Table V-87 and represent the average level of water
839
-------
use presently achieved by plants active in each process element.
Specific discussion follows when the median rather than mean was used
as the BPT flow. All flows correspond to internal controls which are
common industry practice.
Pollutant characteristics of process wastewater from the process
elements in this subcategory are essentially similar because they
contain toxic metals especially mercury, and also nickel, silver and
zinc. Raw wastewater characteristics for all sixteen process elements
are presented in Tables V-19 to V-22 (pages 345 - 348), and in Tables
V-89 to V-140 (pages 429 - 480). Specific manufacturing process
elements at each plant will affect the overall pollutant
characteristics of the combined process wastewater flowing to one
end-of-pipe treatment system. Some loss in pollutant removal
effectiveness will result where waste streams containing specific
pollutants at treatable levels are combined with others in which these
same pollutants are absent or present at very low concentrations.
Although process wastewater streams with different raw waste
concentrations will be combined for end-of-pipe treatment, the
treatment effectiveness concentrations can be achieved with the
recommended treatment technologies as discussed in Section VII.
Total subcategory raw waste characteristcs are needed to evaluate the
pollutant removals which would be achieved by implementing the
recommended treatment technologies. Total raw waste characteristics
from sampled plants alone do not represent the total subcategory. To
present raw waste from the total subcategory the following methodology
was used. For pollutants in each process element the mean raw waste
concentration (from sampling data in Section V) was multiplied by the
total wastewater flow for the process. The annual mass of pollutants
generated by each process was summed and divided by the total
subcategory flow to obtain the subcategory raw waste concentrations.
The results of these calculations are shown in Table X-43 (page 994).
For the total subcategory mercury raw waste concentration all total
raw wastewater sampling data from both screening and verification was
used to obtain an average concentration and loading. This was done
because one fourth of the mercury values from individual samples and
combined process element streams were not obtained and reported from
the lab as analytical interference.
All process element raw wastewater samples and calculated total raw
waste concentrations were evaluated to determine which pollutants
should be considered for regulation. Tables VI-1 and VI-2 (pages 566
and 571) summarize this analysis and lists the pollutants that should
be considered. Pollutant parameters which were found frequently or at
high concentrations in process element waste streams in this
subcategory include chromium, mercury, nickel, silver, zinc, cyanide,
manganese, oil and grease, and TSS. Nickel is proposed for regulation
only for the nickel impregnated cathode and cell wash process
840
-------
elements. Cyanide is proposed for regulation only for the cell wash
process element. Chromium, mercury, nickel, silver, zinc, manganese,
oil and grease, and TSS, are selected for regulation at BPT. pH is
proposed for regulation as a control parameter. Other pollutants
which appeared at lower concentrations and were considered, but not
selected for regulation at BPT, should be incidentally removed by the
application of BPT technology.
With the application of lime and settle technology, combined with oil
skimming and chromium reduction when necessary, the concentration of
regulated pollutants should be reduced to the concentration levels
presented in Table VII-20 (page 712). Pollutant mass discharge
limitations based on BPT are determined by multiplying the process
element BPT flows summarized in Table IX-41, with the achievable
effluent concentration levels for lime and settle technology from
Table VII-20. The results of this computation for all process
elements and regulated pollutants in the zinc subcategory are
summarized in Tables IX-42 to IX-57 (pages 883-891). To alleviate
some of the monitoring burden, several process elements which occur at
most plants and have the same pnp are combined in one regulatory
table. Table 55-A (page 890) is the combined table for Tables IX-50
to IX-55. These limitation tables list all the pollutants which were
considered for regulation and those proposed for regulation are *'d.
These mass discharge limitations are substantiated by the demonstrated
ability of the selected BPT to achieve the effluent concentrations
presented. As discussed in Section VII, the effluent concentrations
shown are in fact achieved by plants with wastewater characteristics
(toxic metals, oil and grease, TSS) similar to those from the zinc
subcategory by the application of lime and settle technology. Long-
term, self-monitoring data have demonstrated the feasibility of
maintaining these levels reliably over extended periods of time with a
reasonable degree of control over treatment system operating
parameters. At least half of all plants active in each process
element presently produce production normalized process wastewater
volumes equal to or less than the volume upon which pollutant
discharge limitations are based.
To confirm the reasonableness of these limitations, the Agency
compared them with actual results at zinc subcategory plants. Since
plants presently discharge wastewaters from various battery process
elements, and BPT is a single end-of-pipe treatment, this comparison
is best made on a total plant rather than a process element basis.
This was accomplished by calculating total wastewater discharge flow
rates for each plant in the subcategory based on available production
information and the normalized process element flows shown in Table
IX-41. These flow rates were then compared to calculated effluent
flow rates actually reported or measured. Effluent concentrations
were also compared with those attainable by lime and settle technology
841
-------
as presented in Table VI1-20. Finally, total plant mass discharges
were compared to BPT limitations for plants which, on the basis of
effluent flow rates and concentrations, were potentially meeting BPT
mass discharge limitations.
Zinc subcategory process wastewater flow from each plant was compared
with the calculated flow upon which pollutant discharge limitations
for the plant would be based. In order to minimize the effects of
irregular operating schedules for some process operations, this
comparison was made on the basis of annual flows. To calculate the
actual annual process wastewater discharge flows, the discharge flow
rate (1/hr) from each process element was multiplied by the hours of
production activity in the process element, and the resultant process
element annual discharge flows were summed to determine the plant
total. In some cases, process element flow rates were not available,
and reported total process wastewater flows or estimated flows for
specific process elements were used. Production information from each
plant was used to determine a calculated BPT flow for comparison to
the actual values. The total annual production (in terms of pnp) for
each process element was determined and multiplied by the normalized
flow shown for the process element in Table IX-41 to determine this
BPT flow for the process element at the plant. Flows for each process
element were summed to obtain a total plant BPT flow. Table IX-58
(page 892) presents a comparision of the actual and BPT calculated
flows for each zinc subcategory plant.
As shown in Table IX-58 eight of sixteen zinc subcategory plants were
found to produce process wastewater discharge equal to or less than
those upon which BPT pollutant discharge limitations would be based.
In addition, five of the remaining eight plants had flows less than
two times the BPT flow. The achievement of BPT flows in present
practice at the plants in the subcategory confirms the thesis that the
flow basis for BPT limitations is reasonable and reflects control
techniques widely practiced in the subcategory at the present time.
Treatment reported to be applied to zinc subcategory process
wastewaters and summarized in Table V-142 (page 482) shows that
present treatment practice in the subcategory is highly diverse. Many
of the technologies practiced (e.g., amalgamation and carbon
adsorption) are aimed specifically at the removal of mercury.
Effluent data and on-site observations at plants in the zinc
subcategory (discussed in Section V) reveal that most of the
technologies employed are not effectively applied for the reduction of
pollutant discharges. In some cases, such as amalgamation, this is
due to the inherent limitations of the technologies employed. In
other cases, such as sulfide precipitation, failure to achieve
effective pollutant removal results from specific design, operation,
and maintenance factors at the plants employing the technologies.
Despite these adverse factors and observations, plants in this
842
-------
subcategory can comply with the limitations achieved by lime and
settle, the selected BPT technology.
Present treatment and control practices in the zinc subcategory are
not only diverse, but are uniformly inadequate either in their design
or in their operation and maintenance (See Section V discussion).
Consequently, a treatment technology is selected which can be related
uniformly to the subcategory. The simplest treatment system
technology (lime and settle), and its demonstrated effectiveness, is
transferred from other industrial categories with similar waste
characteristics (toxic metals, oil and grease, and TSS). By
re-evaluating all the flow and effluent data collected based on the
selected BPT equivalent technology flows and lime and settle treatment
effectiveness, eight plants in the subcategory meet the flows and can
readily comply with the mass limitations with some or no treatment
modification to their existing treatment systems. Of these eight
plants, two plants comply by having no process wastewater flows; one
plant can comply by segregating non-process wastewater streams; four
plants can comply by providing adequate maintenance (adequate solids
removal) and control (pH monitoring) of existing waste treatment
facilities; and the eighth plant can comply by upgrading design and
properly maintaining the existing waste treatment system. The
remaining eight plants, in addition to evaluating existing treatment,
would have to improve control of process wastewater flow rates by
implementing flow normalization to comply with BPT mass limitations.
If the application of BPT technology at specific plants does not
result in effluent concentrations sufficiently low to meet mass
discharge limitations, there are other available treatment alter-
natives, such as sulfide precipitation, carbonate precipitation and
ferrite coprecipitation, especially for mercury removal (see Section
VII, Page 573) which could achieve lower effluent concentrations than
hydroxide precipitation. Another way of meeting the mass discharge
limits is to reduce the discharge flow either through process
modification, in-process controls or reuse of water.
In the establishment of BPT, the cost of application of technology
must be considered in relation to the pollutant reduction benefits
from such application. The quantity of pollutants removed by BPT
treatment are displayed in Table X-45 (page 998) and for direct
dischargers in Table X-46 (page 999). Total treatment costs are
displayed in Table X-62 (page 1008). The capital cost of BPT treatment
as an increment above the cost of in-place treatment equipment is
estimated to be $308,768 ($50294 for direct dischargers) for the zinc
subcategory. Annual cost of lime and settle technology for the zinc
subcategory is estimated to be $102,462 ($18219 for direct
dischargers). The quantity of pollutants removed by the BPT system
for this subcategory is estimated to be 9,887 kg/yr (2,274 for direct
dischargers) including 5,572 kg/yr (1,282 for direct dischargers) of
843
-------
toxic metals. The pollutant reduction benefit is worth the dollar
cost of required BPT.
APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS IN PERMITS
The purpose of these limitations (and standards) is to form a uniform
national basis for regulating wastewater effluent from the battery
manufacturing category. For direct dischargers, the regulations are
implemented through NPDES permits. Because of the many elements found
in battery manufacturing and the apparent complexity of the
regulation, two examples of applying these limitations to determine
the allowable discharge from battery manufacturing are included.
Example K Plant X manufactures lead acid batteries using 5.2 x 106
kg lead/yr. The plant operates for 250 ^ays during the year. Leady
oxide is purchased; paste is mixed in the plant and applied to casted
grids; plates are cured in stacks; 80% of the batteries are charged
using closed, single-fill formation; 20% are formed using open
formation and dehydration for dehydrated batteries; all batteries are
detergent washed.
Table IX-59 (page 893) illustrates the calculation of allowable daily
discharge of lead.
Example 2_. Plant Y manufactures nickel cadmium batteries using
pressed powder anodes and nickel impregnated cathodes. The plant
operates for 250 days during the year. The plant uses 55,800 kg
cadmium/yr in anode manufacture; 61,300 kg nickel/yr in cathode
manufacture; and produces 404,000 kg/yr of finished cells.
Table IX-60 (page 894 ) illustrates the calculation of the allowable
daily discharge of cadmium.
844
-------
ALL PROCESS
WASTEWATER
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
O*^AปA^G*^>ปW*ป.
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
SEDIMENTATION
SLUDGE
DISCHARGE
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
FILTRATE
00
ฃ*
Ul
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
RECYCLE OR REUSE OF PROCESS SOLUTIONS
SEGREGATION OF NON-CONTACT COOLING WATER FROM PROCESS WATER
CONTROL ELECTROLYTE DRIPS AND SPILLS
FIGURE IX-1. CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
00
CELL TESTING
WASTEWATER
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
ปi
SETTLE
SL
CHEMICAL
ADDITION A^
i^A^ >V^V^^^L>^>S
^~ CHROMIUM
4G REDUCTION
UDGE
1
1 i
LIME
ADDITION
(_/S_/*VyS^lCซAl.Sซ>Vป>^>S^kซA.
CHEMICAL SEDIMENTA1
1 PRECIPITATION
oฃ> ^^^BSE^SBSS
SLU
CL-
FILTRATE k
J
E
.A^sJ DISCHARGE
riON
W*^
DGE
V( ^ Y/J 1 SLUDGE TO
V | // ,f DISPOSAL
~^y
SLUDGE |fSSl^KStfปซj
FIGURE IX-2. CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
CLOSED FORMATION
DOUBLE FILL (WET BATTERY)
FILL AND DUMP (DAMP BATTERY)
OPEN FORMATION
DEHYDRATED
BATTERY WASH
LIME AND
CARBONATE
ADDITION
&
BATTERY REPAIR
R
O
SM r\
OIL
SKIMMING
i
t
EMOVAL OF
IL AND GREASE
i
^>^>^s^O^*wis
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
*- -^-DISCHARGE
SEDIMENTATION
SLUDGE
/"" ^\ C ^ SLUDGE TO
1 ^ / f^ ]j{O \ RECLAIM OR
FILTRATE ^V V 1 71 ff DISPOSAL
^y f
SLUDGE Ljtfri*v^.*1IปvJ
00
RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY: SPENT FORMATION ACID IS REUSED
PASTING OPERATION WASTEWATERS ARE RECYCLED OR REUSED
PASTE FORMULATION
AND APPLICATION AREA
WASHDOWN WASTEWATER
RECYCLE OR REUSE
to'^i
I
^c-i'M/l 1
1
LEAD OXIDES
RETURN TO PROCESS
m^^^
FIGURE IX-3. LEAD SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
STREAM A
STREAM B
CO
^
00
CHEMICAL
ADDITION
LIME
ADDITION
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
PROCESS
WASTEWATERS FROM:
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODE
LEAD IODIDE CATHODE
CELL TESTING
LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
STREAM C
PROCESS WASTEWATERS
FROM AIR SCRUBBERS
1
5H
LIME
ADDITION
I
k^A^^A. A. V A A A
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
<=^=>
FILTR
U>k>^^S^^>J
l^^^^^^^^w
[SEDIMENTATION
ATE
SLUDGE
^f
^-DISCH*
tK
SLUDGE T0
DISPOSAL
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO DISPOSAL
FIGURE IX-4. LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
vo
STREAM A
CHEMICAL
ADDITION >
LIME
ADDITION
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
A^>S^k_>S^M*>_ซ
SETTLING
&fii*i&S%$
|SLUD(
fc-
3E
.Jฃ
CHROMIUM
REDUCTION
C^>
1
/
\
i y
<^S^>JyC>*>^>.
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
FILTR
U^>WS
-*-f^^^
ISEDIMEr
"mU*
ATE
STATION! ""
ggJ3^*^
SLUDGE
sGV:
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
STREAM B
SILVER CHLORIDE
KMnO4
RINSE
CATHODE PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
SPENT PROCESS SOLUTION
RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS
TECHNOLOGY: RINSE WATER
HOLDING
BLI
ฃED
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
CHEMICAL SEDIMENTATION
PRECIPITATION!
CELL TESTING
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
FILTRATE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
STREAM C
LIME
ADDITION
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
AIR SCRUBBERS
i
1
^^>^fLL>^^\
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
^Ab>Wซt>ซ>kปtX.
SEDIMENTATION
FILTRATE
SLUDGE
"\\
^ DISCHA
T )f\
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
FIGURE IX-5. MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
ALL PROCESS WASTEWATER
DISCHARGE
00
Ul
o
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
RECOMMENDED
IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
REUSE OF PROCESS SOLUTIONS
SEGREGATION OF NON-CONTACT COOLING WATER
SEGREGATION OF ORGANIC-BEARING CELL CLEANING WASTEWATER
CONTROL ELECTROLYTE DRIPS AND SPILLS
ELIMINATE CHROMATES IN CELL WASHING
FLOW CONTROLS FOR RINSE WATERS
FIGURE IX-6. ZINC SUBCATEGORY BPT TREATMENT
-------
TABLE IX-1
FLOW BASIS FOR BPT MASS DISCHARGE
LIMITATIONS - CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
Process Element
BPT
Flow
Anodes
00
Pasted S Pressed Powder
Electrodeposited
Impregnated
Cathodes
Nickel Electrodeposited
Nickel Impregnated
Ancillary Operations
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Floor and Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Silver Powder Production
Cadmium Hydroxide Production
Nickel Hydroxide Production
2.7
697.
998.
569.
1640.
4.93
0.08
12.0
1.5
65.7
21.2
0.9
110.
Mean Normalized
Discharge Flow
M/kg)
2.7
697.
998.
569.
1640.
4.93
0.08
12.0
1.5
65.7
21.2
0.9
110.
-------
TABLE IX-2
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
PASTED & PRESSED POWDER ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM 0.864 0.405
*NICKEL 3.807 2.700
*ZINC 3.591 1.512
*COBALT 0.783 0.324
*OIL & GREASE 54.000 32.400
*TSS 110.700 54.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-3
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM 223.040 104.550
*NICKEL 982.770 697.000
*ZINC 927.010 390.320
*COBALT 202.130 83.640
*OIL & GREASE 13940.000 8364.000
*TSS 28577.000 13940.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
852
-------
TABLE IX-4
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
IMPREGNATED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM 319.360 149.700
*NICKEL 1407.180 998.000
*ZINC 1327.340 558.880
*COBALT 289.420 119.760
*OIL & GREASE 19960.000 11976.000
*TSS 40918.000 19960.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-5
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL ELECTRODEPOSITED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM 182.080 85.350
*NICKEL 802.290 569.000
*ZINC 756.770 318.640
*COBALT 165.010 68.280
*OIL & GREASE 11380.000 6828.000
*TSS 23329.000 11380.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
853
-------
TABLE IX-6
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM 524.800 246.000
*NICKEL 2312.400 1640.000
*ZINC 2181.200 918.400
*COBALT 475.600 196.800
*OIL & GREASE 32800.000 19680.000
*TSS 67240.000 32800.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-7
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CKT.T. WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - IbA/000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 1.578 0.739
*NICKEL 6.951 4.930
*ZINC 6.557 2.761
*COBALT 1.430 0.592
*OIL & GREASE 98.600 59.160
*TSS 202.130 98.600
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
854
-------
ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION
TABLE IX-8
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
*NICKEL
*ZINC
COBALT
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.026
0.113
0.106
0.023
1.600
3.280
0.012
0.080
0.045
0.010
0.960
1.600
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-9
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
3.840
16.920
15.960
3.480
240.000
492.000
1.800
12.000
6.720
1.440
144.000
240.000
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
855
-------
TABLE IX-10
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 0.480 0.225
*NICKEL 2.115 1*500
*ZINC 1.995 0.840
*COBALT 0.435 0.180
*OIL & GREASE 30.000 18.000
*TSS 61.500 30.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-10A
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH, ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION, FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH, & EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 5.923 2.777
*NICKEL 26.099 18.510
*ZINC 24.618 10.366
*COBALT 5.368 2.221
*OIL & GREASE 370.200 222.120
*TSS 758.910 370.200
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
856
-------
TABLE IX-11
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 21.024 9.855
*NICKEL 92.637 65.700
*ZINC 87.381 36.792
*COBALT 19.053 7.884
*OIL & GREASE 1314.000 788.400
*TSS 2693.700 1314.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-12
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 6.784 3.180
*NICKEL 29.892 21-200
SILVER 8.692 3.604
*ZINC 28.196 11.872
*COBALT 6.148 2.544
*OIL & GREASE 424.000 254.400
*TSS 869.200 424.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
-------
TABLE IX-13
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CADMIUM HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CADMIUM USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM USED
*CADMIUM 0.288 0.135
*NICKEL 1.269 0.900
*ZINC 1.197 0.504
COBALT 0.261 0.108
OIL & GREASE 18.000 10.800
*TSS 36.900 18.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-14
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL USED
CADMIUM 35.200 16.500
NICKEL 155.100 110.000
ZINC 146.300 61.600
COBALT 31.900 13.200
OIL & GREASE 2200.000 1320.000
TSS 4510.000 2200.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
858
-------
TABLE IX-15
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT ANNUAL FLOW
AT CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
Plant ID Actual Flow BPT Annual Flow
(1/vri (10*) (1/yr) (10*1
A 0.17 .909 1/
B 3.0 1.4U ""
C 156^ 153.
D 13^5 102. 1/
E 48.1 189-
F 321. 315.
G 0 -188
H 10.5 10.6
I 50.5 59.
J 0 <.00005
K 1.72 1.3H
L 22. 1 39* 9
M 027
J/ No longer active in the cadmium subcategory
?/ Since actual flow rate was zero, and plant is now closed, the
~ calculation of BPT annual flow is insignificant.
-------
00
0%
o
TABLE IX-16
FLOW BASIS FOR BPT MASS
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS - CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
Process Element
Ancillary Operations
Heat Paper Production
BPT Flow
2U.1
Mean Normalized
Discharge Flow
I/kg)
115.4
Cell Testing
0.014
0.014
-------
TABLE IX-17
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION AND CKT.T. TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF REACTANTS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1/000,000 Ib OF REACTANTS
CHROMIUM 10.126 4.099
TSS 988.510 482.200
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
861
-------
TABLE IX -18
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT IN-PLACE
AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
Treatment Number of Discharge Status
In-Place Plants Direct Indirect Zero
None 74 3 12 40 I/
Less than BPT 48 1 41 6
(pH adjust only or no pH
adjust with treatment)
BPT Treatment 51 8 40 3
(L&S, or pH adjust,
oo filter)
BAT Treatment 9 351
(L,S & F)
Not Classified 2 Oil
i/ Discharge status is unknown for 19 plants, which are included in
the total number of plants with no treatment, but not under discharge
status. Fifteen of these plants are not full line manufacturers.
Based on the observations that most non-full line manufacturers
are zero dischargers, and that permit information was not found on
these plants, they are considered as indirect or zero dischargers
with no reported treatment in-place.
-------
TABLE IX-19
oo
CTl
FLOW BASIS FOR BPT MASS DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
Process Element
Anodes and Cathodes
Leady Oxide Production
Paste Preparation and
Median
Flow
I/kg
0.00
Mean
Flow
I/kg
0.21
BPT
Flow
I/kg
0.0
Application
Curing
Closed Formation
(In Case)
Single Fill
Double Fill
Fill and Dump
Open Formation
(Out of Case)
Dehydrated
Wet
Ancillary Operations
Battery Wash
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.31
0.83
9.0
0.0
0.72
0.49
0.17
0.57
0.01
0.09
1.26
1.73
18.4
4.77
1.28
0.41
0.14
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.45
0.45
9.0
0.0
0.72
0.41
0.14
-------
TABLE IX-20
SUMMARY OF ZERO DISCHARGE FOR LEAD SUBCATEGORY PROCESS ELEMENTS
oo
Process Element
Leady Oxide Production
Paste Preparation and
Application
Curing
Closed Formation
Single Fill
Double Fill
Fill and Dump
Open Formation
Dehydrated
Wet
Battery Wash
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
No. of Plants
Reported Active
In Process Element
34
95
89
99l/
40
30
11
35
7
60
5
No. of Plants Reporting
No Discharge in
Process Element
22
51
81
59l/
36
Method of Attaining
Zero Discharge
Use of non-contact cooling water on
ball mills; use of dry bag-houses
for air pollution control rather
than wet scrubbers.
Recycle of wastewater after treat-
ment (common practice).
Curing in covered stacks or in
humidity controlled rooms instead
of steam curing.
Low rate formation and reuse of
battery case rinsewater in acid
cutting.
Low rate formation and reuse of
battery case rinsewater in acid
cutting.
Information not submitted.
Water recycled after treatment.
Reuse of formation acid.
Recycle of battery case rinsewaters
Use of dry floor cleaning
procedures.
None reported.
18 plants reported they were active in the closed formation process for wet batteries, but did not distinguish
whether they used single or double fill charging. Of the 18, 12 plants reported no discharge from the
formation process.
-------
TABLE IX-21
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CLOSED FORMATION - DOUBLE FILL, OR FILL & DUMP
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - IbA/000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
NICKEL
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.095
0.189
0.855
0.067
0.634
0.599
0.553
9.000
18.450
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5
0.040
0.076
0.450
0.059
0.450
0.252
0.284
5.400
9.000
TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-22
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
OPEN FORMATION - DEHYDRATED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
NICKEL
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
1.890
3.780
17.100
1.350
12.690
11.970
11.070
180.000
369.000
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5
0.810
1.530
9.000
1.170
9.000
5.040
5.670
108.000
180.000
TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
865
-------
TABLE IX-23
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BATTERY WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - tag/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
NICKEL
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.151
0.302
1.368
0.108
1.015
0.958
0.886
14.400
29.520
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.065
0.122
0.720
0.094
0.720
0.403
0.454
8.640
14.400
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-24
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
NICKEL
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.086
0.172
0.779
0.062
0.578
0.545
0.504
8.200
16.810
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.037
0.070
0.410
0.053
0.410
0.230
0.258
4.920
8.200
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
866
-------
TABLE IX-25
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BATTERY REPAIR
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY 0.029 0.013
CHROMIUM 0.059 0.024
*COPPER 0.266 0.140
*LEAD 0.021 0.018
NICKEL 0.197 0.140
ZINC 0.186 0.078
*IRON 0.172 0.088
*OIL & GREASE 2.800 1.680
*TSS 5.740 2.800
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
867
-------
TABLE IX-26 (CONT'D)
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT HOURLY FLOW
AT LEAD SUBCATE6ORY PLANTS
00
-------
TABLE IX- 26
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT HOURLY FLOW
AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
00
o%
vo
Plant ID
107
110
112
122
132
133
135
138
144
146
1*7
152
155
158
170
173
178
179
182
184
190
191
198
207
208
212
213
226
233
237
239
242
255
261
269
277
278
280
288
295
299
Actual Flow
Meets BPT
Actual Flow
1700
4880
2950
11600
0.4
NA
0
329
0
2725
8.0
9280
NA
0
0
57
0
8.0
NA
0
0
37300
10300
18800
NA
6810
454
9310
9370
11400
6090
NA
NA
2270
31400
15
5680
NA
NA
0
0
BPT Hourly Flow
ll/hri
253
1110
376
4190
104
NA
NA
NA
5450
2390
3.0
6030
NA
NA
NA
2010
2530
138
NA
70
NA
17500
463
4970
NA
3320
148
11200
5660
24500
6220
NA
NA
1230
17100
90
617
NA
NA
123
25
-------
TABLE IX- 26 (CONT'D)
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT HOURLY FLOW
AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
00
ปJ
o
Plant ID
491
493
494
495
501
503
504
513
517
520
521
522
526
529
536
543
549
553
572
575
59 4
620
623
634
635
640
6ซ6
652
656
668
672
677
680
681
682
683
685
686
690
704
705
706
714
716
Actual Flow
Meets BPT
Actual Flow
ll/hrl
NA
NA
7820
0
11900
11100
0
1820
0
4540
0
0
22700
568
NA
0
48000
3430
3270
2730
0
NA
NA
1530
360
22000
810
12700
NA
0
22500
0
2070
31800
6810
265
5450
9080
0
8850
2730
0
1590
NA
BPT Hourly Flow
ll/hrl
NA
NA
3110
NA
3570
27700
NA
1700
NA
470
0
NA
168
729
NA
37
1690
1490
72
2390
NA
NA
NA
2290
2970
13900
194
3500
NA
53
1280
165
986
1080
3350
8640
2950
1710
134
3610
1470
123
1800
NA
-------
TABLE IX- 2 6 (CONT*D)
COMPARISON OP ACTUAL TO BPT HOURLY FLOW
AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
00
-J
Plant ID
717
721
722
725
730
731
732
733
738
740
746
765
768
771
772
775
777
781
785
786
790
796
811
814
815
817
820
828
832
852
85*
857
863
866
877
880
883
893
901
917
Actual Flow
Meets BPT
Actual Flow
11/tlCL
6470
0
NA
0
443
2840
3590
NA
29100
NA
0
13100
3450
1360
11500
1140
4320
6620
41600
5110
0
0
NA
13100
598
0
3410
68
8330
16100
0
4200
11100
0
18600
0
0
2160
0
18800
BPT Hourly Flow
(1/hcl
3400
2440
NA
22
1790
904
2390
NA
9078
NA
NA
11100
6680
990
379
2570
2910
493
8350
2050
52
NA
NA
1760
117
788
3360
92
13700
12200
38
4190
5510
NA
3580
NA
70
3230
815
10100
-------
TABLE IX-2 6 (CONT'D)
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT HOURLY FLOW
AT LEAD SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
oo
-j
tO
Plant ID
920
927
936
939
942
943
947
951
963
964
968
971
972
976
978
979
982
990
Actual Flow
Meets BPT
Actual Flow
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NA
0
3630
NA
0
17500
18400
1140
0
0
0
0
23800
26800
1230
0
10500
3180
BPT Hourly Flow
(1/hr)
NA
NA
1320
NA
NA
37100
13600
1060
13
329
NA
4450
4210
28400
2040
25
10300
2150
NA - Data not available,
-------
TABLE DC-27
OF BPT TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
AT LEAD SIBCATEGORY PLANTS
DCP Data - Plants meeting BPT flow
Pollutant
ID
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
* D/I
D/I*
I
I
D
I
D
D
I
I
I
0:
Parameters - Concentrations (mg/1)
Qi
- Direct or indirect
Pb Ni
0.5
5.00
0.05
1.0
6.34
0.28
0.25
7.5
discharge.
2
0
0
0
Zn
MM^
.30
.1
.24
.1
Fe O&G
0.3
2.0
TSS
5548.
0.
3000.
4.
0
6
pH
7.5
11.2
11.2
Sampled Plants
C
G
J
Sampling
Daฃ
1
2
3
1
2
3
I/I
2
3
a
0.000
0.010
0.005
0.010
0.010
0.059
0.000
0.005
0.005
Cu
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
040
034
059
050
090
018
014
019
Pb Ni
1.350 0.000
4.050 0.000
3.580 0.012
6.06 0.110
3.880 0.068
13.30 0.046
0.110 0.011
0.130 0.009
0.110 0.011
Z
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
.000
.710
.590
.165
.000
.105
.000
.000
.037
* OSG
0.000 10.0
0.000 9.9
0.000 5.0
0.420 2.3
0.280 1.7
3.380 3.7
0.760 1.4
0.920 2.7
0.950 2.2
TSS
^^^M*
90.
76.
39.
3.
11.
66.
13.
11.
11.
6
0
8
5
0
0
0
0
0
25
6.5-8.5
7.2-8.8
6.6-7.9
6.0-10.4
7.7-9.2
7.0-9.0
9.0-^.3
8.7-9.1
8.6-9.1
(DCP DATA) . 0.187 4.5 3.0 7.0
I/ This plant did not meet BPT flow.
873
-------
TABLE IX-28
FLOW BASIS FOR BPT MASS DISCHARGE
LIMITATIONS - LITHIUM SUBCATEGOR*
Process Element
BPT FLOW
U/kq)
Mean Normalized
Discharge Flow
_ (I/ML
Cathodes
Iron Disulfide
Lead Iodide
7.54
63.08
7.54
63.08
00
-J
Ancillary Operation
Heat Paper Production
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Cell Testing
cell Wash
Air Scrubbers
Floor and Equipment Wash
24.1 I/
* ~
0.014
0.0
10.59
0.094 2/
115.4
*
0.014
0.929
10.59
0.094
* Cannot be calculated at present time,
\/ Same as for calcium subcategory
2/ Same as for magnesium subcategory
-------
TABLE IX-29
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
IRON OISULFIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF IRON DISULFIDE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF IRON DISULFIDE
CHROMIUM 3.167 1.282
LEAD 1.131 0.980
IRON 9.274 4.750
TSS 309.140 150.800
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-30
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
LEAD IODIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD
CHROMIUM 26.494 10.724
LEAD 9.462 8.200
IRON 77.588 39.740
TSS .2586.280 1261.600
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
875
-------
TABLE IX-31
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF REACTANTS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF REACTANTS
CHROMIUM 10.122 4.097
LEAD 3.615 3.133
IRON 29.643 15.183
TSS 988.100 482.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-32
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH, CKT.T. TESTING, & LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
CHROMIUM 0.045 0.018
LEAD 0.016 0.014
IRON 0.133 0.068
TSS 4.428 2.160
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
876
-------
TABLE IX-33
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AIR SCRUBBERS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - ongAg OF CKLT..S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
TSS 434.190 211.800
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
877
-------
TABLE IX-3a
FLOWS BASIS FOR BPT MASS
DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS - MAGNESIUM SUBCAIEGORY
oo
^j
00
Process Element
Cathodes
Silver Chloride -
Chemically Reduced
Silver Chloride -
Electrolytic Oxidation
Ancillary Operations
Air Scrubbers
Cell Testing
Floor and Equipment Hash
Heat Paper Production
Mean Normalized
Discharge (I/kg)
4915
1(15,
BPT Flow
206.5
52.6
0.094
115.4 1/
2458
145.
206.5
52-6
0.094
24.1 1/
J/ Same as for calcium subcategory
-------
TABLE IX-35
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - CHEMICALLY REDUCED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
SILVER 1007.780 417.860
COD 122900.000 59975.200
TSS 100778.000 49160.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-36
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - ELECTROLYTIC
MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
SILVER 59.450 24.650
COD 7250.000 3538.000
TSS 5945.000 2900.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
879
-------
TABLE IX-37
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
CHROMIUM
LEAD
SILVER
TSS
pH
0.039
0.014
0.039
3.854
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.016
0.012
0.016
1.880
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-38
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
CHROMIUM 22.092 8.942
LEAD 7.890 6.838
SILVER 21.566 8.942
TSS 2156.600 1052.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
880
-------
TABLE IX-39
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF REACTANTS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF REACTANTS
CHROMIUM 10.122 4.097
TSS 988.100 482.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-40
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AIR SCRUBBERS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
TSS 8466.500 4130.000
pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
881
-------
TABLE IX-41
FLOWS BASIS FOR BPT
MASS DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS - ZINC SUBCATEGORY
Process Element
Anodes
Zinc Powder-Wet Amalgamated
Zinc Powder-Gelled
Amalgam
Zinc Oxide Powder-Pasted
or Pressed, Reduced
(Zinc Oxide, Formed)
Zinc Electrodeposited
BPT
Flow (I/kg)
3.8
0.68
143.
3190.
Mean Normalized
Flow (I/kg)
3.8
0.68
143.
3190.
Cathodes
Silver Powder Pressed and
Electrolytically Oxi-
dized (Silver Powder,
Formed)
Silver Oxide Powder-Thermal-
mally Reduced or Sin-
.tered, Electrolytically
formed (Silver Oxide
Powder, Formed)
Silver Peroxide Powder
Nickel Impregnated
196
131
31.4
1640.
196
131
31.4
1640.
Ancillary Operations
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Silver Etch
Mandatory Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handling
Floor and Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
1.13
0.12
49.1
0.27
0.01
7.23
52.2
21.2
1.13
0.12
49.1
0.27
0.01
7.23
52.2
21.2
882
-------
TABLE IX-42
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
WET AMALGAMATED POWDER ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
*CHROMIUM 1.596 0.646
*MERCURY 0.950 0.380
*SILVER 1.558 0.646
*ZINC 5.054 2.128
^MANGANESE 1.634 1.292
*OIL & GREASE 76.000 45.600
*TSS 155.800 76.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-43
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GELLED AMALGAM ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
*CHROMIUM 0.286 0.116
*MERCURY 0.170 0.068
*SILVER 0.279 0.116
*ZINC 0.904 0.381
*MANGANESE 0.292 0.231
*OIL & GREASE 13.600 8.160
*TSS 27.880 13.600
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
883
-------
TABLE IX-44
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ZINC OXIDE ANODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lbA/000,000 Ib OF ZINC
*CHROMIUM 60.060 24.310
*MERCURY 35.750 14.300
*SILVER 58.630 24.310
*ZINC 190.190 80.080
*MANGANESE 61.490 48.620
*OIL & GREASE 2860.000 1716.000
*TSS 5863.000 2860.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-45
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC DEPOSITED
*CHROMIUM 1339.800 542.300
*MERCURY 797.500 319.000
*SILVER ' 1307.900 542.300
*ZINC 4242.700 1786.400
*MANGANESE 1371.700 1084.600
*OIL & GREASE 63800.000 38280.000
*TSS 130790.000 63800.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
884
-------
TABLE IX-46
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
*CHROMIUM 82.320 33.320
*MERCURY 49.000 19.600
'SILVER 80.360 33.320
*ZINC 260.680 109.760
'MANGANESE 84.280 66.640
*OIL & GREASE 3920.000 2352.000
*TSS 8036.000 3920.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-47
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER OXIDE POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
*CHROMIUM 55.020 22.270
*MERCURY 32.750 13.100
'SILVER 53.710 22.270
*ZINC 174.230 73.360
'MANGANESE 56.330 44.540
*OIL & GREASE 2620.000 1572.000
*TSS 5371.000 2620.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
885
-------
TABLE IX-48
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
*CHROMIUM 13.188 5.338
*MERCURY 7.850 3.140
*SILVER 12.874 5.338
*ZINC 41.762 17.584
*MANGANESE 13.502 10.676
*OIL & GREASE 628.000 376.800
*TSS 1287.400 628.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-49
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CHROMIUM 688.800 278.800
*MERCURY 410.000 164.000
*NICKEL 2312.400 1640.000
*SILVER 672.400 278.800
*ZINC 2181.200 918.400
*MANGANESE 705.200 557.600
*OIL & GREASE 32800.000 19680.000
*TSS 67240.000 32800.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
886
-------
TABLE IX-50
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELTปS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKLT.S PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM
*CYANIDE
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
*SILVER
*ZINC
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
TABLE IX-51
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION
0.475
0.328
0.283
1.593
0.463
1.503
0.486
22.600
46.330
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.192
0.136
0.113
1.130
0.192
0.633
0.384
13.560
22.600
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM
*MERCURY
*SILVER
*ZINC
* MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.050
0.030
0.049
0.160
0.052
2.400
4.920
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.020
0.012
0.020
0.067
0.041
1.440
2.400
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
887
-------
TABLE IX-52
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER ETCH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
*CHROMIUM 20.622 8.347
'MERCURY 12.275 4.910
'SILVER 20.131 8.347
*ZINC 65.303 27.496
*MANGANESE 21.113 16.694
*OIL & GREASE 982.000 589.200
*TSS 2013.100 982.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-53
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
'CHROMIUM 0.113 0.046
*MERCURY 0.068 0.027
*SILVER 0.111 0.046
*ZINC 0.359 0.151
'MANGANESE 0.116 0.092
*OIL & GREASE 5.400 3.240
*TSS 11.070 5.400
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
888
-------
TABLE IX-54
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
REJECT CELT. HANDLING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM 0.004 0.002
*MERCURY 0.003 0.001
'SILVER 0.004 0.002
*ZINC 0.013 0.006
'MANGANESE 0.004 0.003
*OIL & GREASE 0.200 0.120
*TSS 0.410 0.200
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-55
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
'CHROMIUM 3.037 1.229
'MERCURY 1.807 0.723
'SILVER 2.964 1.229
'ZINC 9.616 4.049
'MANGANESE 3.109 2.458
'OIL & GREASE 144.600 86.760
*TSS 296.430 144.600
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
889
-------
TABLE IX-55A
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH, ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION, EMPLOYEE WASH, REJECT CELT. HANDLING,
AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM
*CYANIDE
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
*SILVER
*ZINC
'MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
3.679
2.540
2.190
12.352
3.592
11.651
3.767
175.200
359.160
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
1.489
1.051
0.876
8.760
1.489
4.906
2.978
105.120
175.200
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE IX-56
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM 21.924 8.874
*MERCURY 13.050 5.220
*SILVER 21.402 8.874
*ZINC 69.426 29.232
*MANGANESE 22.446 17.748
*OIL & GREASE 1044.000 626.400
*TSS 2140.200 1044.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
890
-------
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
TABLE IX-57
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/I,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM
*MERCURY
*SILVER
*ZINC
MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
8.904
5.300
8.692
28.196
9.116
424.000
869.200
3.604
2.120
3.604
11.872
7.208
254.400
424.000
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
391
-------
TABLE IX-58
COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TO BPT ANNUAL FLOW
AT ZINC SUBCATEGORY PLANTS
Plant ID Actual Flow BPT Annual Flow
11/vrl (10*1 (1/vr) C10ซ)
A 1-69 .826
B 32.5 3.21
C .787 .530
D 39.4 2.94
E 10.6 6.77
F 2.22 12.6
G 15.3 .184
H 266 1.84
I 0,. 0.
J 0.0032 .0154
K 10-4 21.
L 2.70 2.47
M 04 0.
N 4.71 2471
O 1.14 1.96
P 1.72 3.67
-------
TABLE IX-59
SAMPLE DERIVATION OF THE OPT l-DAY LEAD LIMITATION FOR PLANT X
PNP
Process Elements kg/yr (10 )
I.
2.
3.
CO
cj 4.
Leady Oxide
Purchased
Paste Prep. &
Application
Curing - Stacked
Formation -
2.6
5.2
5.2
4.16
Avg. PNP
(kg/day)
10400
20800
20800
16640
1-Day Limits
(mg/kg)l/
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Lead Mass
Di scharge ( mg/day )
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Closed, Single
5. Formation - 1.04
Open, Dehydrated
6. Battery Wash - 5.2
With Detergent
4160
20800
1.350
0.108
5615
2246
Total Plant X Discharge (1-Day Value for Lead):
7861 mg/day (0.017 Ib/day)
I/ I/kg of lead used from Table IX-19 multiplied by lime and settle treatment
concentrations (rog/l) from Table VII-20.
2/ Average PNP multiplied by the 1-day limits in Tables IX-22 and DC-23, then each
process summed for the plant's daily discharge limit.
-------
TABLE DC-60
SAMPLE DERIVATION OF THE BPT 1-DAY CADMIUM LIMITATION FOR PLANT Y
oo
vo
Process Elements
PNP
1. Pasted & Pressed Wgt. of
Powder Anode Cadmium Used
PNP
fcg/yr
55800
Avg. PNP 1-Day Limits
(kg/day) (mg/kq)l/
2. Nickel Impregnated Wgt. of 61300
Cathode Nickel Applied
3. Electrolyte
Preparation
4. Floor Equipment
Wash
Wgt. of Cells 404000
Produced
223
245
1616
0.864
524.8
5.923
Cadmium Mass
Pi scharge (mg/day) 2J
193
128576
9572
Total Plant Y Discharge (1-Day Value for Cadmium):
138341 mg/day
(0.3 Ib/day)
I/ I/kg values used from Table IX-1 multiplied by lime and settle treatment
concentrations (mg/1) from Table VI1-20.
2/ Average PNP multiplied by the 1-day limits in Table IX-2, Table IX-6 , and DC-1QA,
-------
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
The factors considered in assessing the best available technology
economically achievable (BAT) include the age of equipment and plants
involved, the processes employed, process changes, nonwater quality
environmental impacts (including energy requirements), and the costs
of application of such technology (Section 304 (b) (2) (B)). In
general, the BAT technology level represents, at a minimum, the best
existing economically achievable performance of plants of various
ages, sizes, processes or other shared characteristics. As with BPT,
in those subcategories where existing performance is universally
inadequate, BAT may be transferred from a different subcategory or
category. BAT may include process changes or internal controls, even
when not common industry practice.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BAT
In pursuing effluent limitations for the battery manufacturing cate-
gory, the Agency desired to review a wide range of BAT technology
options. To accomplish this, the Agency elected to develop
significant technology options which might be applied to battery
manufacturing wastewater as BAT. These options were to consider the
range of technologies which were available and applicable to the
battery manufacturing subcategories, and to suggest technology trains
which would reduce the discharge of toxic pollutants remaining after
application of BPT.
In a draft development document that was given limited circulation in
September, 1980 to battery manufacturers and others who requested to
receive a copy, a number of alternative BAT systems were described for
each subcategory. Comments from this limited, but technically
knowledgeable audience were used, together with further review and
analysis of available data, in refining these alternatives and in
making the selection of a specific BAT option for each subcategory.
Some options originally presented in the draft development document
were eliminated from consideration, and others were modified on the
basis of comments received and other reevaluation prior to the final
selection of BAT options.
As discussed in Section IX treatment technology options are described
in detail for all subcategories even though there may be no direct
discharge plants in that subcategory. In general, three levels of
treatment technologies, or options, were evaluated for each subcate-
gory. The technology options considered build on BPT (also referred
to as option 0, as described in Section IX), generally providing
improved in-process control to reduce or eliminate wastewater and
improved end-of-pipe treatment to reduce the pollutant concentration
895
-------
in treated wastewaters. For two subcategories, the selected
technology options provide for no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants from all process elements. Other subcategory selected
options provide reduced pollutant discharge by reducing both the
volume of process wastewater and the concentrations of pollutants, and
may include the elimination of wastewater discharge from specific
process elements. The wastewater treatment technology options
considered vary among subcategories. This variation stems from
differences in wastewater flow and process characteristics. As a
general case - with variations already noted in each subcategory - BPT
(option 0) relied upon lime and settle technology applied to the
average flow from each manufacturing process element. The BAT options
build upon this base using greater wastewater flow reduction gained
from in-process controls; lime, settle and filter technology to reduce
effluent concentrations of pollutants; augmented filtration; and
increased recycle to achieve lower discharge levels of toxic and other
pollutants. Waste segregation and separate treatment are also
considered where recycle can be substantially improved or where
separate treatment has other obvious environmental benefits.
REGULATED POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The toxic pollutants listed in Tables VI-1 and VI-2 (pages 566 and
571) for regulatory consideration were used to select the specific
pollutants proposed for regulation in each subcategory. The selection
of toxic pollutants for regulation was based primarily upon the
presence of the pollutant at high concentrations throughout a
subcategory and secondly on the pollutant concentrations in specific
process elements. Other pollutants, not specifically regulated, would
also be controlled by the removal of the selected pollutants. The
overall costs for monitoring and analysis would therefore be reduced.
Nonconventional pollutants are regulated as appropriate when found at
treatable concentrations. Conventional pollutants (pH, TSS and O&G)
are not regulated under BAT, except where one might be used as a
indicator, but are generally considered under BCT. In the limitation
tables all the pollutants which were considered for regulation are
listed and those proposed for regulation are *'d.
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
EPA has considered four technology options for the cadmium
subcategory. The first three build upon BPT (option 0) and represent
incremental improvements in pollutant discharge reduction from the
lime and settle technology level. The fourth, based on a system
recently implemented at one cadmium subcategory plant, provides no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
BAT Options Summary
896
-------
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-1, Page 845 ) consists of the
following technology:
a) In-process technology:
recycle or reuse of process solutions
segregation of non-contact cooling water
control of electrolyte drips and spills
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
oil skimming
chemical precipitation
sedimentation
sludge dewatering
Option 1 (Figure X-l, Page 938} includes all aspects of option 0 and
builds on it by adding the following:
a) In-process technology:
recycle or reuse pasted and pressed powder anode wastewaters
use dry methods to clean floors and equipment
control rinse flow rates
recirculate water in air scrubbers
dry clean impregnated electrodes
reduce cell wash water use
apply countercurrent rinse to silver powder
and cadmium powder
apply countercurrent rinse for sintered and
electrodeposited anodes and cathodes
b) End-of-pipe treatment remains unchanged from BPT.
Option 2 (Figure X-2, page 939) builds on and includes all of the
technology and treatment of option 1:
a) In-process technology is identical to option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment in addition to option 1:
polishing filtration (mixed media)
Option 3 (Figure X-3, page 940) is based -on further improvement
in both in-process control and end-of-pipe treatment.
a) In-process technology:
continue all option 1 in-process technology
reduce rework of cadmium powder
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
oil skimming
chemical precipitation
filtration
reverse osmosis (alternate, ion exchange) with
recycle of permeate
chemical precipitation of brine
897
-------
sedimentation
polishing filtration (mixed media)
sludge dewatering
Option 4 (Figure X-4, page 941) builds on option 3 by improving the
treatment of brine or regenerate to achieve no discharge of process
wastewater pollutant:
a) In-process technology:
continue all in-process technology from option 3
eliminate impregnation rinse discharge by
recovering used caustic.
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
oil skimming
Chemical precipitation
sedimentation
filtration
sludge dewatering
reverse osmosis (alternate, ion exchange) with
recycle of permeate
evaporation with recycle of distillate
centrifugation of concentrate.liquor solids
landfill dry solids.
Option j_
Option 1 builds on BPT by modifying processes to reduce the amount of
wastewater which is generated and must be treated. The in-process
technology and its application to specific process elements to achieve
the wastewater flow reductions for option 1 are discussed
individually.
Countercurrent rinsing is applied for the removal of soluble
contaminants from metal powders and from sintered and electrodeposited
electrodes. Countercurrent cascade rinsing is most frequently
considered as a technique to more efficiently use rinse water in metal
finishing. It is equally effective in many battery manufacturing
operations. Almost any level of rinsing efficiency can be obtained by
providing enough countercurrent cascading steps. In practice, more
than ten cascade steps are only rarely seen; two to three are usually
adequate. Industrywide, the lowest water use in rinsing sintered
plaques is achieved at one plant using three-stage countercurrent
cascade rinsing; another achieved a water use reduction of more than
an order of magnitude after instituting six-stage countercurrent
rinsing. A water reduction ratio of 6.6 is used as a conservative
estimate of the benefit of countercurrent cascade rinsing. This can
generally be achieved with two or three rinse stages. A theoretical
discussion of countercurrent rinsing is included in Section VII.
898
-------
Controlling rinse flow rates can substantially reduce excess and
unnecessary water use. Technology (actually techniques) includes
limited or controlled rinse flow, water shut off when not actually
being used, proper sizing of rinse tanks to parts being rinsed, and
other common sense types of water control.
Pasted and pressed powder anodes generate a small amount of wastewater
from tool cleaning, floor washing and related activities. This small
volume of wastes can be introduced into the product paste mix after
gravity filtering through a paper filter to remove suspended solids.
This practice for dealing with small amounts of tool cleaning and
related wastes is commonly practiced throughout many battery
manufacturing subcategories.
Electrodeposited anodes and electrodeposited cathodes are extensively
rinsed and cleaned. Dry cleaning of impregnated electrodes can be
used to eliminate electrode cleaning wastewater. Loose particles have
been observed to be removed by brush scrubbing and other wet methods.
Dry cleaning methods, such as vibrating, vacuuming, and dry brushing
are also used to clean loose particles from impregnated electrodes.
Applying dry cleaning rather than wet cleaning will reduce the mean
water use to 232 I/kg for the anodes and 218 I/kg for the cathodes.
Applying countercurrent cascade rinsing at a conservative water use
reduction will further reduce the water generation by a factor of 6.6
reducing the wastewater generation to 35.15 I/kg for the anodes and
33.0 I/kg for the cathodes.
Impregnated anodes and impregnated cathodes are extensively rinsed and
cleaned, and also require extensive air scrubbing of the process area
vent gases. Both anode and cathode manufacture have similar
manufacturing and water use requirements. When data from both
electrodes at BPT is combined and averaged, the normalized flow is
1320 I/kg. Recirculating water to air scrubbers is a widely used
mechanism to reduce the amount of water used. Varying degrees of
recirculation are frequently used. In-stream treatment to remove
unwanted materials often allows air scrubbers to be operated without
discharging process wastewaters. Using dry cleaning techniques,
recirculating scrubber water, and applying countercurrent cascade
rinsing reduces the wastewater from these two process elements to 200
I/kg.
Dry floor and equipment cleaning methods can be used to clean process
area floors and equipment. Floor and equipment cleaning methods have
been observed to vary from water flushing using high pressure hoses
and large quantities of water to dry vacuuming in which no water is
used. Even when wet floor and equipment cleaning methods are used,
the wastewater can be treated and reused, thereby achieving zero
discharge of wastewater pollutants. Applying these techniques will
eliminate the generation of floor and equipment wastewater.
899
-------
Cell wash water reduction can be achieved by using recirculated
washing solution and countercurrent cascade rinsing of cells. A
conservative water reduction rate of 6.6 is used to reduce wastewater
flow to 0.75 I/kg.
Cadmium powder production requires adherence to quality control
procedures and also requires substantial washing of the powder to
remove impurities. Where observed, quality control was inadequate and
water flow control was non-existent. This production process can be
made more efficient by providing adequate quality control, by
controlling rinse flows, and by applying countercurrent cascade
rinsing. Applying these techniques will reduce the wastewater flow to
6.57 I/kg.
Silver powder, cadmium hydroxide and nickel hydroxide production
require substantial washing to remove impurities. This washing
process can be made more water efficient by applying countercurrent
cascade rinsing. If a conservative water reduction of 6.6 is used the
wastewater flows for these elements become 3.21 I/kg, 0.14 I/kg and
16.5 I/kg, respectively.
Reduction in wastewater generation achieved using these in-process
technologies are detailed for this and other options in Table X-l
(page 958).
Option 2
Option 2 builds on option 1 and includes all of the in-process
technologies and end-of-pipe treatment used in option 1. In addition,
a polishing filter of the mixed media type is added to reduce the
discharge of toxic metals and incidentally to reduce the discharge of
suspended solids.
Option 3^
Option 3 generally builds on option 2 with substantial changes in the
end-of-pipe treatment. Additional in-process technology is suggested
for cadmium powder production to reduce wastewater generation. By
using more precise process controls, the amount of off-specification
powder produced will be reduced and the reprocessing or rework which
is necessary to recover the off-specification powder and the attendent
generation of wastewater will also be reduced. Based on sampling and
plant visit information from one plant, this will reduce the
wastewater flow from cadmium powder production by a factor of 2 from
option 1.
End-of-pipe treatment is restructured by using reverse osmosis (or
alternatively ion exchange) to recover 85 percent of the wastewater
for reuse in the process. Brine (or regenerant) is treated using
900
-------
lime, settle and filtration technology before discharge. Figure X-3
(page 940) details this technology train and the technology
performance is detailed in Section VII.
Option ฃ
Option 4 builds on option 3 by replacing the brine or regenerant
treatment system with vapor recompression evaporation and crystalized
solids centrifugation. This combination of technologies provides for
zero discharge of process wastewater and allows the wastewater
pollutants to be disposed as solid waste.
To reduce the hydraulic load on this treatment system (and to provide
some economic return) it is suggested that impregnation caustic be
recovered and sold or concentrated for reuse in the process. One
major producer has converted to this option 4 technology and is
achieving zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
These options are relatively similar to options depicted in the draft
development document. The principal changes are: (1) sulfide
precipitation to remove toxic metals has been deleted; (2) flow
reduction is considered mainly in option 1; (3) a polishing filter is
applied as part of option 2; (4) reverse osmosis has been included as
an alternative to ion exchange in option 4; and (5) the option 4
diagram has been simplified to show only major treatment steps.
BAT Option Selection
The four BAT options were carefully evaluated, and the technical
merits and disadvantages of each were compared. All of the BAT
options are considered to be technologically suitable for cost and
performance comparison. All of the options are compatible with the
operating requirements of cadmium anode battery manufacturing
operations. No comments were received indicating a need to revise the
in-process controls applicable to any option. Therefore, selection is
based on pollutant removals and economic factors.
The Agency developed quantitative estimates of the total cost and
pollutant removal benefits of each technology option. These estimates
are based on all available data for each plant in the subcategory. As
a first step, an estimate of total raw wastewater pollutant loads and
wastewater flows from each manufacturing process element was developed
from data presented in Section V. This forms the basis for estimating
the mean raw waste used to calculate the pollutant reduction benefits
and is shown in Table X-2, (page 959). All plants and process
elements in the subcategory are taken into account in this
calculation.
901
-------
Total kg/yr for each pollutant within each process element were summed
and divided by the total subcategory flow to obtain a total
subcategory mean raw waste concentration. Table X-3 (page 961)
displays the pollutant concentrations - both mg/1 and mg/kg of total
subcategory anode weight for the raw waste and after applying each
treatment option. Effluent flow after application of each treatment
option was estimated based on wastewater reduction achieved by the
option. The mass of pollutant discharged after each treatment option
was calculated by using the appropriate mean effluent concentrations
for each pollutant shown in Table VI1-19 and multiplying them by the
treatment option annualized flow. The mass of pollutants discharged
after application of treatment was subtracted from the total
subcategory raw waste to determine the mass of pollutants removed by
each level of control and treatment. The results of these
calculations for the total subcategory are shown in Table X-4 (page
962), to display the pollutant reduction of each technology option.
Results for direct dischargers only, based on reported flow and
production data are shown in Table X-5 (page 963).
An estimate of total annual compliance costs of each technology option
for the cadmium subcategory was also prepared and is displayed in
Table X-62 (Page 1008). BAT compliance estimates were developed by
estimating costs for each existing direct discharge plant in the
subcategory based on reported production and wastewater flows, and
summing individual plant costs for each level of treatment and
control. Since, the cost estimates for option 4 do not include
credits for recovered process materials (cadmium, nickel, and
caustic), it is likely that the true costs for this option will be
lower than shown. An economic impact analysis based on estimated
costs for each treatment and control option at each plant in the
subcategory indicates that there are no potential plant closures
projected for any option for direct dischargers.
Option ]_ is proposed as the selected BAT option because limitations
are achievable using technologies and practices that are currently in
usev at plants in the subcategory. Also, the result of implementing
this technology is a significant reduction of toxic pollutant
discharges. For this option flow is reduced to 102.3 million 1/yr for
the subcategory and to 73.6 million 1/yr for direct dischargers. The
annual toxic pollutant removal is 194,149 kg/yr for the subcategory
and 139,693 kg/yr for the direct dischargers. For plants to comply
direcly with this option, the estimated compliance capital cost is
$441,000 for the subcategory ($123,000 for direct dischargers), and
annual cost is $147,000 for the subcategory ($38,000 for direct
dischargers).
Option ฃ was rejected because the technology yields small incremental
pollutanF removals when compare with option 1. This option will be
considered for the final regulation however, because of the toxicity
902
-------
of the pollutant mix in this subcategory. For this option flow is the
same as for option 1, but the annual toxic pollutant removal is
194,204 kg/yr for the subcategory and 139,733 kg/yr for the direct
dischargers. For plants to comply directly with this option, the
estimated compliance capital cost is $563,000 for the subcategory
($147,000 for direct dischargers), and annual cost is $189,000 for the
subcategory ($49,000 for direct dischargers).
Option 3_ was rejected because the wastewater discharge flow from this
technology requires modification of production processes and rerouting
of wastewater streams which result with substantial retrofitting of
both production and wastewater treatment processes. Depending on the
present configuration of the plants, including existing structures,
piping and equipment, as well as available land area, such
retrofitting may become extremely expensive. The compliance cost
estimates have accounted for the installation (and operation and
maintenence) costs for the necessary equipment that would be incurred
at a plant which would incur no additional costs for modifying
production process and rerouting wastewater flows. Although EPA has
not calculated all of the costs of retrofitting at each plant, it
expects that these costs would be high. New sources would not incur
these retrofitting costs. For this option, discharge flow is reduced
to 15 million 1/yr for the subcategory and 11 million 1/yr for direct
dischargers. The annual toxic pollutant removal is 194,267 kg/yr for
the subcategory and 139,778 kg/yr for the direct dischargers.
Compliance cost estimates for plants to comply directly with this
option are $804,000 capital for the subcategory ($181,000 for the
direct dischargers), and $249,000 annual for the subcategory ($66,000
for the direct dischargers).
Option 4 was rejected because, as discussed above for option 3, this
technology option require substantial retrofitting of both production
and wastewater treatment process at existing plants.
This option achieves zero discharge of pollutants. Further, it
emphasizes recovery and reuse of process materials and solutions, and
results in generation of less toxic sludge than the other options and
greater conservation of natural resources. Option 4 is implemented in
its entirety at one cadmium subcategory plant, and has been
demonstrated to achieve zero discharge without adverse impacts on
production. This plant is active in the most significant
wastewater-producing process elements, including impregnated anode and
cathode manufacture. Prior to implementation of this system, this
plant produced the highest annual volume of process wastewater in the
subcategory. Additionally, two other plants in the subcategory
achieve zero discharge of wastewater pollutants because of processes
and production methods selected. Thus, three of ten active plants in
this subcategory achieve zero discharge of wastewater pollutants.
903
-------
For this option the annual toxic pollutant removal is 194,279 kg/yr
for the subcategory and 139,787 kg/yr for the direct dischargers.
Compliance cost estimates for plants to comply directly with this
option are $2,126,000 capital for the subcategory ($624,000 for direct
dischargers), and $624,000 annual for the subcategory ($134,000 for
direct dischargers).
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
In selecting pollutant parameters for BAT regulation for the cadmium
subcategory, all pollutants considered for regulation in Section VI
for the subcategory (Table VI-1, page 566) were evaluated. The choice
of pollutants proposed for regulation was dependent upon the toxicity
of the pollutants, their use within the subcategory, and their
presence in the raw waste streams at treatable concentrations. The
pollutants do not have to appear in every process element or
necessarily at high concentrations in the total raw waste streams of
the plants which were sampled. Since plants in the cadmium
subcategory have a variety of different combinations of process
elements, the appearance of a particular pollutant at significant
concentrations in a single process element is sufficient reason for
selection.
Pollutant parameters regulated at BAT for this subcategory are
cadmium, nickel, silver, zinc and cobalt. As discussed in Section IX,
silver is regulated for the silver cathode and associated process
elements only. Other pollutants which appeared at lower
concentrations and were considered, but not selected for regulation at
BAT, are expected to be adequately removed by the application of the
selected technology.
The conventional pollutant parameters, oil and grease, total suspended
solids and pH are not regulated under BAT, but are considered under
BCT.
BAT Effluent Limitations
The effluent concentrations attainable through the effectiveness of
BAT technology is displayed in Table VI1-20 under L&S technology. The
BAT mass discharge limitations are calculated by multiplying these
concentrations by the applicable BAT flow listed in Table X-l (page
958). These limitations are expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per
kg of production normalizing parameter for each process element and
are presented in Tables X-6 to X-l 6 (pages .964-969). To alleviate
some of the monitoring burden, several process elements which occur at
most plants and have the same pnp are combined in one table. Table
X-12A (page 967) is the combined table for Tables X-10 to X-l2. By
multiplying these limitations by the actual production within a
process element, the allowable mass discharge for that process element
904
-------
can be calculated. The allowable pollutant discharge for the
different process elements can be summed to determine the total
allowable mass discharge for the plant.
The reasonableness of these BAT limitations is based upon two premises
- the demonstrated ability to achieve the flow levels, and the proven
ability of the lime and settle technology to achieve the designated
effluent concentrations. The flows used as a basis to calculate BAT
mass discharge limitations are based upon demonstrated performance at
cadmium subcategory plants. By process substitution or in-process
controls, cadmium battery manufacturing plants can meet the option 1
flow levels.
The effluent concentrations which are used to calculate BAT mass
discharge limitations are based upon the demonstrated performance L&S
technology upon waste streams from other industries which have
wastewater characteristics similar to those of waste streams in the
cadmium subcategory. The details of this performance are documented
in Section VII of this document. There are other treatment
alternatives available for implementation at existing plants such as
sulfide precipitation or iron co-precipitation which are reported to
.achieve even lower effluent concentrations than those achieved by L&S
technology.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
There are no direct dischargers in the calcium subcategory and
therefore no BAT regulation is proposed at this time. However,
technology options were analyzed for treating the raw wastewater
streams in the subcategory and are discussed here for use in Section
XI and XII for pretreatment and new source standards.
Two technology options beyond option 0 were considered for the calcium
subcategory. The first provided improved end-of-pipe treatment
technology by implementing lime, settle and filter technology. The
second included segregation, treatment, and recycle of the major
process waste stream (from heat paper production) produced in the
subcategory and total reuse or recycle of treated wastewater using the
same end-of-pipe system specified for option 1. No significant in-
process control technologies were identified for inclusion in these
options.
Technology Options Summary
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-2, page 846) consists of the
following technology:
a) In-process technology
No water use reduction technology identified
905
-------
b) End-of-pipe treatment
Settling
Chromium reduction
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
Option 1 (Figure X-5, page 942) includes all aspects of option 0
and builds on it by adding additional end-of-pipe treatment.
a) In-process technology is identical to option 0.
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
All option 0 end-of-pipe treatment
Polishing filtration (mixed media)
Option 2 (Figure X-6, page 943) provides end-of-pipe treat-
ment for two separated wastewater streams, allowing recycle and
reuse of wastewater.
a) End-of-pipe treatment for heat paper production
wastewater includes:
Settling
Holding tank
Recycle to process
b) End-of-pipe treatment for cell testing wastewater
includes:
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Polishing filtration
Sludge dewatering
Recycle treated water to process
The calcium subcategory technology options are unchanged from the
options set forth in a draft development document. There were no
comments on this part of the draft development document.
Option ]_
The option 1 treatment system for the calcium subcategory is shown in
Figure X-5 (page 942). Two distinct process wastewater streams are
treated. Prior to combination in the chemical precipitation system,
wastewater from heat paper production is passed through a settling
tank where the suspended material is allowed to settle. The settled
sludge is removed periodically and disposed. Effluent from the
settling device is treated chemically to reduce hexavalent chromium to
the trivalent state prior to chemical precipitation and clarification.
After chromium reduction, it may be combined with the wastewater from
906
-------
cell leak testing to remove dissolved metals using chemical
precipitation (with lime) followed by clarification and filtration.
Settled solids are removed from the clarifier and dewatered in a
vacuum filter. Filter cake is disposed as a solid waste. The
filtrate from the vacuum filter is returned to the treatment system
for further treatment.
To further reduce the discharge of metals and suspended solids in the
effluent, the waste stream is passed through a multimedia filter.
This filter is intended to act as a polishing unit on the treated
wastewater stream. Periodic backwashes from the filter are returned
to the treatment system.
Option 2
The option 2 treatment begins with segregation of heat paper and cell
testing wastewater. Treatment of the cell test wastewater is
identical to option 1 treatment, except that following treatment the
wastewater is recycled or reused, with makeup water added as required.
For the heat paper wastewater stream option 2 treatment consists of
settling to remove particulate contaminants. The clarified effluent
from the settling unit is discharged to a holding tank, from which it
is recycled back to the process operation as required. It is intended
that all of this wastewater stream be recycled with makeup water added
to the system as required. Recycle of this wastewater stream
eliminates asbestos and chromium from the effluent discharged from
plants in this subcategory.
Option Selection
In selecting an option for the calcium subcategory, the Agency
compared the pollutant reduction benefits of applying each technology
option. This comparison is presented in Table X-18, (page 971) which
show the pollutant removal performance for each of the treatment
options. Costs for the options at existing plants (all indirect
dischargers) are displayed in Table X-62 (page 1008). The performance
shown is based on the effluent concentrations achievable by the
technology being used (as discussed in Section VII and shown in Table
X-17 (page 970)), and the normalized discharge flows from each process
element. The raw waste is based on wastewater characteristics shown
in Section V (from sampled streams) and on the total flow for the heat
paper process element. Pollutant removals are for indirect
dischargers only.
Option 2 achieves greater pollutant removal than option 1 achieves
zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants. Since option 2
907
-------
eliminates the need for chromium reduction and chemical precipitation
on the heat paper waste stream, it reduces the consumption of
chemicals and the generation of toxic sludges requiring disposal,
making this option the least costly for the removal of hexavalent
chromium. Option 2 is technically achievable since the role of water
in heat paper production is as a solids carrier. This water can
therefore be recycled without adversely affecting the production
process. Similarly, the use of cell testing water does not preclude
recycle of this treated effluent.
Pollutant Parameters Selected for Effluent Limitations
Because the selected treatment system achieves zero discharge of
process wastewater, no specific pollutants have been selected for
limitation. The limitation for the calcium subcategory is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
Four technology options have been considered by EPA as a basis for
development of limitations for this subcategory. These options are
built incrementally upon BPT (option 0) and achieve either reduced
process wastewater volume or reduced effluent pollutant concentrations
in comparison with the previous option. All of the in-process
controls included in these options were observed in practice within
the lead subcategory. Some end-of-pipe technologies transferred from
other industrial categories are considered as well as those that were
practiced at lead subcategory plants.
BAT Options Summary
These options are similar to those displayed in a preliminary draft of
this document. The option using sulfide precipitation and settle
technology (formerly Option 2) was eliminated because adequate
performance data on this configuration of treatment processes are not
presently available. The LS&F option was formerly displayed as option
3 (alternate).
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-3, page 847) consists of the
following technologies:
a) In-process technology:
reuse of spent formation acid
multiple stage settling and total recycle or reuse
of pasting operations wastewater
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
oil skimming
lime precipitation augmented with carbonate
sedimentation
908
-------
sludge dewatering
Option 1 (Figure X-7, page 944) includes all aspects of option 0 and
builds on it by adding the following:
a) In-process technology:
low-rate charging in case
recirculate air scrubber water
control spills
countercurrent rinse electrodes after open
case formation
eliminate process water for plate dehydration
water rinse for batteries prior to detergent wash
countercurrent rinse batteries or reuse of battery
rinse water
b) End-of-pipe treatment for this option is unchanged from
BPT.
Option 2 (Figure X-8, page 945) builds on option 1 with improved
end-of-pipe treatment.
a) In-process technology is unchanged from option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment in addition to option 1:
polishing filtration .(multimedia filter)
Option 3 (Figure X-9, page 946) builds on option 2 with revision of
end-of-pipe treatment.
a) In-process technology is unchanged from option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment consist of the following treatment
steps:
oil skimming
chemical precipitation using sulfides
sedimentation
polishing filtration using membrane filters
sludge dewatering
Option 4 (Figure X-10, page 947) provides improved end-of-pipe.
a) In-process technology is unchanged from option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment consists of the following
treatment steps:
oil skimming
lime precipitation augmented with carbonate
filtration (mixed media)
reverse osmosis
sulfide precipitation of brine
sedimentation of treated brine
filtration (membrane type) of treated settle brine
909
-------
sludge dewatering.
Option 1
Option 1 continues the end-of-pipe treatment of BPT and adds improved
in-process controls to reduce the amount of wastewater treated and
discharged. These in-process controls are applied to the formation of
wet or damp batteries, the formation and dehydration of plates for
dehydrated batteries, and battery washing. All in-process control
techniques included in option 0 are continued as part of this
treatment and control option. As described in Section IX, the
following process elements are limited to zero discharge leady oxide
production; paste preparation and application; closed formation of
single-fill batteries, and open formation of wet, charged batteries.
The remaining process elements which have discharge allowances
included closed formation of double fill and fill and dump batteries;
open formation of dehydrated batteries; battery wash; floor wash; and
battery repair. Under option 1 there are discharge allowances for
open formation of dehydrated batteries, battery wash and battery
repair. All other process elements are limited to zero discharge
under option 1 by implementation of in-process control techniques.
Closed Formation
All wastewater discharges from closed formation processes are
eliminated by application of one or more of the in-process controls
included under the option 1 technology. All of these controls are
presently observed within the subcategory. Specific in-process
controls included are:
Low rate charging or recycle of contact cooling water
Recirculation of wet scrubber water
Control of spillage in electrolyte filling and dumping
to reduce case contamination and eliminate battery
rinsing; or recirculation of rinse water.
Slow charging rates used in closed formation eliminate the use of
contact cooling water and the resultant process wastewater discharge.
Contact cooling water used in higher rate formation processes may be
recycled through a cooling tower and neutralized as required.
Widespread practice of these techniques is illustrated in Table X-19;
(page 956); 36 of 40 reporting plants report no process wastewater
discharge from closed case single fill formation processes. Where wet
scrubbers are used to control acid fumes and mist resulting from
formation processes, recycle of the scrubber water is also required
for this level of control. Neutralization of the scrubber water may
be required to maintain efficient scrubbing and to limit equipment
corrosion.
910
-------
Appropriate care and technology in filling batteries with acid
electrolyte prior to formation, limits or eliminates acid
contamination of the battery cases and of production equipment and
work areas. If double fill or fill and dump processes are employed,
similar control during the removal of the charging acid from the
battery is also required. Production by single- fill techniques
simplifies the controls which must be employed , since only the
singel-filling operation (there is no acid removal operation) must be
controlled. Effective control of overflows and acid spillage in
filling batteries has been demonstrated, both by manufacturers
employing automatic filling equipment (with acid level sensing
provisions and special design features to avoid drips and spills) and
by manufacturers employing careful manual battery filling procedures.
These practices limit or eliminate the requirement for battery rinsing
or washing prior to further handling or shipment, reducing or
eliminating the quantity of wastewater which must be treated. As an
alternative to this level of control in filling and acid removal,
equivalent pollution reduction may be achieved by treatment and
recycle of the battery rinse water.
Where recycle is used to reduce or eliminate wastewater discharges
associated with closed formation processes, some blo.wdown or a bleed
from the system may be needed. These bleed streams are directed to
either the acid cutting or paste preparation processes. Both of these
operations have negative water balances and together require about 0.4
I/kg of makeup water. These reuse practices have been observed by EPA
at existing plants.
Combinations of these spill control and water reuse technologies can
be employed to reduce wastewater discharge to zero from closed case
formation. As shown in Table X-19, some plants are now achieving this
wastewater control level; 59 of 99 plants report no process wastewater
discharge from closed formation.
Open Formation - Dehydrated Batteries
Significant reductions in process wastewater discharges from the
formation and dehydration of plates for dehydrated batteries are
achieved by several in-process control techniques, including:
Use of countercurrent rinsing and rinse flow control or
recycle of wastewater from post-formation plate rinses
Elimination or recycle of process water used- in plate
dehydration
Recycle of wet scrubber water.
Countercurrent cascade rinsing and rinse flow control can provide
significant reductions in wastewater discharge from rinsing electrodes
after open formation. The achievable reduction is discussed in
911
-------
Section VII. Although countercurrent and multi-stage rinses after
open formation are reported by a number of plants in this subcategory,
these techniques are not coupled with effective rinse flow control.
Consequently, they may not achieve substantially reduced wastewater
discharge volumes compared to single-stage rinses. As an alternative
to countercurrent rinsing and strict rinse flow control, rinse
wastewater may be recycled for reuse in product rinsing either before
or after treatment. Because this technique affords lower rinsing
efficiency than countercurrent rinsing, it may not be compatible with
both acceptable product quality and wastewater flow rates at some
sites. Also, where wastewater is recycled after treatment, higher
treatment costs may be incurred.
Process water used in dehydrating electrodes is from seal water on the
vacuum pumps or ejectors used in vacuum drying of electrodes. This
water becomes contaminated with acid and lead from the electrodes and
consequently requires treatment prior to discharge. The volume of
this wastewater may be greatly reduced by recycle, or eliminated
entirely by the use of other dehydrating techniques such as steam
dehydrating. These results are achieved by many plants producing
dehydrated batteries, although most plants did not specifically
identify the techniques employed.
The flow basis which is used for determining the pollutant reduction
benefit of this option for the open formation of dehydrated batteries
was calculated in the following manner. As described in Section IX,
the flow used for determining BPT mass discharge limitations for this
subcategory is 9.0 I/kg. This consists of 3.6 I/kg from the plate
dehydration area and 5.4 I/kg from the plate washing area. The
application of two-stage countercurrent rinsing to plate washing will
achieve a water reduction factor of 6.6. Treatment and reuse of water
in the plate dehydration area will achieve an equivalent water use
reduction. The option 1 flow of 1.36 I/kg is derived by applying the
water reduction factor of 6.6 to the option 0 flow of 9.0 I/kg. This
flow appears to be reasonable because some plants have eliminated
plate dehydration wastewater, and additional stages of countercurrent
rinsing could further reduce rinse water flow.
Ancillary Operations
Battery Washing
In-process control techniques for the reduction of wastewater
discharges from battery washing include use of efficient acid addition
and removal techniques as discussed previously. Water used for
rinsing electrolyte splashes off battery cases may be treated and
reused. Slowdown from this operation may be used in paste formulating
or acid cutting. A viable alternative for many plants is the
elimination of battery washing, which eliminates all associated
912
-------
wastewater discharges. Many plants in the lead subcategory
demonstrate the feasibility of the discharge reductions projected by
these in-process control techniques and presently discharge little or
no process wastewater from battery washing, although specific washing
techniques were not generally identified in dcp's. The use of a water
rinse prior to detergent washing was observed at a sampled battery
manufacturing plant, as was the manufacture of batteries without any
battery wash operation.
Nondetergent rinses seen frequently in battery manufacturing
operations can be recycled or reused, eliminating a wastewater
discharge from this type of battery wash. Wastewater from detergent
rinses at the final product stage may not be amenable to reuse in
other battery manufacturing operations and therefore requires a
discharge allowance. In plants having a final product detergent
rinse, at least one and usually several other battery rinses were
observed. Using the worst case of only two rinses (one without, one
with detergent) the following results occur. option 1 technology
allows no discharge from the rinse without detergent and full option 0
discharge flow from the rinse with detergent. Total flow from battery
wash at option 1 would be 50 percent of the option 0 value or 0.36
I/kg. This value is used for calculating pollutant reduction benefits
of the technology.
Floor Wash. Only five lead subcategory plants reported wastewater
discharge resulting from floor washing. The other plants in the
subcategory make use of dry floor cleaning techniques or salvage and
recycle spilled solutions. Detergent battery wash wastewater could be
reused for floor washing, and the amount of floor wash water can be
dramatically reduced by commercial floor washing machines. Since so
few plants within the subcategory discharge floor wash wastewater and
because there are alternative procedures to eliminate this wastewater
stream, the option 1 flow for the battery wash element is zero.
Battery Repair. Three plants reported a discharge of wastewater from
battery repair operations. At one sampled plant this was observed to
be generated by cleaning battery cases before opening, and tool
cleaning in the repair area. Because the nature of the wastewater is
uncertain, its reuse in other manufacturing operations cannot be
required, and a discharge allowance identical to option 0 of 0.14 I/kg
is established. This allowance is applied only to the wet repair of
wet batteries and should not apply to reburning parts and other dry
production line repairs.
Option 2_
Option 2 consists of the in-process technologies set forth in option
1 plus end-of-pipe treatment consisting of pH adjustment using lime
augmented by carbonate precipitation, settling, and mixed media
913
-------
\
\
' filtration. This is a conventional system which should be almost as
effective in lead removal as Option 3. This technology train has not
been specifically included in cost calculations in Section VIII, but
is estimated to be about equal or less than option 3 because of
chemicals used for treatment (lime is less costly than sulfide) and
filter costs (mixed media filters are less costly than membrane
filters).
Option .3
Option 3 continues all of the in-process control technologies included
in option 1 and adds improved end-of-pipe treatment. For this option
the end-of-pipe treatment consists of pH adjustment with lime,
chemical precipitation with sulfide, sedimentation, and polishing
filtration. A membrane filter was included to achieve maximum
reduction of suspended solids. A membrane filter has been
demonstrated in treating lead subcategory process wastewater on a
pilot scale, although it was not used in conjunction with sulfide
precipitation in that instance.
Option ฃ
Option 4 includes neutralization and filtration of the process
wastewater followed by reverse osmosis. The permeate from the reverse
osmosis unit (85 percent of the wastewater flow) is returned to the
manufacturing process for use as make-up water, and the brine
containing essentially all of the process wastewater pollutants, is
treated in a system identical to the end-of-pipe system provided in
option 3.
BAT Option Selection
The BAT options were carefully evaluated, and the technical merits and
disadvantages of each were compared. All options are considered to be
technologically suitable for cost and performance comparison. All of
the options are compatible with the operating requirements of lead
battery manufacturing operations. No comments were received
indicating a need to revise the in-process controls applicable to any
option. Therefore, selection is based on pollutant removals and
economic factors. Quantitative estimates were prepared using all
available data for each plant in the subcategory. As a part of this
evalution, the Agency developed a theoretical "normal" plant. This
normal plant is defined as a plant having all of the manufacturing
process elements proportioned as they occur across the entire
subcategory. While no such entity is known to exist, it is a useful
concept in evaluating the pollutant reduction benefits of various
options, and appraising the importance of toxic and other pollutant
discharges. Manufacturing processes and product variations in the
914
-------
other battery manufacturing subcategories make use of the normal plant
concept unreasonable.
The EPA data base was used as a basis for generating the normal plant
profile and data. All of the 184 plants in the data base supplied
some data. Where data was lacking, the nonresponding plants were
presumed to be similar to the average of those that supplied
information. Normal plant production normalizing parameter
equivalents (million kg/yr of lead) and flow (million 1/yr) are
displayed for each lead subcategory process in Table X-20 (page 973).
In Section V the raw waste characteristics of the lead subcategory
processes were described and displayed in Tables V-40, to V-50 (pages
366 to 376). These tables show that the raw waste characteristics of
the lead processes are essentially similar. Total raw waste
concentrations for the normal lead subcategory plant were calculated
by using data from plants A, C and D because these plants were used to
characterize all the process streams. The daily mass loadings from
these plants in (Table V-53, page 382) were averaged to obtain a mean
mass loading. The mass loadings for each pollutant were divided by
the mean production normalized flow of these three plants to determine
raw waste concentrations. The mass loadings in Table V-53 for plant A
were combined with the pasting mass loadings for plant A in Table V-42
(page 368) because the pasting wastewaters were recycled and not
included in the total raw waste.
These raw waste concentrations are used as the basis for calculating
treatment effectiveness and pollutant removal benefits of the several
technology options. Treatment effectiveness calculations are
summarized in Table X-21 (page 974), and benefits are displayed in
Tables X-22 (for the normal plant) and X-23 on pages 975 and 976. For
the normal plant benefits, the effluent discharge from each plant in
the subcategory was estimated for each treatment and control
alternative based on production data for the normal plant and the
normalized process element discharge flows shown in Table X-20. For
the total subcategory, the total mass of each pollutant discharged
annually with each alternative level of control was determined by
applying the technology effectiveness (Table VI1-20, page 712) to the
total effluent flow. The mass of pollutant removed through each
control and treatment option was calculated as the difference between
raw waste and pollutants discharged by that option.
An estimate of total annual compliance costs for each technology
option for the lead subcategory was also prepared. These estimates
were developed by estimating costs for each plant in the subcategory
based on reported production and wastewater flows, and summing the
costs for each level of treatment and control. Thirty-four plants in
the lead subcategory did not report sufficient production or flow data
915
-------
to be costed. In order to include these plants in the subcategory
total of 184, the calculated subcategory costs were increased in
proportion to the estimated plant sizes, or by 18.9%.
The results of these calculations are also shown in Table X-62. The
costs for technology options 2 and 3 are listed as being equal. The
costs of the two options are estimated to be very close (within 10%)
with option 2 slightly less expensive because of lower filter costs.
An economic impact analysis based on estimated costs indicates that
there is one potential plant closures projected only for option 4 for
direct dischargers.
Option J_ is proposed as the selected BAT option because limitations
are achieveable using technologies and practices that are currently in
use at plants in the subcategory. Also, the result of implementing
this technology is a significant reduction of toxic pollutant
discharges. For this option flow is reduced to 350 million 1/yr for
the subcategory and to 42 million 1/yr for direct dischargers. The
annual toxic pollutant removal is 1,065,626 kg/yr for the subcategory
and 127,875 kg/yr for direct dischargers. For plants to comply
directly with this option the estimated compliance capital cost is
$19,612,000 for the subcategory ($1,847,000 for direct dischargers),
and annual cost is $4,853,000 for the subcategory ($546,000 for direct
dischargers.
Option 2_ was rejected because the technology yields small incremental
pollutant removals when compared with option 1. This option will be
considered for the final regulation. For this option flow is the same
as for option 1, but the annual toxic pollutant removal is 1,065,883
kg/yr for the subcategory, and 127,906 for direct dischargers. For
plants to comply directly with this option, the estimated capital cost
for compliance is $22,489,000 for the subcategory ($2,252,000 for
direct dischargers), and annual cost is $5,798,000 for the subcategory
($678,000 for direct dischargers).
Option 3^ was rejected because the implementation of sulfide technology
at existing plants requires significant modification or retrofitting
of treatment and ventilation systems within the plant in addition to
just installing the treatment equipment. Depending upon the present
configuration of the plants, including existing structures, piping and
equipment, as well as available land area, the retrofitting and
modifications may become extremely expensive. The compliance cost
estimates have accounted for the installation (and operation and
maintenance costs for the necessary equipment that would be incurred
at a plant which would incur no additional cost for modifying existing
ventilation systems. New sources would not incur these additional
modification costs. Commenters also stated on the draft development
document the use of sulfide in treatment systems requires special
handling of the sludges which might be toxic and reactive. For this
916
-------
option, discharge flow is the same as for option 1. The annual toxic
pollutant removal is 1,066,191 kg/yr for the subcategory, and 127,943
kg/yr for direct dischargers. As discussed above, compliance costs
are estimated as equal to the option 2 costs.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed above for sulfide treatment
and option 3 (reverse osmosis) in the cadmium subcategory, this
technology option requires substantial retrofitting of both production
and wastewater treatment processes at existing plants. For this
option discharge flow is reduced to 53 million 1/yr for the
subcategory and 6 million 1/yr for direct dischargers. The annual
toxic pollutant removal is 1,066,274 for the subcategory and 127,953
for direct dischargers. Estimated capital compliance costs for plants
to comply directly with this option are $30,126,000 for the
subcategory ($3,561,00 for direct dischargers), and annual cost is
$8,552,000 for the subcategory and $1,010,000 for the direct
dischargers.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
In selecting pollutant parameters for BAT regulation for the lead
subcategory, all pollutants considered for regulation in Section VI
for the subcategory (Table VI-I, page 566) were evaluated. The choice
of pollutants for regulation was dependent upon the toxicity of
presence in the raw waste streams at treatable concentrations. The
plants in the lead subcategory have a variety of different
combinations of process elements, but, in general, the same pollutants
are detected in significant concentrations for all processes.
Pollutant parameters regulated at BAT for this subcategory are lead,
copper and iron. Antimony, cadmium, chromium, mercury, nickel, silver
and zinc which appeared at lower concentrations and were considered,
but not selected for regulation at BAT, are expected to be adequately
removed by the application of the selected technology.
The conventional pollutant parameters, oil and grease, total suspended
solids and pH are not regulated under BAT, but are considered under
BCT.
BAT Effluent Limitations
The effluent concentrations attainable through the application of BAT
technology are displayed in Table VI1-20 under L&S technology. The
BAT mass discharge limitations can be calculated by multiplying these
concentrations by the applicable BAT flow listed in Table X-19 (page
972). These limitations are expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per
kg of lead used in the product and are presented in Tables X-25, X-26
and X-27 (pages 978-979). By multiplying these limitations by the
917
-------
actual production within a process element, the allowable mass
discharge for that process element can be calculated. The allowable
pollutant discharge for the different process elements can be summed
to determine the total allowable mass discharge for the plant.
The reasonableness of these BAT limitations is based upon two premises
- the demonstrated ability to achieve the flow levels and the proven
ability of the lime and settle technology to achieve the designated
effluent concentrations. The flows used as a basis to calculate BAT
mass discharge limitations are based upon demonstrated performance at
lead subcategory plants. By process substitution or in-process
controls, lead battery manufacturing plants can meet the option 1 flow
levels. Every process element within the lead subcategory is known to
be performed without wastewater discharge at more than one plant.
Table X-19 includes a summary table of the number of plants which are
active in each process element but do not discharge wastewater as a
result of these process elements. In fact, 51 plants are presently
discharging no wastewater from their battery manufacturing processes.
The effluent concentrations which are used to calculate BAT mass
discharge limitations are based upon the demonstrated performance of
L&S technology upon waste streams from other industries which have
wastewater characteristics similar to those of waste streams in the
lead subcategory. The details of this performance are documented in
Section VII of this document. There are other treatment alternatives
available for implementation at existing plants such as sulfide
precipitation or ferrite coprecipitation which are reported to achieve
even lower effluent concentrations than those achieved by L&S
technology.
Sulfide . precipitation is more effective than carbonate precipitation
at removing lead due to the low solubility of lead sulfide. Ferrite
coprecipitation involves the addition of iron salts to a precipitation
and settling system to enhance the removal efficiency of the system.
However, since the presence of iron salts in recycled waters could be
detrimental to lead subcategory battery manufacturing processes, the
use of ferrite coprecipitation should be limited to treatment of waste
streams which are to be discharged. An alternative to reducing
effluent concentrations to meet discharge limitations is the reduction
of discharge flow either through the substitution of dry processes, or
the reuse of water.
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
There are no direct dischargers in the Leclanche subcategory, and
therefore no BAT regulation is recommended at this time. However,
technology options were analyzed for treating the raw waste streams in
the subcategory. The selected technology for this subcategory is
identical to option 0. Pollutant reduction benefits are displayed in
918
-------
Table X-28 (page 980). The effluent limitation would be zero
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
As discussed in Section IX for the lithium subcategory, no BAT
regulation is recommended at this time. However, technology options
were analyzed for treating the raw waste streams in the subcategory
and are discussed here for use in Sections XI and XII. Plants in the
lithium subcategory generate three distinct wastewaters: wastewater
Stream A is generated by heat paper production; wastewater Stream B is
generated by the manufacture of iron disulfide cathodes, lead iodide
cathodes, cell testing, lithium scrap disposal, floor and equipment
wash, and cleanup; and wastewater Stream C is generated by air
scrubbers on various plant operations. As discussed in Section IX,
these wastewater streams are most usually generated and treated
separately.
Three alternative levels of treatment and control technology beyond
option 0 were considered for technology options for this subcategory.
Each of these options builds upon option 0, and provides different
treatment for one or more of the wastewater streams generated in this
subcategory. All three options incorporate improvements in end-of-
pipe treatment or recycle of treated wastewater. In-process controls
providing substantial reductions in process wastewater volumes or
pollutant loads have not been identified.
Technology Options Summary
Because there are three wastwater streams the technology options will
be outlined for each wastewater stream. Technology options for waste
Stream A are identical to heat paper in the calcium subcategory.
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-4, page 848) consists of the
following technology.
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Settling
Chromium reduction
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
B. Wastewater Stream B
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
919
-------
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
C. Wastewater Stream C
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Aeration
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Option 1 (Figure X-ll, page 948) for this subcategory
builds upon BPT.
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology is identical to BPT.
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
All BPT end-of-pipe treatment
Polishing filtration (mixed media)
B. Wastewater Stream B
a) In-process technology is unchanged from BPT.
b) End-of-pipe treatment is changed by adding:
Polishing filtration
C. Wastewater Stream C treatment is unchanged from BPT.
Option 2 (Figure X-12, Page 949) includes the following changes.
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology is identical to BPT.
b) End-of-pipe treatment for heat paper production
wastewater includes:
Settling
Holding tank
Recycle to process
B. Wastewater Streams B and C treatment is unchanged from option 1.
Option 3 (Figure X-13, Page 950) builds upon option 2.
A. Wastewater Streams A and B treatment is unchanged
from Option 2.
B. Wastewater Stream C treatment is upgraded by adding
polishing filtration.
Option 1
The Option 1 treatment system for the lithium subcategory, shown in
Figure X-ll, consists of three distinct treatment systems, each of
which is directly associated with one of three major wastewater
streams generated by this subcategory. These wastewater streams
920
-------
result from: A) heat paper production B) iron disulfide cathode and
lead iodide cathode manufacture, lithium scrap disposal, testing, and
C) air scrubber blowdown.
Wastewater Stream A, from heat paper production, is passed through a
clarifier or settling tank where the suspended material is allowed to
settle. The settled sludge is removed periodically and disposed of on
a contract basis. The effluent from the initial clarifier is treated
by chemical reduction to reduce hexavalent chromium to the trivalent
state. Once the heat paper wastewater stream has undergone chemical
reduction of chromium, it may be combined with the wastewater
associated with wastewater stream B prior to further treatment.
The combined wastewaters from wastewater Streams A and B are treated
to remove dissolved metals using chemical precipitation (with lime)
followed by settling in a clarifier. The settled solids are removed
from the clarifier, and dewatered in a vacuum filter. The sludge
filter cake is disposed on a contract haul basis, along with any oil
and grease removed by the skimming mechanism on the clarifier. The
filtrate from the vacuum filter is sent back to the treatment system
to undergo further treatment.
In order to provide improved removal of metals and suspended solids,
the clarified wastewater stream is passed through a multi-media filter
prior to discharge. This filter is intended to act as a polishing
unit on the treated wastewater stream. Periodic backwashes from the
filter are sent back to the treatment system.
Wastewater Stream C is initially aerated to decrease the oxygen
demand. In the process, sulfuric acid is formed from the sulfurous
acid originally present. Subsequently, the low pH wastewater is
neutralized and settled prior to discharge. Lime used to neutralize
the waste stream may precipitate calcium sulfate and calcium chloride.
The clarifier also removes miscellaneous suspended solids contained in
the wastewater streams. It is expected that solids removed in
settling will be disposed on a contract haul basis.
Option ฃ
The option 2 treatment for the heat paper wastewater stream consists
of settling after which the clarified effluent is discharged to a
holding tank. This wastewater stream is recycled with makeup water
added to the system as required. Solids are recovered or contractor
hauled.
Because of the recycle of the treated heat paper wastewater to the
process, further treatment will not be required to remove hexavalent
chromium from solution.
921
-------
Stream B is identical to the system described for this wastewater
stream in option 1.
The option 2 treatment system for Stream C is identical to the system
described in option 1.
Option 3.
The option 3 treatment system for Streams A and B is identical to the
system described in option 2. A polishing filter is added to remove
additional solids from the air scrubber blowdown water.
Option Selection
These three treatment and control options were studied carefully and
the technical merits and disadvantages of each were compared. In the
selection of a technology option from among these alternatives, the
Agency considered pollutant reduction benefits, costs, and the status
of demonstration of each technical alternative. Tables X-30 and X-31
(pages 982 and 983) provide a quantitative comparison of polluant
reduction benefits of the different options and compliance costs are
displayed in Table X-62. In this subcategory, contract hauling is the
least costly method for compliance at existing plants.
Because there are three distinct wastewater streams in this
subcategory, it is necessary to consider and evaluate each of them
separately in determining the most appropriate technology option for
treatment and control of pollutants. The wastewater generated by heat
paper manufacture is identical to the heat paper manufacturing
operation discussed in detail in the calcium subcategory. Employing
the same logic as detailed in the calcium subcategory is appropriate
to arrive at the same conclusion about treatment options for this
operation. The technically preferred option for this segment of the
subcategory is option 2. This option results in the maximum reduction
in the discharge of pollutants.
Technology options 1-3 contain only one change from option 0 for
wastewater Stream B which contains wastewaters from iron disulfide or
lead iodide cathodes, cell testing, lithium scrap disposal, and floor
and equipment wash. This improved technology is the addition of a
polishing filter after sedimentation to improve removal of toxic
metals and suspended solids. The operability of lime, settle and
filter technology is detailed in Section VII. For this segment of the
subcategory the technically preferred option is option 1.
Option 3 adds a filter to improve removal of TSS from the wastewater
for Stream C. Since this wastewater stream is believed to be
essentially free from toxic metals, the filter would only remove TSS.
It is therefore not the technically preferred option, and the selected
922
-------
technology for this segment of the subcategory is lime and settle
technology.
Pollutant Parameters Selected for Effluent Limitations
Pollutant parameters selected for limitation for this subcategory are
those selected and discussed in Section IX, except that the
conventional pollutants would be considered under BCT.
Effluent Limitations
Effluent concentrations from Table VI1-20 for L&S technology are
multiplied by the normalized process element flows shown in Table X-29
to determine the polutant mass discharge limitations shown in Tables
"X-32 to X-34 (pages 985-986). These tables are presented as guidance
for state or local pollution control agencies because discharges from
this subcategory are not proposed for national regulation at BAT. The
heat paper manufacturing process element is not shown in the tables
because the limitations would be at no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants. The air scrubber process elements are not shown in the
tables because no toxic pollutants would need to be limited. The
discharge limitation for any battery manufacturing plant may be
determined by summing the mass discharge allowances for all of the
applicable manufacturing process elements.
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
As discussed in Section IX for the magnesium subcategory, no BAT
regulation is proposed at this time. However, technology options were
analyzed for treating the raw waste streams in the subcategory and are
discussed here for use in Section XI and XII. The magnesium
subcategory generates three distinct wastewaters: wastewater Stream A
is generated by heat paper production; wastewater Stream B is
generated by the manufacture of silver chloride cathodes, cell
testing, and floor and equipment wash; and wastewater Stream C is
generated by air scrubbers on various plant operations. As discussed
in Section IX, these wastewater streams are usually generated and
treated separately.
Three alternative levels of treatment and control technology were
considered beyond option 0 for this subcategory. Each of these
options builds upon option 0 and, provides different treatment for one
or more of the wastewater streams generated in this subcategory. All
three options incorporate improvements in end-of-pipe treatment or
recycle of treated wastewater. Except for one process element, in-
process controls providing substantial reductions in process
wastewater volumes or pollutant loads have not been identified.
923
-------
Technology Options Summary
Because there are three distinct wastewater streams the technology
options will be outlined for each wastewater stream. Options for
waste Stream A are identical to heat paper production options in the
calcium subcategory.
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-5, page 849) consists of the
following technology.
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Settling
Chromium reduction
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
B. Wastewater Stream B
a) In-process technology:
Rinse water flow control
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
C. Wastewater Stream C
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Chemical precipitation
Sedimentation
Option 1 (Figure X-14, page 951) for this subcategory
builds upon option 0.
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
All option 0 end-of-pipe treatment
Polishing filtration (mixed media)
B. Wastewater Stream B
a) In-process technology:
Countercurrent cascade rinse
b) End-of-pipe treatment is identical to option 0
C. Wastewater Stream C treatment is identical to option 0
Option 2 (Figure x-15, page 952),
924
-------
A. Wastewater Stream A
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
Settling
Holding tank
Recycle to process
B. Wastewater Stream B
a) In-process technology is unchanged from option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
All option 0 end-of-pipe treatment
Polishing filtration (mixed-media)
C. Wastewater Stream C treatment is unchanged from option 0.
Option 3 (Figure X-16, Page 953).
A. Wastewater Stream A treatment is unchanged
from option 2.
B. Wastewater Stream B treatment is upgraded by adding
carbon adsorption to remove organics.
C. Wastewater Stream C
a) In-process technology:
None identified
b) End-of-pipe treatment:
All option 0 end-of-pipe treatment
Polishing filtration (mixed media)
Option ]_
The option 1 treatment system for the magnesium subcategory, shown in
Figure X-14, consists of three distinct treatment systems, each of
which is directly associated with one of three major wastewater
streams generated by this subcategory. These wastewater streams
result from: A) heat paper production; B) silver chloride cathode
manufacture, cell testing, and floor and equipment cleaning; and C)
air scrubbers.
Wastewater Stream A, from heat paper production, is passed through a
clarifier or settling tank where the suspended material is allowed to
settle. The settled sludge is removed periodically for disposal as
solid waste. The effluent from the initial settling is treated by
chemical reduction to reduce hexavalent chromium to the trivalent
state. The wastewater is then treated to remove dissolved metals
using chemical precipitation (with lime) followed by settling in a
clarifier. The settled solids are removed from the clarifier and
dewatered in a vacuum filtration unit. The sludge filter cake is
disposed of on a contract haul basis. The liquid filtrate from the
vacuum filter is sent back to the treatment system to undergo further
treatment.
925
-------
In order to provide improved removal of metals and suspended solids,
the clarified wastewater stream is passed through a mixed-media filter
prior to discharge. This filter is intended to act as a polishing
unit on the treated wastewater stream. Periodic backwashes from the
filter are sent back to the treatment system.
Wastewater stream B, from silver chloride cathode production, cell
testing and floor and equipment wash, is reduced in volume by using
three-stage countercurrent cascade rinsing of chemically reduced
silver cathodes. Because the cathode material is smooth surfaced a
high efficiency will be achieved and a rinse reduction factor of 30 is
reasonable for this material. End-of-pipe treatment is the same as
BPT.
Option 2 treatment for the heat paper wastewater stream, consists of
settling after which the clarified effluent is discharged to a holding
tank. From the tank all of the wastewater is recycled, with makeup
water added to the system as required. This is discussed in detail in
the calcium subcategory. Because of the recycle of the treated heat
paper wastewater back to the process operation, the option 2 treatment
equipment will not be required to remove hexavalent chromium from
solution.
The option 2 treatment for silver chloride cathode production, cell
testing, and floor and equipment wash wastewaters is the same as
option 1 with the addition of a mixed-media polishing filter to
further reduce pollutant discharge.
The option 2 treatment system for Stream C is similar to the system
described in option 1 with the addition of a mixed-media polishing
filter to remove additional amounts of solids.
The option 3 treatment system is very similar to the system previously
described for option 2 treatment. It differs only in that carbon
adsorption is included for the silver chloride cathode wastewater to
further reduce organic pollutant (COD) discharges.
Option Selection
These three treatment and control options were studied carefully and
the technical merits and disadvantages of each were compared. In the
selection of a technology option from among these alternatives, the
Agency considered pollutant reduction benefits, costs, and the status
of demonstration of each technical alternative. Tables X-36 and X-37
(pages 988 and 989) provide a quantitative comparison of pollutant
reduction benefits of the different technology options. The
corresponding compliance costs are displayed in Table X-62. These
tables present the pollutant removal which would occur if all of the
existing plants in the magnesium subcategory used a particular
926
-------
treatment system, and shows the combined costs to all existing plants
of using that treatment.
Because there are three distinct wastewater streams in this
subcategory, it is necessary to consider and evaluate each of them
separately in determining the most appropriate technology option for
treatment and control of pollutants. The wastewater generated by heat
paper production is identical to the heat paper production operation
discussed in detail in the calcium subcategory. It is appropriate,
employing the same logic as detailed in the calcium subcategory, to
arrive at the same conclusion about treatment options for this
operation. The technically preferred option for this segment of the
subcategory is option 2. This option results in the maximum reduction
in the discharge of pollutants at the least cost of any option
considered for this wastewater stream.
The three options displayed for the treatment of silver chloride
cathode, cell testing, and floor and equipment wash wastewaters are
not practiced at any manufacturing plant in this subcategory. Since
only minimal treatment is now provided to these wastewaters, it is
necessary to transfer any technology for use in this segment. The
first option employs water flow reduction, transferring countercurrent
cascade rinsing from other subcategories. The basis for the use of
countercurrent cascade rinsing is set forth in substantial detail in
Section VII. A high level of rinsing efficiency is projected because
of the compact, smooth nature of the surface being rinsed. This
results in a thirty fold reduction in wastewater discharge from the
chemically reduced cathode production and a proportionate reduction in
pollutant discharge.
The second option adds polishing filtration to the lime and settle
end-of-pipe treatment employed at BPT to remove additional pollutants.
This technology is widely used and is described in detail in Section
VII.
The third option requires the use of carbon adsorption to remove COD.
COD is known to contain phenol-like compounds which are not detected
by the analytical procedures used. The applicability of the carbon
adsorption technology is not well demonstrated on this particular
wastewater, and therefore this option is not selected. The
technically preferred option is option 2 based on the removal of
pollutants and the proven effectiveness of the technology employed.
Wastewater Stream C, from air scrubbers, is not known to betreated
effectively in any of the plants in this subcategory. No in-process
technology is known which can be employed to substantially reduce the
wastewater flow and the quantity of pollutants carried by that
wastewater. The only technology applied above option 0 is the
addition of a polishing filter. This occurs at option 3, however,
927
-------
since no toxics are removed by this option, option 0 is selected as
the technically preferred option.
Pollutant Parameters Selected for Effluent Limitations
Pollutant parameters selected for limitation for this subcategory are
those selected and discussed for BPT in Section IX, except that the
conventional pollutants would be considered under BCT.
Effluent Limitations
The effluent concentrations attainable through the application of the
recommended technology are displayed in Table VI1-20. The mass
discharge limitation for each process element can be calculated by
multiplying these concentrations by the applicable BAT flow listed in
Table X-35 (page 987). These limitations are expressed in terms of mg
of pollutant per kg of production normalizing parameter and are
displayed in Tables X-38 to X-41 (pages 991-992). These tables are
presented as guidance for state or local pollution control agencies
bceasue discharges from this subcategory are not proposed for national
regulation at BAT. By multiplying these limitation numbers by the
actual production in a process element (kg of production normalizing
parameter), the allowable mass discharge for that process element can
be calculated in mg. The allowable masses for the different process
elements can be summed to determine the total allowable mass discharge
for a plant.
Of the eight plants which are reported active in the magnesium sub-
category, five reported no wastewater discharge from the magnesium
subcategory, thereby meeting all levels of discharge limitation. None
of the three plants which reported wastewater discharge had the
complete treatment technology system, although one plant had some
components of the BAT system.
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
Four technology options are presented to display the most appropriate
technology options. All four options build upon BPT (option 0) and
provide reduced pollutant discharge by reducing wastewater volumes
through the application of in-process control techniques. In
addition, three of the options provide augmented end-of-pipe
treatment.
BAT Options Summary
Option 0 for this subcategory (Figure IX-6, page 850) consists of
the following:
928
-------
a) In-process technology
Reuse of process solutions
Elimination of the use of chromates in cell washing
Segregation of noncontact cooling water
Segregation of organic bearing cell cleaning wastewater
Control electrolyte drips and spills
Control flow of rinse waters
b) End-of-pipe treatment
Oil skimming
Lime or acid precipitation
Sedimentation
Sludge dewatering
BAT Option 1 (Figure X-17, page 954) builds on option 0 by adding the
following:
a) In-process technology
Countercurrent rinse amalgamated zinc powder
Recirculate amalgamation area floor wash water
Countercurrent rinse of formed zinc electrodes
Countercurrent rinse of electrodeposited silver powder
Countercurrent rinse of formed silver oxide electrodes
Reduce flow and Countercurrent rinse silver peroxide
Flow controls and Countercurrent rinse for im-
pregnated nickel cathodes
Countercurrent rinse or rinse recycle for cell washing
Countercurrent rinse after etching silver grids
Dry cleanup or wash water reuse for floor and
equipment
b) End-of-pipe treatment is unchanged from BPT.
BAT Option 2 (Figure X-18, page 955) builds on BAT Option 1.
a) In-process technology is unchanged from BAT Option 1.
b) End-of-pipe treatment continues BAT Option 1 and adds:
Polishing filtration (mixed-media)
BAT Option 3 (Figure X-19, page 956) follows BAT Option 2.
a) In-process technology
All in-process technology employed at Option 2
Eliminate wastewater from gelled amalgam
b) End-of-pipe treatment
Oil skimming
Sulfide precipitation
Sedimentation
Filtration (membrane)
Sludge dewatering
BAT Option 4 (Figure X-20, page 957) provides reduced flow,
improved end-of-pipe treatment, and recycle.
929
-------
a) In-process technology
All in-porcess technology used in Option 3
Eliminate amalgamation wastewater
b) End-of-pipe treatment
Oil skimming
Lime or acid precipitation
Filtration
Reverse osmosis with recycle of permeate
Sulfide precipitation of brine
Sedimentation of precipated brine
Filtration (membrane)
Sludge dewatering
Option J_
Option 1 adds in-process control technology to the end-of-pipe
treatment provided at BPT. This in-process technology substantially
reduces the quantity of wastewater which must be treated before
release. Normalized flows for the several elements of this sub-
category are listed in Table X-42, (page 993). Specific flow
reductions for each of the manufacturing process elements are
discussed in detail.
Wet Amalgamated Zinc Powder Anode. Water is discharged as a result of
rinsing the amalgamated zinc powder and of area floor washing. Area
floor washing contributes 0.25 I/kg of the 3.8 I/kg BPT flow for this
process element. Floor area wash water may be eliminated by reusing
treated amalgam rinse water or by treatment and reuse of the floor
washwater. By replacing the typical zinc powder series rinsing sys-
tems with countercurrent rinsing, the 3.55 I/kg can be reduced by a
factor of 6.6 to 0.55 I/kg. The effluent flow of 0.55 I/kg is used
for setting BAT effluent limitations for this process element.
Gelled Amalgam Zinc Powder Anode. Water discharged is a result of
equipment and process area floor washing. Water used in washing
amalgamation area floors becomes contaminated with mercury as well as
suspended solids. Recycle of this water for continued use in floor
washing is possible if the mercury and other contaminants are removed
by treatment prior to removal of suspended solids. In order to
control the dissolved solids content in the recirculation water, a
small bleedoff or blowdown of wastewater may be necessary. This
blowdown is established at a nominal level of 10 percent of the BPT
flow for this element.
Zinc Oxide Formed Anode. Wastewater is generated in the postformation
rinse operation. The implementation of countercurrent rinsing for
this operation will reduce the amount of wastewater discharged. Since
existing practice does not provide examples of this flow reduction
930
-------
technique, attainable flow reductions for this process element are
based upon the calculated flow rate requirement for the three-stage
countercurrent rinse presented in Section VII. Applying a
conservative rinse reduction ratio of 6.6 to the BPT flow of 143 I/kg,
the BAT flow for this element becomes 21.67 I/kg.
Electrodeposited Zinc Anode. Wastewater results from post-
electrodeposition and post-amalgamation rinsing operations. The
application of countercurrent rinses will reduce the flow of
wastewater from these rinsing operations after electrodeposition in a
similar fashion to the flow reduction for the zinc oxide formed anode
process element. Post amalgamation rinsing is eliminated by proper
control of amalgamation solution concentration. Hence, the BPT flow
of 3,190 I/kg is halved by eliminating one rinsing step and further
reduced by a factor of 6.6 by using three stage countercurrent
rinsing. The BAT flow for this process element is 241.7 I/kg.
Silver Powder Formed Cathode. This process element is similar to the
two previously described process elements in that wastewater is
generated as a result of rinsing operations. The flow reduction
attained through the application of countercurrent rinses is also
similar. Since this process element has only one rinsing operation
(postformation) the BAT flow is the BPT flow (196 I/kg) reduced by a
factor of 6.6, or 29.70 I/kg.
Silver Oxide Powder Formed Cathodes. The water produced by this
process element also results from rinsing operations. The attainable
effluent flow reduction through the application of countercurrent
rinses is the same as the three previously described process elements.
The BAT flow is the BPT flow (131 I/kg) reduced by a factor of 6.6, or
19.85 I/kg.
Silver Peroxide Powder Cathode. The production of silver peroxide
powder cathodes generates wastewater through spent bath dumps and
rinses. The BAT is determined by applying countercurrent rinsing to
the BPT flow of 31.4 I/kg to reduce the water use by a factor of 6.6
to 4.76 I/kg.
Nickel Impregnated Cathode. The production of nickel impregnated
cathodes and the flow reductions possible through the application of
BAT technology were previously described under the cadmium
subcategory. The BAT flow allowed for this process element is 200
I/kg as developed and discussed under the cadmium subcategory.
Cell Wash. Reduced wastewater discharge from cell washing can be
achieved through recycling of cell rinse water or by countercurrent
cell rinsing. The BAT flow for the cell wash process element is
determined by applying countercurrent rinsing to the BPT flow of 1.13
I/kg to reduce the water use by a factor of 6.6, to 0.17 I/kg.
931
-------
Electrolyte Preparation. Wastewater is generated from spills
occurring while preparing electrolyte solutions and filling cells.
The BAT flow is determined to be the median or 0.0 I/kg because it is
already achieved by half of the existing plants by proper design and
operation of filling equipment and reuse of drips and spills.
Silver Etch. Wastewater results from rinsing etched silver foil. The
countercurrent rinse flow rate calculations presented in Section VII
were used as the basis for determining attainable discharge flow rates
from rinsing after silver foil etching operations. A rinsing
efficiency factor of 6.6 is estimated and flow is reduced from 49.1
I/kg at BPT. The result of these calculations is a BAT flow basis of
7.44 I/kg for the silver etch process element.
Floor and Equipment Wash. Wastewater is generated from washing floors
and production equipment. The wastewater discharge from floor wash
(0.13 I/kg) remains unchanged from BPT. The BPT flow from equipment
wash, 7.1 I/kg can be reduced by treatment and reuse with a blowdown
at a nominal level of 10 percent of the BPT flow. With these
in-process controls the BAT flow for floor and equipment wash is 0.84
I/kg.
Silver Peroxide Production. The production of silver peroxide is
similar to silver powder production in that water is generated by
rinsing operations and the rinse flows can be reduced by the
implementation of countercurrent rinsing. The attainable flow
reductions for this process element are calculated in the same manner
as silver powder production, using a conservative rinse flow reduction
factor of 6.6. The BPT flow of 52.2 I/kg is reduced to a BAT flow of
7.91 I/kg.
Silver Powder Production. Silver powder production generates
wastewater as a result of rinses relating to this operation. The
application of countercurrent rinsing in this operation will reduce
the present rinse water flow of 21.2 I/kg. Since no examples of
countercurrent rinsing on this operation exist, estimates of flow
reductions are made based upon the calculated flow rate requirement
for a three-stage countercurrent rinse presented in Section VII. When
loose powders are rinsed, good rinse water contact and mixing can be
achieved. Consequently, a lower factor for rinsing efficiency could
be considered; however, the conservative 6.6 factor is used to
establish a BAT flow of 3.21 I/kg.
Option 2_
BAT option 2 builds on option 1 by including all of the in-process
technology used to reduce wastewater flow and improves end-of-pipe
treatment by adding a polishing filter.
932
-------
Option 3^
BAT option 3 provides some reduction in wastewater flow by eliminating
wastewater from gelled amalgam production. End-of-pipe treatment is
improved by using sulfide as the precipitation agent before settling
and filtering the wastewater. The reduced solubility of the sulfide
precipitate provides a basis of improved performance.
Option ฃ
BAT option 4 substantially revises the end-of-pipe treatment to allow
reuse of the wastewater. This is accomplished by adding reverse
osmosis after filtration and recycling the permeate. Brine from
reverse osmosis is treated using sulfide to remove metal pollutants
before discharge.
BAT Option Selection
Three technology options were originally developed and presented in
the draft development document for consideration as BAT for the zinc
subcategory. These options have been restructured into four options
to better display the application of a full range of technologies to
this subcategory. These options are somewhat modified from options
outlined in the draft development document. Most of the wastewater
generation control has been concentrated in the first opiton while the
second option adds filtration to improve effectiveness. The third and
fourth options continue to depend on sulfide precipitation for
pollutant removal.
The Agency developed quantitative estimates of the total cost and
pollutant removal benefits of each BAT option. These estimates are
based on all available data for each plant in the subcategory. As a
first step, an estimate of total raw wastewater pollutant loads and
wastewater flows from each manufacturing process element was developed
from data presented in Section V. This forms the basis for estimating
the mean raw waste used to calculate the pollutant reduction benefits
and is shown in Table X-43, (page 994). All plants and process
elements in the subcategory are taken into account in this
calculation.
Total kg/yr for each pollutant within each process element were summed
and divided by the total subcategory flow to obtain a total
subcategory mean raw waste concentration. Table X-44 (page 997)
displays the pollutant concentrations - both mg/1 and mg/kg of the
total subcategory anode weight for raw waste and after applying each
treatment option. Effluent flow after application of each treatment
option was estimated based on wastewater reduction achieved by the
option. The mass of pollutant discharged after each treatment option
was calculated by using the appropriate mean effluent concentrations
933
-------
shown in Tble VII-20 and multiplying them by the treatment option
annualized flow. The mass of pollutants discharged after application
of treatment was subtracted from the total subcategory raw waste to
determine the mass of pollutants removed by each level of control and
treatment. The results of these calculations for the total
subcategory are shown in Table X-45 (page 998) to display the
pollutant reduction of each technology option. Results for direct
dischargers only, based on reported flow and production data are shown
in Table X-46 (page 999).
An estimate of total annual compliance costs of BPT and of each BAT
option for the zinc subcategory was also prepared and is displayed in
Table X-62 (page 1008). These estimates were developed by estimating
costs for each existing direct discharge plant in the subcategory
based on reported production and wastewater flows, and summing in
dividual plant costs for each level of treatment and control. The
costs for technology options 2 and 3 are listed as being equal. The
costs of the two options are estimated to be very close (within 10%)
with option 2 slightly less expensive because of lower filter costs.
An economic impact analysis based on estimated costs for each
treatment and control option at each plant in the subcategory
indicates that there are no potential plant closures projected for any
options for direct dischargers.
Option ]_ is proposed as the selected BAT option because limitations
are achievable using technologies and practices that are currently in
use at plants in the subcategory. Also, the result of implementing
this technology is a significant reduction of toxic pollutant
discharges. For this option flow is reduced to 8.11 million 1/yr for
the subcategory and to 1.87 million 1/yr for direct dischargers. The
annual toxic pollutant removal is 5701 kg/yr for the subcategory and
1311 kg/yr for direct dischargers. For plants to comply directly with
this option, the estimated compliance capital cost is $437,000 for the
subcategory ($90,000 for direct dischargers), and annual cost is
$123,000 for the subcategory ($24,000 for direct dischargers).
Option 2_ was rejected because the technology yields small incremental
pollutant removals when compared with option 1. This option will be
considered for the final regulation however, because of the toxicity
of the pollutant mix in this subcategory. For this option flow is the
same as for option 1, but the annual toxic pollutant removal is 5708
kg/yr for the subcategory and 1313 kg/yr for the direct dischargers.
For plants to comply directly with this option, the estimated
compliance capital cost is $508,000 for the subcategory ($102,000 for
direct dischargers) and annual cost is $197,000 for the subcategory
($38,000) for direct dischargers.
Option 3> was rejected because the implementation of sulfide technology
at existing plants requires significant modification or retrofitting
934
-------
of treatment and ventilation systems within the plant in addition to
just installing the treatment equipment. Depending upon the present
configuration of the plants, including existing structures, piping and
equipment, as well as available land area, the retrofitting and
modifications may become extremely expensive. The compliance cost
estimates have accounted for the installation (and operation and
maintenance) costs for the necessary equipment that would be incursed
at a plant which incurs no additional costs for modifying existing
ventilation systems. New sources would not incur these additional
modification costs. For this option the discharge flow is reduced to
7.64 million 1/yr for the subcategory and 1.76 million 1/yr for direct
dischargers. The annual toxic pollutant removal is 5,715 kg/yr for
the subcategory, and 1,314 kg/yr for direct dischargers. As discussed
above, compliance costs are estimated as equal to the option 2 costs.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed for option 3 in the cadmium
subcategory, this technology option requires substantial retrofitting
of both production and wastewater treatment processes at existing
plants. For this option, discharge flow is reduced to 1.03 million
1/yr for the subcategory and 240,000 1/yr direct dischargers. The
annual toxic pollutant removal is 5720 kg/yr for the subcategory, and
1,315 kg/yr for direct dischargers. Estimated capital compliance
costs for plants to comply directly with this option are $656,000 for
the subcategory {$109,000 for direct dischargers), and annual costs
are $307,000 for the subcategory ($55,000 for direct dischargers).
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
In selecting pollutant parameters for BAT regulation for the zinc
subcategory, all pollutants considered for regulation in Section VI
for the subcategory (Table VI-1, page 566) were evaluated. The choice
of pollutants proposed for regulation was dependent upon the toxicity
of the pollutants, their use within the subcategory, and their
presence in the raw waste streams at treatable concentrations. The
pollutants do not have to appear in every process element or
necessarily at high concentrations in the total raw waste streams of
the plants which were sampled. Since plants in the zinc subcategory
have a variety of different combinations of process elements, the
appearance of a particular pollutant at significant concentrations in
a single process element is sufficient reason for selection.
Pollutant parameters proposed for regulation at BAT for this
subcategory are chromium, cyanide, mercury, nickel, silver, zinc and
manganese. As discussed in Section IX, nickel is regulated for the
nickel impregnated cathode and cell wash elements only, and cyanide is
regulated for the cell wash element only. Other pollutants which
appeared at lower concentrations and were considered, but not selected
for regulation at BAT, are expected to be adequately removed by the
application of the selected technology.
935
-------
The conventional pollutant parameters/ oil and grease, total suspended
solids and pH are not regulated under BAT, but are considered under
BCT.
BAT Effluent Limitations
The effluent concentrations attainable through the application of BAT
technology are displayed in Table VI1-20 under L&S technology. The
BAT mass discharge limitations for the different process elements are
calculated by multiplying these concentrations by the applicable BAT-1
flow listed in Table X-42. These BAT limitations (shown in Tables X-
47 to 61, pages 1000 to 1007) are expressed in terms of mg of pollutant
per kg of production normalizing parameter. To alleviate some of the
monitoring burden, several process elements which occur at most plants
and have the same are combined in one regulatory table. Table X-59A
(page 1006) is the combined table for Tables X-55, 57, 58, and 59. By
multiplying these limitation numbers by the production per unit time
(e.g. kg/day) within a process element, the allowable mass discharge
for that process element can be calculated in mg per unit of time.
The allowable masses for the different process elements can be summed
to determine the total allowable mass discharge for the plant.
No plant in this subcategory presently employs the selected technology
in its entirety, although most plants employ some of the identified
in-process and end-of-pipe technologies. Performance at these
facilities may be compared to that attainable at BAT both in terms of
the volume of wastewater produced and the concentrations of pollutants
present in the treated effluent, as well as the mass of pollutants
discharged.
The volumes of wastewater presently discharged from each plant in the
zinc subcategory have been compared to the flows attainable by
implementation of the selected BAT technology option. The present
discharge flows are derived from the best available data including
dcps, on-site measurements and data collection, and supplementary
contacts. The attainable flows were calculated from individual plant
production information and the individual process operation flows
shown in Table X-42. Three of the 17 plants in the subcategory for
which data are available achieve no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants. Two additional plants have indicated substantial dis-
charge flow reductions and plans for achieving zero discharge
operation. Five plants in the data base have effluent flows only
slightly above (about twice or less) the BAT technology option flow.
Since 10 plants of 17 now meet or are close to the BAT flow it may be
concluded that this part of the basis for BAT effluent limitations is
reasonable and attainable.
936
-------
As previously discussed in Section IX, present treatment practice in
the subcategory was found to be uniformly ineffective, both as a
result of the treatment technologies employed and of the manner in
which the existing systems were operated. While one plant employs
end-of-pipe treatment nominally equivalent to BAT, the system is not
operated to provide effective removal of process wastewater
pollutants. However, based on the information presented in Section
VII and on careful examination of the processes and wastewaters in
this subcategory, the BAT limitations are attainable by application of
the selected technology.
937
-------
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
ALL PROCESS WASTEWATER
AFTER IN-PROCESS FLOW
Cl
REDUCTIONS
R
O
jLxฃ^ฃ^t^
OIL
SKIMMING
;
t
EMOVAL OF
IL AND GREASE
i
^^>*>*yC>*o*^A.
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
-^
>><^S^oN
SEDIMEI
^^^^^^^^^5s
FILTRATE
~*^*~*~+*,
STATION
SLUDGE
^r
DISCHARGE
CJ
00
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
b&a&jrad
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
RECYCLE OR REUSE FOR PASTED AND PRESSED POWDER ANODE WASTEWATER
USE DRY METHODS TO CLEAN FLOORS AND EQUIPMENT
CONTROL RINSE FLOW RATES
RECIRCULATE WASTEWATER FROM AIR SCRUBBER
DRY CLEAN IMPREGNATED ELECTRODES
REDUCE CELL WASH WATER USE
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE SILVER AND CADMIUM POWDER
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE FOR SINTERED AND ELECTRODEPOSITED
ANODES AND CATHODES
FIGURE X-1. CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
ALL PROCESS WASTEWATER
vo
U)
vo
DISCHARGE
^~
REMOVAL. OF
OIL AND GREASE
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
FIGURE X-2. CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 2 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
ALL PROCESS
WASTEWATERS
AFTER IN-PROCESS
FLOW REDUCTION
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
RETURN TO __ PERMEATE
PROCESS "^ I
VO
O
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
LIME, ACID 0
ADDITION
' ^A^ป^>NyOS-^>V
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
E <=ปt=>
R CO2
SEDIMENTATION
Mjfcj^^*:^*--^
; POLISHING ''
i FILTRATION)
DISCHARGE
FILTRATE
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY: REDUCE CADMIUM POWDER REWORK
FIGURE X-3. CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 3 TREATMENT
-------
j^ ALL PROCESS
1 WASTEWATER
/ / /
x i r x
->ฃ>oCA^L>^
OIL
SKIMMING
f
1
RETURNED
TO PROCESS "*
s
BACKWASH
}
i
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
LIME, ACID OR CO2
ADDITION
t#
k^oJZc^j L^^^-^^I -v^-^-i^s^
"*" CHEMICAL^"*" "*" K HOLiSHING 2
CHEMICAL SEDIMENTATION ' Fl LTR ATION^
PRECIPITATION %^^*ฃ*$
DISTILLATE
BRINE OR REGENERANT
V
<
*
i
V,r
xfe
SLUDGE
ฃ
v^
9k
L
S
4
ION EXCHANGE OR
REVERSE OSMOSIS
i
LIQ
/*"" ^\. C ^ SLunrsF TO
1 ^ /^ ^^ ly/O 1 RECLAIM OR
FILTRATE "" V\ 1/7 .1 DISPOSAL
\>-^y i '
^-^
SLUDGE kipr.jjr r^"J,'
VAPOR
RECOMPRESSION
EVAPORATOR
(VRE)
UOR ,
. BRINE
CENTRIFUGE
I
T
DRY SOLIDS TO
DISPOSAL
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS CONTROL TECHNOLOGY: ELIMINATION OF IMPREGNATION RINSE DISCHARGE
FIGURE X-4. CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 4 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
10
ฃ*
to
CELL TESTING
WASTEWATER
FIGURE X-5. CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
RETURN TO
PROCESS
CELL TESTING
WASTEWATER
u>
RETURN TO
p
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
ROC ESS
SETTLING
s^,*^^...
HOLDING
TANK
BACKWASH
LIME
ADDITION
^*v>^xLCx^^>S
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
SEDIMENTATION
SLUDGE
POLISHING
^FILTRATION]
FILTRATE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
SLUDGE TO
RECOVERY OR
DISPOSAL
FIGURE X-6. CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 2 TREATMENT
-------
LIME AND
CARBONATE
ADDITION
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
OPEN FORMATION
DEHYDRATED - RINSES ONLY
o
BATTERY WASH
R
0
^6oO^L^
OIL
SKIMMING
1
t
EMOVAL OF
IL AND GREASE
1
k^X_A^O^>^A,
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
<=*=>
^S-A-^-A.
SEDIMEC
FILTRATE
.A^WS^.
STATION
SLUDGE
Q'
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO
RECLAIM OR
DISPOSAL
VD
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
LJ
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
LOW RATE CHARGE IN CASE
RECIRCULATE AIR SCRUBBER WATER
CONTROL SPILLS
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE ELECTRODES AFTER OPEN FORMATION
ELIMINATE PROCESS WATER FOR PLATE DEHYDRATION
WATER RINSE OF BATTERIES PRIOR TO DETERGENT WASH
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE BATTERIES OR REUSE BATTERY RINSE WATER
FIGURE X-7. LEAD SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
10
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
OPEN FORMATION - * *
BATTERY WASH J^TZ^I^C^
OIL ,
SKIMMING
\
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
LIME AND CARBONATE
ADDITION
*Uj^K_rAt_iA>i ^wS_<\ VS S^^^^^^^^^^^^^
CHEMICAL SEDIMENTATION
1 PRECIPITATION
SLUDGE
FILTRATE ~~ \\
i\'?i**ฃ'r<4~;f*i?i>) DISCHARGE
^JFILTRATION^
Wati^^'?$Siifto
"**\ O SLUDGE TO
/~\ 1 >O 1 RECLAIM OR
1 // t DISPOSAL
^^ 1 1
SLUDGE hfeVCSi*^
nrW ATFB IN
-------
Vฃ>
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
OPEN FORMATION
DEHYDRATED - RINSES ONLY
BATTERY WASH
SULFIDE
ADDITION
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
DISCHARGE
FIGURE X-9. LEAD SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 3 TREATMENT
-------
PROCESS WASTEWATER FROM:
OPEN FORMATION
vo
^
-ซ4
BATTERY WASH
,\t
SKIMMING
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
LIME AND
CARBONATE
ADDITION
RETURN TO PERMEATE
r*e*r***r?fsfs ^"^""^"^n
SULFIDE
ADDITION
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
FIGURE X-10. LEAD SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 4 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
00
CHEMICAL
STREAM A ADDITION Aw
HEAT PAPER Vy
PRODUCTION " /
WASTEWATER A-A^WA^AW*^ *^****J******.
SETTLING REDUCTION 1
(SLUDGE x
ALTERNATE
STREAM B
PROCESS
WASTEWATERS FROM:
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODE
LEAD IODIDE CATHODE
CELL TESTING ' "'
LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL '
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
LIME
ADDITION
STREAM C I /w
PROCESS WASTEWATERS 1 ^/
FROM AIR SCRUBBERS |^\>^Aป>^A^ |oS>^>J/CA^OS
1
-
i
i
LIME
ADDITION
^LJPLJI/^AI ^^^^1 1 ^
*"* ' ป " ISE Dl M EN T ATI ONl
PRECIPITATION 1 1
SLUDGE
FILTRATE \\ j
^:
SLUI
DEWAT
BACKWASH
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
IP
^ ^_A_A_Al^_A_A_A ^ Us-^-^>V^A-A-A>O ^
CHEMICAL ISEDIMENTATION!
PRECIPITATION 1 1
SLUDGE
FILTRATE ~~ ^\ |
Vi
SLUD
L.^^^^^_^J DEW ATI
^ AERATION *" CHEMICAL ^ s
AIRฃg 222? PRECIPITATION
|-^- DISCHARGE
EDIMENTATIONI
t*f?-ff3ฃW*ฃf"3$'* D|SCHARGE
TJFILTRATION^
i&iฃ&i&rS8&itiA
^\ xrM
\ L/O 1 SLUDGE TO
fl f DISPOSAL
5fSE 1 1
fc^^T^V^J
* ^^17^2^ *- DISCHARGE
^FILTRATIONk
ifetJ'A'itiis^ffcfW
JVO 1 SLUDGE TO
^/ j T DISPOSAL
GE UP^^J
SLUDGE
(SOLID WASTE REMOVAL)
FIGURE X-11. LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
STREAM A
R
P
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
ETURN TO
ROCESS
SETTLING
-^~
HOLDING
TANK
STREAM B
SOLIDS TO
RECOVERY OR
DISPOSAL
PROCESS
WASTEWATERS FROM:
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODE
LEAD IODIDE CATHODE
CELL TESTING
LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
10
STREAM C
PROCESS WASTEWATERS
FROM AIR SCRUBBERS
BACKWASH
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO DISPOSAL
FIGURE X-12. LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 2 TREATMENT
-------
STREAM A
R
P
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
ETURN TO __^
ROC ESS
SETTLING
'&&tti$ฃฃti
*ป-
HOLDING
TANK
SOLIDS TO
RECOVERY OR
STREAM B DISPOSAL
PROCESS
WASTEWATERS FROM:
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODE
LEAD IODIDE CATHODE
LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL i
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
3
1
J
LIME
ADDITIC
STREAM C 1
PROCESS WASTEWATERS I S
FROM AIR SCRUBBERS ^A^A^A^A^A^J l^A^WkljC^^
BACKWASH
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
\0 jc ,
^^^ *^T-r>jiซ_^ป_O_fX_f> ^^^ ^>_^>_<^ป_O_r>_rv>VX^ ^^^ ?\ปปป!fr!*6it*liซRTj6.!TฃS"-H ^.^^^^ niC
CHEMICAL SEDIMENTATION "4 POLISHING fj
PRECIPITATION gFILTRATION^
SLUDGE
r "\ ,^]
'-ป*! I ^^ UO 1 SLUDGE TO
FILTRATE VV /] I DISPOSAL
^^
SLUDGE UePWKW^J
DN
^
A JL >J .t^J^^^t^t^t^t^t^. H.iH**X-Sft#i>'f-?il!?3
^" AERATION "*^ r-HFMtfAt ~^" "^*"' K POLISHING ซ
AIR* ^T;;^, ^ ** CHEMICAL SEDIMENTATION fc -romTirtw'
AIRW O O O O O PRECIPITATION gFILTRATIONj^
MO O Q O O rtxtuiri i M i IWIN SU'Vfc.-S'Wi.sWr-TM
'"" ฐ B B y o^ '^ma^^^1 f IH******'!****
bHa^g^KJ
SLUDGE TO DISPOSAL
FIGURE X-1 3. LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 3 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
STREAM A
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
STREAM B
KMnO4
SILVER CHLORIDE
CATHODE PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
SPENT PROCESS SOLUTION L^^A^A^^
RINSE
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
VO
Ul
ADDITIONAL. RECOMMENDED
IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
COUNTERCURRENT CASCADE
RINSE
DISCHARGE
HOLDING
TANK
CELL. TESTING
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
STREAM C
LIME
ADDITION
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
AIR SCRUBBERS
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
FIGURE X-14. MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
STREAM A
RETURN TO
p
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTE WATER
ROC ESS
SETTLING
?3&&M8sg&
-*s->*s>V>^>s-^.
HOLDING
TANK
STREAMS
SOLIDS TO
RECOVERY OR
DISPOSAL
BACKWASH
KMnO
SILVER CHLORIDE
CATHODE PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
SPENT PROCESS SOLUTION
HOLDING
TANK
Rir
BLI
SE
SED
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
vo
Ul
to
STREAM C
SEDIMENTATION
SLUDGE
* POLISHING
FILTRATION
RECYCLE
CELL TESTING SLUDGE
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH DEWATERING
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
a
AIR SCRUBBERS
I
ซ-*^N-*LOo\^
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
i/Wk_/V_/WWlป_ซ*>-Wl
IsEDI MENTATION!
^^^^^3^^iT3i-'2&fci^^^^^
FILTRATE
SLUDGE
^(l
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
DISCHARGE
ฉฐ?
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
FIGURE X-15. MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 2 TREATMENT
-------
STREAM A
RETURN TO
p
HEAT PAPER
PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER
ROC ESS
SETTLING
s-fimssSKs
ป
HOLDING
TANK
STREAM B
SILVER CHLORIDE
CATHODE PRODUCTION
WASTEWATER .
SPENT PROCESS SOLUTION
SOLIDS TO
RECOVERY OR
DISPOSAL
BACKWASH
RINSE
Ul
CJ
STREAM C
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
[~JFmmฎsm
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH SLUDGE
PROCESS WASTEWATERS FROM:
AIR SCRUBBERS
' POLISHING f|
FILTRATION'i
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
FIGURE X-16. MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 3 TREATMENT
-------
ALL PROCESS WASTEWATER
AFTER IN-PROCESS FLOW
REDUCTION
VO
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED
IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY:
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE AMALGAMATED ZINC POWDER
RECIRCULATE AMALGAMATION AREA FLOOR WASH WATER
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE OF FORMED ZINC ELECTRODES
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE OF ELECTRODEPOSITED SILVER-POWDER
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE OF FORMED SILVER OXIDE ELECTRODES
REDUCE FLOW AND COUNTERCURRENT RINSE SILVER PEROXIDE
FLOW CONTROLS AND COUNTERCURRENT RINSE FOR IMPREGNATED NICKEL CATHODES
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE OR RINSE RECYCLE FOR CELL WASHING
ELIMINATE ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION SPILLS
COUNTERCURRENT RINSE AFTER ETCHING SILVER GRIDS
DRY CLEANUP OR WASH WATER REUSE FOR FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT
FIGURE X-17. ZINC SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 1 TREATMENT
-------
BACKWASH
ALL PROCESS WASTEWATER
AFTER IN-PROCESS FLOW v, . / f ^m ^
REDUCTION S / /
^ X_A_*^A^A^A^_
OIL
SKIMMING
U>
Ul 1 " J
01 X
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
L lp ,
i ^A^A^xL^A^A^A. ป ^
*" CHEMICAL "^SEDIMENTATION * f ^buSHmG^ ^ DISCHARGE
1 PRECIPITATION jjFILTRATION^
SLUDGE
FILTRATE ^\ ) /] ^f
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLODGE
ADDITIONAL IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY: NONE
FIGURE X-18. ZINC SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 2 TREATMENT
-------
SULFIDE
ADDITION
ALL. PROCESS WASTEWATER
REDUCTION
R
O
^6oO^^-
OIL
SKIMMING
i
t
EMOVAL OF
IL AND GREASE
I
^>S>^A^CA^S^S
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
-ปป-
A^S^N-A,
SEDIMEf
FILTRATE
^S>S^V^S_
STATION
SLUD
^r
DISCHARGE
SLUDGE TO
DISPOSAL
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
ADDITIONAL IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY: ELIMINATE WASTEWATER FROM GELLED AMALGAM
FIGURE X-19. ZINC SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 3 TREATMENT
-------
ALL PROCESS
WASTEWATERS
AFTER IN-PROCESS
FLOW REDUCTION
LIME OR ACID
ADDITION
VO
LH
SULFIDE
ADDITION
<^^**JL^ป~A.
CHEMICAL
PRECIPITATION
DISCHARGE
REMOVAL OF
OIL AND GREASE
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED IN-PROCESS TECHNOLOGY: AMALGAMATION BY DRY PROCESSES
FIGURE X-20. ZINC SUBCATEGORY BAT OPTION 4 TREATMENT
-------
TABLE X-l
Process Elements
Anodes
Pasted & Pressed Powder
Electrodeposited
Impregnated
Cathodes
vo
01 Nickel Electrodeposited
00 Nickel Impregnated
Ancillary Operations
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Floor and Equipment Wash
Employee Wash
Cadmium Powder Production
Silver Powder Production
Cadmium Hydroxide
Production
Nickel Hydroxide
Production
Median
1.0
697.
998.
569.
1720.
0.9
110.0
PROCESS ELEMENT FLOW SUMMARY
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
Flow (I/kg)
Mean
2.7
697.
998.
569.
1640.
BPT
(PSESO)
2.7
697.
998.
569
1640
3.33
0.08
2.4
1.5
5.7
1.2
4.93
0.08
12.0
1.5
65.7
21.2
4.93
0.08
12.0
1.5
65.7
21.2
0.9
110.0
0.9
110.0
0.0
35.15
200.0
33.0
200.0
0.75
0.08
0.0
1.5
6.57
3.21
0.14
16.5
BAT 2
(PSES 2)
0.0
35.15
200.0
33.0
200.0
BAT 3
(PSES 3)
0.0
5.27
30.0
4.95
30.0
BAT 4
(PSES 4)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.75
0.08
0.0
1.5
6.57
3.21
0.112
0.012
0.0
0.225
0.493
0.482
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.14
16.5
0.021
2.47
0.0
0.0
-------
TKBLE X-2
PROCESS EC0O1T WBSreWOER SUMVFOT
CADMIUM SUBCKCBQORT
ANODES
Pasted & Pressed
Powder Electrodepceited Impregnated
mg/1 kg/yr "fc/1 ^9^yr mg/1 kgfyr
Flow Vyr (106) 0.948
Pollutants
118 Cadmium 267.0 253.1
119 Chronium 0.004 0.004
121 Cyanide 3.184 3.018
122 lead 0.023 0.022
123 Mercury 0.0 0.0
124 Nickel 18.930 17.95
126 Silver NA NA
128 Zinc 0.41 0.389
Cobalt 0.0 0.0
Oil & Grease 822.0 779.0
TSS 1038.0 984.0
80.9
94.6 7653.0
0.0 0.0
0.022 1.780
0.0 0.0
0.001 0.081
0.071 5.74
NA NA
0.006 0.485
0.0 0.0
5.23 423.0
126.7 10250.0
179.623
31.7 5693.0
0.14 25.14
0.04 7.18
0.0 0.0
0.02 3.59
2.25 404.1
NA NA
0.04 7.18
0.08 14.37
2.5 449.0
204.0 36647.0
CK3HXR5
Nickel Nickel
EHedrotliyoBited Ihpregnated
mg/1 kg/yr mg/1 kg/yr
0.680
0.050 0.034
0.002 0.001
0.031 0.021
0.0 0.0
0.016 0.011
3.18 1.262
NA NA
0.0 0.0
0.101 0.069
1.667 1.134
1.667 1.134
274.2
12.98 3559.0
0.061 16.73
0.054 14.81
0.003 0.823
0.004 1.097
117.3 32164.0
NA NA
0.198 54.3
0.663 181. 8
6.80 1865.0
539.0 147794.0
ANCILLARY OPERATIONS
Electrolyte
Cell Nash Preparation
tag/I* kg/yr mg/1* kg/yr
4.71
37.2 175.2
0.073 0.344
0.045 0.212
0.006 0.028
0.006 0.028
56.4 256.6
0.024 0.113
211.0 994.0
0.410 1.931
6.42 30.24
330.0 1554.0
0.0371
37.2 1.376
0.073 0.003
0.045 0.002
0.006 0.000
0.006 0.000
56.4 2.087
0.024 0.001
211.0 7.81
0.410 0.015
6.42 0.238
330.0 12.21
vo
vo
NA - Not analyzed (treated as zero in calculations).
* Based on flow weighted mean concentrations from sampled process elements.
-------
X-2
ANCHIARf (TERATICNS
PROCESS QfMEOT WASIEWWER SUfflVRY
CADMIUM SCKME30RY
Floor and
Equipment Wash
mg/1 kg/yr
Biployee Wash
mg/1
Cadmium Powder
Production
mg/1
Silver Powder
Production
mg/1
Cadmium Hydroxide
Production
mg/1** kg/yr
Nickel Hydroxide
Production
mg/1*** kg/yr
Flow Vyr (106) 7.781
Pollutants
118 Cadmium 29.2 227.2
119 Chroniun 0.081 0.630
121 Cyanide NA NA
122 lead 0.0 0.0
123 Mercury 0.0 0.0
124 Nickel 9.08 70.6
126 Silver NA NA
128 Zinc 12.9 100.4
Cobalt 5.04 39.21
Oil & Grease NA NA
TSS NA NA
0.068
0.069 0.005
0.0 0.0
0.022 0.001
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.130 0.009
NA NA
0.160 O.OU
0.0 0.0
167.0 11.36
197.3 13.42
27.00
177.3 4787.0
0.004 0.108
0.026 0.702
0.0 0.0
0.008 0.216
0.062 1.674
NA NA
4272 115314
0.0 0.0
4.37 117.9
17.47 471.7
0.80
0.002 0.002
0.933 0.746
NA NA
0.147 O.UB
0.003 0.002
0.877 0.702
16.67 13.34
0.333 0.266
0.900 0.720
NA NA
21.0 16.8
1.6
63.3 101.3
0.19 0.304
0.06 0.096
0.0 0.0
0.001 0.002
3.300 5.28
NA NA
0.060 0.096
0.110 0.176
2.700 4.320
354.1 567.0
170.0
12.98 2207.0
0.061 10.37
0.054 9.18
0.003 0.510
0.004 0.680
117.3 19941.0
NA NA
0.198 33.66
0.663 112.7
6.80 1156.0
539.0 91630.0
748.35
32.96 24665.62
0.073 54.63
0.049 36.67
0.002 1.50
0.008 5.99
70.7 52908.35
0.018 13.47
155.8 116592.93
0.469 350.98
6.47 4841.82
387.7 290135.30
TDBVL SUBCATCQGRf
RAH WASIE
mg/1 kg/yr
NA - Not analyzed (treated as zero in calculations)*
* - Based on flow weighted mean conoentratlons from sanpled process elements*
** - Based on mean raw waste concentrations from Impregnated Anode Manufacture.
***- Based on mean raw waste concentrations from Nickel Impregnated Cathode Manufacture.
-------
vo
TABLE X-3
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
CADMIUM SUBCATEQORY
PARAMETER
FLOW (I/kg)*
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
COBALT
RAW WASTE
nปg/i
1303
32.960
0.073
0.049
0.002
0.008
70.700
0.018
155.800
0.469
OIL & GREASE 6.470
TSS 387.700
mg/kg
.740
42971.270
95.173
63.883
2.607
10.430
92174.418
23.467
203122.692
611.454
8435.198
505459.998
BPT
mg/1
(PSES 0)
mg/kg
1303.740
0.079
0.073
0.049
0.002
0.008
0.570
0.018
0.300
0.070
6.470
12.000
102.995
95.173
63.883
2.607
10.430
743.132
23.467
391.122
91.262
8435.198
15644.880
BAT 1
mg/1
178.
0.079
0.080
0.070
0.015
0.059
0.570
0.100
0.300
0.070
10.000
12.000
(PSES 1)
mg/kg
220
14.079
14.258
12.475
2.607
10.430
101.585
17.822
53.466
12.475
1782.200
2138.640
BAT 2
mg/1
178
0.049
0.070
0.047
0.015
0.036
0.220
0.070
0.230
0.050
10.000
2.600
(PSES 2)
mg/kg
.220
8.733
12.475
8.376
2.607
6.416
39.208
12.475
40.991
8.911
1782.200
463.372
BAT
mg/l
0.049
0.070
0.047
0.080
0.036
0.220
0.070
0.230
0.050
10.000
2.600
3 (PSES 3)
mg/kg
26.410
1.294
1.849
1.241
2.113
0.951
5.810
1.849
6.074
1.321
264.100
68.666
BAT 4 (PSES
mg/1
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
4)
mg/kg
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o.ooo
0.000
0.000
Normalized flow based on total stlbcategory cadmium anode weight.
-------
TABLE X-4
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
CADMIUM SUBCATBQORY - TOTAL
PARAMETER
FLOW 1/yr (106)
118 CADMIUM
119 CHRCMIUM
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
COBALT
OIL & GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CCNVEOTICNALS
TOTAL POLLU.
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
748.35
24665.62
54.63
36.67
1.50
5.99
52908.35
13.47
116592.93
350.98
4841.82
290135.29
194242.49
294977.11
489607.25
BPT & PSES 0
Removed
kg/yr
24606.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
52481.79
0.00
116368.42
298.60
0.00
281155.09
193456.71
281155.09
474910.40
Discharged
kg/yr
748.35
59.12
54.63
36.67
1.50
5.99
426.56
13.47
224.51
52.38
4841.82
8980.20
785.78
13822.02
14696.85
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
24657.54
46.45
29.51
0.00
0.00
52850.04
3.24
116562.24
343.82
3818.82
288907.69
194119.51
292726.51
487219.35
Discharged
kg/yr
102.30
8.08
8.18
7.16
1.50
5.99
58.31
10.23
30.69
7.16
1023.00
1227.60
122.98
2250.60
2387.90
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
24660.61
47.47
31.86
0.00
2.31
52885.84
6.31
116569.40
345.86
3818.82
289869.31
194171.94
293688.13
488237.79
Discharged
kg/yr
102.30
5.01
7.16
4.81
1.50
3.68
22.51
7.16
23.53
5.12
1023.00
265.98
70.55
1288.98
1369.46
BAT 3 t PSES 3
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
24664.88
53.57
35.96
0.29
5.44
52905.01
12.41
116589.44
350.22
4690.22
290095.87
194231.04
294786.09
489403.31
15.16
0.74
1.06
0.71
1.21
0.55
3.34
1.06
3.49
0.76
151.60
39.42
11.45
191.02
203.94
BAT 4 &
PSES 4
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
24665.62
54.63
36.67
1.50
5.99
52908.35
13.47
116592.93
350.98
4841.82
290135.29
194242.49
294977.11
489607.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SLUDGE GEN
4470633.08
4546037.03
4552391.04
4559114.87
4560299.05
-------
TABLE X-5
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
CADMIUM SUBCATEOORY - DIRECT DISCHARGERS
PARAMETER
FLOW 1/yr (106)
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
^> 123 MERCURY
2 124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
COBALT
OIL 6 GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
538.45
17747.32
39.31
26.38
1.08
4.31
38068.42
9.69
83890.51
252.54
3483.77
208757.06
139760.64
212240.83
352280.39
Removed
kg/yr
17704.78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
37761.50
0.00
83728.97
214.85
0.00
202295.66
139195.25
202295.66
341705.76
BPT
Discharged
kg/yr
538.45
42.54
39.31
26.38
1.08
4.31
306.92
9.69
161.54
37.69
3483.77
6461.40
565.39
9945.17
10574.63
BAT
Removed
kg/yr
17741.51
33.43
21.23
0.00
0.00
38026.46
2.33
83868.43
247.39
2747.67
207873.74
139672.16
210621.41
350562.19
1
Discharged
kg/yr
73.61
5.81
5.88
5.15
1.08
4.31
41.96
7.36
22.08
5.15
736.10
883.32
88.48
1619.42
1718.20
BAT
Removed
kg/yr
17743.72
34.16
22.92
0.00
1.66
38052.22
4.54
83873.58
248.85
2747.67
208565.67
139709.88
211313.34
351294.99
2
Discharged
kg/yr
73.61
3.60
5.15
3.46
1.08
2.65
16.20
5.15
16.93
3.69
736.10
191.39
50.76
927.49
985.40
BAT 3
BAT 4
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
17746.79
38.55
25.87
0.21
3.91
38066.02
8.93
83888.00
251.99
3374.67
208728.69
139752.41
212103.36
352133.63
10.91
0.53
0.76
0.51
0.87
0.40
2.40
0.76
2.51
0.55
109.10
28.37
8.23
137.47
146.76
Removed
kg/yr
17747.32
39.31
26.38
1.08
4.31
38068.42
9.69
83890.51
252.54
3483.77
208757.06
139760.64
212240.83
352280.39
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SLUDGE GEN
3216693.20
3270947.21
3275519.04
3280357.34
3281209.35
-------
TABLE X-6
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM
* CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
11.248
14.763
10.194
5.273
8.788
49.561
46.750
10.194
5.272
5.976
4.218
4.570
3.515
35.150
19.684
4.218
TABLE X-7
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
IMPREGNATED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
64.000
84.000
58.000
30.000
50.000
282.000
266.000
58.000
30.000
34.000
24.000
26.000
20.000
200.000
112.000
24.000
?HIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
964
-------
TABLE X-8
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL ELECTRODEPOSITED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - Ib/I,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
10.560
13.860
9.570
4.950
8.250
46.530
43.890
9.570
4.950
5.610
3.960
4.290
3.300
33.000
18.480
3.960
TABLE X-9
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
64.000
84.000
58.000
30.000
50.000
282.000
266.000
58.000
30.000
34.000
24.000
26.000
20.000
200.000
112.000
24.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
965
-------
TABLE X-10
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
* CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.240
0.315
0.218
0.113
0.188
1.058
0.998
0.218
0.113
0.128
0.090
0.098
0.075
0.750
0.420
0.090
TABLE X-ll
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CBT.LS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - Ib /1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.026
0.034
0.023
0.012
0.020
0.113
0.106
0.023
0.012
0.014
0.010
0.010
0.008
0.080
0.045
0.010
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
966
-------
TABLE X-12
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELTปS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.480
0.630
0.435
0.225
0.375
2.115
1.995
0.435
0.225
0.255
0.180
0.195
0.150
1.500
0.840
0.180
TABLE X-12A
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH, ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION, AND EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.746
0.979
0.676
0.350
0.583
3.285
3.099
0.676
0.350
0.396
0.280
0.303
0.233
2.330
1.305
0.280
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
967
-------
TABLE X-13
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
*CADMIUM 2.102 0.985
CHROMIUM 2.759 1.117
CYANIDE 1.905 0.788
LEAD 0.986 0.854
MERCURY 1.643 0.657
*NICKEL 9.264 6.570
*ZINC 8.738 3.679
*COBALT 1.905 0.788
TABLE X-14
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*SILVER
*2INC
*COBALT
1.027
1.348
0.931
0.482
0.803
4.526
1.316
4. 269
0.931
0.481
0.546
0.385
0.417
0.321
3.210
0.546
1.798
0.385
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
968
-------
TABLE X-15
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CADMIUM HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM USED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.045
0.059
0.041
0.021
0.035
0.197
0.186
0.041
0.021
0.024
0.017
0.018
0.014
0.140
0.078
0.017
TABLE X-16
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 00 0,0 00 Ib OF NICKEL
5.280
6.930
4.785
2.475
4.125
23.265
21.945
4.785
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
USED
2.475
2.805
1.980
2.145
1.650
16.500
9.240
1.980
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
969
-------
TABLE X-17
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
CALCIUM SUBCATBGOFY
PARAMETER RAW WASTE BPT (PSES 0) BAT 1 (PSES 1) BAT 2 (PSES 2)
mg/kg mg/1rag/kg mg/1 mg/kg mg/1mg/kg
FLOW (I/kg)* 24.110 24.110 24.110 0.000
116 ASBESTOS!/ 315.000 7594.650 10.352 249.587 2.243 54.079 0.000 0.000
119 CHROMIUM 61.000 1470.710 0.080 1.929 0.070 1.688 0.000 0.000
TSS 368.000 8872.480 12.000 289.320 2.600 62.686 0.000 0.000
* Normalized flow based on total weight of react ants for heat paper production.
J7 Asbestos is in millions of fibers per liter and millions of fibers per kg.
-------
TABLE X-18
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY - TOTAL
vo
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
BPT & PSES 0
BAT 1 & PSES 1
BAT 2 & PSES 2
kg/yr
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
FLOW 1/yr (106)* 0.13
116 ASBESTOSi/
119 CHROMIUM
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
40.95
7.93
47.84
7.93
47.84
55.77
39.60
7.92
46.28
7.92
46.28
54.20
0.13
1.35
0.01
1.56
0.01
1.56
1.57
Removed
kg/yr
40.66
7.92
47.50
7.92
47.50
55.42
Discharged
kg/yr
0.13
0.29
0.01
0.34
0.01
0.34
0.35
Removed
kg/yr
40.95
7.93
47.84
7.93
47.84
55.77
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SLUD3E GEN
317.73
323.83
325.64
* 100% of the total flow is for indirect dischargers.
I/ Asbestos is in trillions of fibers per year; not included in total.
-------
10
TABLE X-19
PROCESS ELEMENT FLOW SUMMARY
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
Element
Anodes and Cathodes
Leady Oxide Production
Paste Preparation and
Appl ication
Curing
Closed Formation
(In Case)
Single Fill
Double Fill
Fill and Dump
Open Formation
(Out of Case)
Dehydrated
Wet
Ancillary Operations
Battery Wash
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
No. Plants
Reporting
Data
34
95
89
99!
40
30
11
35
7
60
5
3
No. Plants
Reporting
Zero
Discharge
22
51
81
59
36
9
2
2
5
3
0
0
Median
Flow
I/kg
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.31
0.83
9.0
0.0
0.72
0.49
0.17
Mean
Flow
I/kg
0.21
0.57
0.01
0.09
1.26
1.73
18.4
4.77
1.28
0.41
0.14
BPT (PSES 0)
Flow
I/kg
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.45
0.45
9.0
0.0
0.72
0.41
0.14
BAT (PSES)
1,2 & 3
Flow
I/kg
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.36
0.0
0.36
0.0
0.14
BAT (
Flow
l/kg
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.204
0.0
0.054
0.0
0.021
plants reported they were active in the closed formation process for wet batteries, but did not
distinguish whether they used single or double fill charging. 12 of the 18 plants reported no discharge
from the formation process.
-------
TABLE X-20
NORMAL PLANT ELEMENT FLOWS
SUBCATEGOPY
PNP Equivalent..
kg/yr lead (10b)
Normal Plant Flow, 1/yr (10 )
Raw BPT (PSES) BAT (PSES)
Process Element
Leady Oxide
Produced on site
Purchased
Paste Preparation &
Application
Curing
Stacked
Controlled Room
Steam Cure
Formation
Closed Formation
Single Fill
Double Fill
Fill and Dump
Open Formation
Dehydrated
Wet
Battery Wash
With Detergent
Water Only
Floor Wash
Battery Repair
Total-Normal Plant
5.31
2.858
2.452
5.31
5.31
3.976
0.701
0.632
5.310
3.950
0.818
2.691
.441
1.359
1.311
0.048
0.282
4.566
0.323
0.124
0.60
0
3.027
0
0
0.006
0.074
3.391
0.763
24.122
0.229
0.361
5.844
0.132
0.017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.211
0.198
11.80
0
0.203
3.287
0.132
0.017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.783
0
0.102
0
0
0.017
5.31
38.619
16.846
1.902
973
-------
TABLE X-21
SUtARY GF TREATHENT EFFECTIVENESS
LEAD SUBCAT030RY
PARAMETER
FLOW (I/kg)*
114 ANTIMONY
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
IRON
OIL & GREASE
TSS
RAW
ซg/i
0.050
0.004
0.196
0.200
149.100
0.001
0.145
0.014
0.347
12.360
41.700
882.000
WASTE
gAg
7.273
0.364
0.029
1.426
1.455
1084.404
0.007
1.055
0.102
2.524
89.894
303.284
6414.786
BPT
g/i
0.050
0.009
0.080
0.458
0.120
0.002
0.332
0.032
0.300
0.410
10.000
12.000
(PSES 0)
gAg
3.173
0.159
0.029
0.254
1.453
0.381
0.006
1.053
0.102
0.952
1.301
31.730
38.076
BAT
g/i
0.050
0.079
0.080
0.580
0.120
0.017
0.570
0.100
0.3OO
0.410
10.000
12.000
1 (PSES 1)
gAg
0.358
0.018
0.028
0.029
0.208
0.043
0.006
0.204
0.036
0.107
0.147
3.580
4.296
BAT 2 (PSES
g/i
0.358
0.034
0.049
0.070
0.390
0.080
0.017
0.220
0.070
0.230
0.280
10.000
2.600
2)
gAg
0.012
0.018
0.025
0.140
0.029
0.006
0.079
0.025
0.082
0.100
3.580
0.931
BAT
mg/i
0.034
0.010
0.050
0.050
0.010
0.017
0.050
0.050
0.010
0.279
10.000
2.601
3 (PSES 3)
ปgAg
0.358
0.012
0.004
0.018
0.018
0.004
0.006
0.018
0.018
0.004
0.100
3.580
0.931
BAT 4
mg/1
0.034
0.010
0.050
0.050
0.010
0.034
0.050
0.050
0.010
0.280
10.000
2.600
(PSES 4)
gAg
0.054
0.002
0.001
0.003
0.003
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.003
0.001
0.015
0.540
0.140
* Normalized flow based on total subcategory lead weight.
-------
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BPT & PSES 0
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
TABU! X-22
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LEAD SUBCATBSORY - NORMAL PLANT
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Removed
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 3 fc PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 4 & PSES 4
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
10
FLOW 1/yr (106) 38.62
16.85
1.90
114 ANTIMONY
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
1.93
0.15
7.57
7.72
5758.24
0.04
5.60
0.54
13.40
IRON 477.34
OIL & GREASE 1610.45
TSS 34062.84
1.09
0.00
6.22
0.00
5756.22
0.00
0.00
0.00
8.34
470.43
1441.95
33860.64
0.84
0.15
1.35
7.72
2.02
0.04
5.60
0.54
5.06
6.91
168.50
202.20
1.83
0.00
7.42
6.62
5758.01
0.00
4.52
0.35
12.83
476.56
1591.45
34040.04
0.10
0.15
0.15
1.10
0.23
0.04
1.08
0.19
0.57
0.78
19.00
22.80
1.87
0.06
7.44
6.98
5758.09
0.00
5.18
0.41
12.96
476.81
1591.45
34057.90
1.90
1.90
0.29
0.06
0.09
0.13
0.74
0.15
0.04
0.42
0.13
0.44
0.53
19.00
4.94
1.87
0.13
7.47
7.62
5758.22
0.00
5.50
0.44
13.38
476.81
1591.45
34057.90
0.06
0.02
0.10
0.10
0.02
0.04
0.10
0.10
0.02
0.53
19.00
4.94
1.92
0.15
7.56
7.71
5758.24
0.03
5.59
0.53
13.40
477.26
1607.55
34062.09
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.08
2.90
0.75
TOXIC METALS 5795.19 5771.87 23.32 5791.58 3.61 5792.99
CONVENTIONAIS 35673.29 35302.59 370.70 35631.49 41.80 35649.35
TOTAL POLLU. 41945.82 41544.89 400.93 41899.63 46.19 41919.15
2.20
23.94
26.67
5794.63
35649.35
41920.79
0.56
23.94
25.03
5795.13
35669.64
41942.03
0.06
3.65
3.79
SLUDGE GEN
252594.23
254609.94
254732.70
254755.93
254869.27
-------
10
^J
crป
TABLE X-23
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LEAD SUBCATBGORY - TOTAL
PARAMETER
FLOW 1/yr (106)
114 ANTIMONY
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
IRON
OIL & GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVEMTICNAIS
TOTAL POLLU.
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
7105.90
355.29
28.42
1392.76
1421.18
1059489.69
7.11
1030.36
99.48
2465.75
87828.92
296316.03
6267403.80
1066290.04
6563719.83
7717838.79
BPT
Removed
kg/yr
200.28
0.00
1144.75
0.00
1059117.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
1535.72
86557.88
265315.03
6230202.60
1061998.43
6495517.63
7644073.94
& PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
3100.10
155.01
28.42
248.01
1421.18
372.01
7.11
1030.36
99.48
930.03
1271.04
31001.00
37201.20
4291.61
68202.20
73764.85
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
337.80
0.79
1364.78
1218.31
1059447.72
0.00
830.99
64.50
2360.82
87685.51
292818.33
6263206.56
1065625.71
6556024.89
7709336.11
& PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
349.77
17.49
27.63
27.98
202.87
41.97
7.11
199.37
34.98
104.93
143.41
3497.70
4197.24
664.33
7694.94
8502.68
BAT 2
Removed
kg/yr
343.40
11.28
1368.28
1284.77
1059461.71
0.00
953.41
75.00
2385.30
87730.98
292818.33
6266494.40
1065883.15
6559312.73
7712926.86
& PSES 2
Discharged
kg/yr
349.77
11.89
17.14
24.48
136.41
27.98
7.11
76.95
24.48
80.45
97.94
3497.70
909.40
406.89
4407.10
4911.93
BAT 3
Removed
kg/yr
343.40
24.92
1375.27
1403.69
1059486.19
0.00
1012.87
81.99
2462.25
87730.98
292818.33*
6266494.40
1066190.58
6559312.73
7713234.29
& PSES 3
Discharged
kg/yr
349.77
11.89
3.50
17.49
17.49
3.50
7.11
17.49
17.49
3.50
97.94
3497.70
909.40
99.46
4407.10
4604.50
BAT 4
Removed
kg/yr
353.50
27.89
1390.12
1418.54
1059489.16
5.32
1027.72
96.84
2465.22
87814.15
295788.43
6267266.62
1066274.31
6563055.05
7717143.51
& PSES 4
Discharged
kg/yr
52.76
1.79
0.53
2.64
2.64
0.53
1.79
2.64
2.64
0.53
14.77
527.60
137. IB
15.73
664.78
695.28
SLUDGE GEN
46476208.11
46847038.29
46869627.09
46873967.90
46894756.09
-------
TABLE X-24
POLLUTANT FEDUCTION BENEFITS OP CONTROL SYSTEMS
LEAD SUBCATBQORY - DIRECT DISCHARGERS
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
FLOW 1/yr (106) 852.71
114 ANTIMONY
118 CAIHIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
J24 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
IRON
OIL & GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
GONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POIJJJ.
42.64
3.41
167.13
170.54
127139.06
0.85
123.64
11.94
295.89
10539.50
35558.01
752090.22
127955.10
787648.23
926142.83
BPT
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
24.04
0.00
137.37
0.00
127094.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
184.29
10386.98
31837.91
747626.10
127440.12
779464.01
917291.11
372.01
18.60
3.41
29.76
170.54
44.64
0.85
123.64
11.94
111.60
152.52
3720.10
4464.12
514.98
8184.22
8851.72
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
40.54
0.09
163.77
146.20
127134.02
0.00
99.72
7.74
283.30
10522.29
35138.31
751586.58
127875.38
786724.89
925122.56
Discharged
kg/yr
41.97
2.10
3.32
3.36
24.34
5.04
0.85
23.92
4.20
12.59
17.21
419.70
503.64
79.72
923.34
1020.27
BAT 2
Removed
kg/yr
41.21
1.35
164.19
154.17
127135.70
0.00
114.41
9.00
286.24
10527.75
35138.31
751981.10
127906.27
787119.41
925553.43
Discharged
kg/yr
41.97
1.43
2.06
2.94
16.37
3.36
0.85
9.23
2.94
9.65
11.75
419.70
109.12
48.83
528.82
589.40
BAT
3
Removed Discharged
Wyr kg/yr
41.21
2.99
165.03
168.44
127138.64
0.00
121.54
9.84
295.47
10527.75
35138.31
751981.10
127943.16
787119.41
925590.32
41.97
1.43
0.42
2.10
2.10
0.42
0.85
2.10
2.10
0.42
11.75
419.70
109.12
11.94
528.82
552.51
BAT
Removed 1
kg/yr
42.42
3.35
166.01
170.22
127139.00
0.63
123.32
11.62
295.83
10537.73
35494. 71
752071.76
127953.20
7B756n.47
926059.40
4
Oi sdvirge'l
kg/yr
6.33
0.22
O.O6
0.32
0.12
0.06
0.22
0.32
0.32
0.06
1.77
63.30
16.46
1.9O
79.76
83.43
SLUDGE GEN
5577158.61
5621658.10
5624368.64
5624889.39
5627.183.77
-------
TABLE X-25
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
OPEN FORMATION - DEHYDRATED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
*IRON
0.286
0.435
0.571
2.584
0.204
0.340
1.918
0.558
1.809
1.673
0.122
0.204
0.231
1.360
0.177
0.136
1.360
0.231
0.762
0.857
TABLE X-26
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BATTERY WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
*IRON
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIC
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.076
0.115
0.151
0.684
0.054
0.090
0.508
0.148
0.479
0.443
3NS
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
USED
Ib OF LEAD USED
0.032
0.054
0.061
0.360
0.047
0.036
0.360
0.061
0.202
0.227
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
978
-------
TABLE X-27
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BATTERY REPAIR
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY 0.029 0.013
CADMIUM 0.045 0.021
CHROMIUM 0.059 0.024
*COPPER 0.266 0.140
*LEAD 0.021 0.018
MERCURY 0.035 0.014
NICKEL 0.197 0.140
SILVER 0.057 0.024
ZINC 0.186 0.078
*IRON 0.172 0.088
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
979
-------
TABLE X-28
POLLUTANT REDUCTIGtt BENEFITS OF CONTROL OPTIONS
LECIANCHE SUBCATEGORY
RAW WASTE
BPT & BAT (PSES)
vo
00
o
Flow 1/yr (106)
I/kg
POLLUTANTS
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
Toxic Metals
Convent ionals
All Pollutants
ng/i
0.090
0.053
0.409
0.466
0.101
13.40
1.212
0.086
317.5
69.3
115.0
2,536.
0.758
mg/kg
0.068
0.040
0.310
0.353
0.076
10.16
0.919
0.065
240.7
52.5
87.2
1,922.
16.71
kg/yr
1.503
0.881
6.84
7.78
1.684
223.9
20.25
1.435
5,306.
1,158.
1,922.
42,369.
5,570.
44,291.
51,019.
0.0
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
1.503
0.881
6.84
7.78
1.684
223.9
20.25
1.435
5,306.
1,158.
1,922.
42,369.
5,570.
44,291.
51,019.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sludge Generated
294,166.
-------
CO
TABLE X-29
PROCESS ELEMENT FLOW SUMMARY
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
Flow (I/kg)
Process Element Median Mean HPT (PSES) BAT (PSES)
Cathodes
Lead Iodide
Iron Disulf ide
Ancillary Operations
Heat Paper Production
Lithium Scrap Disposal
Cell Testing
Cell Wash
Air Scrubbers
Floor & Equipment Wash
63.08
7.54
24.1
nil.
0.014
0.929
10.59
0.094
63.08
7.54
115.4
nil.
0.014
0.929
10.59
0.094
63.08
7.54
24.1
0.014
0.0
10.59
0.094
63.08
7.54
0.0
0.014
0.0
10.59
0.094
-------
10
00
TABLE X-30
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
mg/1
mg/kg
BPT
mg/i
(PSES 0)
rag/kg
BAT 1 (PSES 1)
mg/i
mg/kg
BAT 2 (PSES 2) BAT 3 (PSES 3)
mg/i
mg/kg
mg/i
mg/kg
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLOW (I/kg)*
116 ASBESTOS!/
119 CHROMIUM
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COLBALT
IRON
TSS
24.
315.000
61.000
368.000
110
7594
1470
8872
.650
.710
.480
24
10.352
0.080
0.120
0.300
0.070
0.410
12.000
.110
249.587
1.929
2.893
7.233
1.688
9.885
289.320
24
2.243
0.070
0.080
0.230
0.050
0.280
2.600
.110
54.079
1.688
1.929
5.545
1.206
6.751
62.686
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
CATHODE AND ANCILLARY OPERATIONS
FLOW (I/kg)**
116 ASBESTOSi/
119 CHROMIUM
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COBALT
IRON
COD
TSS
0.
6.440
0.781
4.880
0.464
0.175
54.153
1424.242
43.279
575
3
0
2
0
0
31
818
24
.703
.449
.806
.267
.101
.138
.939
.885
0
6.440
0.080
0.120
0.300
0.070
0.410
10.000
12.000
.575
3.703
0.046
0.069
0.173
0.040
0.236
5.750
6.900
0
2.24
0.070
0.080
0.230
0.050
0.280
10.000
2.600
.575
1.290
0.040
0.046
0.132
0.029
0.161
5.750
1.495
0.575
2.243
0.070
0.080
0.230
0.050
0.280
10.000
2.600
1.290
0.040
0.046
0.132
0.029
0.161
5.750
1.495
2.243
0.070
0.080
0.230
0.050
0.280
10.000
2.600
0.575
1.290
0.040
0.046
0.132
0.029
0.161
5.750
1.495
AIR SCRUBBER WASTEWATERS
FLOW (I/kg)** 10.590 10.590 10.590
TSS 1208.750 128O0.663 12.000 127.080 12.000 127.080
* Normalized flow based on total weight of reactants.
I/ Asbestos is millions of fibers per liter and millions of fibers per kilogram.
** Normalized flow based on process element (s) battery weight.
10.590
12.000 127.080
10.590
2.600
27.534
-------
TABLE X-31
POTUJTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OP CONTROL SYSTEMS
LTTKTUM SUBCATBGORY
VO
00
U>
PARAMETER RAW HASTE
kg/yr
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.04
116 ASBESTOS!/ 12. 60
119 CHROMIUM 2.44
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COBALT
IRON
TSS 14.72
CATHODE AND ANCILLARY OPERATIONS
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.21
lie ASBESTOS!/ 1.35
119 CHROMIUM 0.16
122 LEAD 1.02
128 ZINC 0.10
COBALT 0.04
IRON 11.37
COD 299.09
TSS 9.09
AIR SCRUBBER WASTEHATERS
HPT f,
Renewed
kg/yr
12.19
2.44
(-0.005)
(-0.010)
(-0.002)
(-0.014)
14.24
0.00
0.14
0.995
0.050
0.032
11.294
296.99
6.57
PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
0.04
0.41
0.00
0.005
0.010
0.002
0.014
0.48
0.21
1.35
0.02
0.025
0.050
0.008
0.076
2.10
2.52
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Renewed
kg/yr
12.51
2.44
(-0.003)
(-0.008)
(-0.002)
(-0.010)
14.62
0.88
0.15
1.003
0.058
0.032
11.320
296.99
8.54
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.11 0.11
TSS 132.96 131.64 1.32 131.64
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
Discharged
kg/yr
0.04
0.09
0.00
0.003
0.008
0.002
0.010
0.10
0.21
0.47
0.01
0.017
0.042
0.008
0.050
2.10
0.55
0.11
1.32
Removed
kg/yr
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Disciiarged
12.60
2.44
14.72
0.88
0.15
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
8.54
131.64
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
0.55
0.11
1.32
HAT_3
Removerf
kg/yr
fc PSES 3
Di sctvargnd
kg/yr
12.60
2.44
14.72
0.88
0.15
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
R.54
132.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
0.21
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
O.IJ
0.79
-------
TABLE X-31
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LITHIUM SUBCATBQORY
PARAMETER
RAW HASTE
kg/yr
BPT & PSES 0
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 3 & PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
VO
00
LITHIUM SUBCATBGORY SUMMARY
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.36
0.36
0.36
0.32
116 ASBESTOS I/
119 CHROMIUM
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COBALT
IRON
COD
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
13.95
2.60
1.02
0.10
0.04
11.37
299.09
156.77
3.72
156.77
470.99
12.19
2.58
0.99
0.04
0.03
11.28
296.99
152.45
3.61
152.45
464.36
1.76
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.01
0.09
2.10
4.32
0.11
4.32
6.63
13.39
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
154.80
3.64
154.80
466.77
0.56
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
1.97
0.08
1.97
4.22
13.48
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
154.90
3.64
154.90
466.87
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
1.87
0.08
1.87
4.12
13.48
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
155.93
3.64
155.93
467.90
0.32
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
O.R4
0.08
0.84
3.09
SLUDGE GEN
922.02
934.41
934.91
940.06
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
2/ For direct dischargers only multiply totals by 0.01.
For indirect dischargers only multiply totals by 0.99.
-------
TABLE X-32
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
LEAD IODIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD
CHROMIUM 26.494 10.724
LEAD 9.462 8.200
ZINC 83.896 35.325
COBALT 18.293 7.570
IRON 77.588 39.740
TABLE X-33
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF IRON DISULFIDE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF IRON DISULFIDE
CHROMIUM 3.167 1.282
LEAD 1.131 0.980
ZINC 10.028 4.222
COBALT 2.187 0.905
IRON 9.274 4.750
985
-------
TABLE X-34
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH, CKT.T. TESTING, AND LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CKT,.T>S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELTS PRODUCED
CHROMIUM 0.045 0.018
LEAD 0.016 0.014
ZINC 0.144 0.060
COBALT 0.031 0.013
IRON 0.133 0.068
986
-------
00
TABLE X-35
PROCESS ELEMENT FLOW SUMMARY
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
Flow (1/kg)
Process Element Median Mean BPT (PSES) BAT (PSES)
Cathodes
Silver Chloride
(Chemically Reduced)
Silver Chloride
(Electrolytic)
Ancillary Operations
Heat Paper Production
Cell Testing
Floor & Equipment Wash
Air Scrubbers
4915.
145.
24.1
52.6
0.094
206.5
4915.
145.
115.4
52.6
0.094
206.5
2458.
145.
24.1
52.6
0.094
206.5
81.9
145.
0.0
52.6
0.094
206.5
-------
vo
00
00
TABLE X-36
Sl*MARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
MAGNESIUM SUBCATBQORY
PARAMETER
RAW
mg/i
WASTE
mg/kg
BPT (PSES 0)
mg/1
mg/kg
BAT 1
mg/1
(PSES 1)
mg/kg
BAT 2
mg/1
(PSES 2)
mg/kg
BAT 3
mg/1
(PSES 3)
mg/kg
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLCW (I/kg)*
116 ASBESTOS I/
119 CHROMIUM
TSS
CELL TESTING AND
FLOW (I/kg)*
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
TSS
24
315.000
61.000
368.000
.110
7594.650
1470.710
8872.480
10.352
0.080
12.000
24.110
249.587
1.929
289.320
24
2.243
0.070
2.600
.110
54.079
1.688
62.686
0
0.000
0.000
0.000
.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0
0.000
0.000
0.000
.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
52
1.220
0.110
14.600
1.947
828.000
.700
64.294
5.797
769.420
102.607
43635.600
0.120
0.110
0.100
0.410
12.000
52.700
6.324
5.797
5.270
21.607
632.400
52
0.120
0.110
0.100
0.410
12.000
.700
6.324
5.797
5.270
21.607
632.400
52
0.080
0.110
0.070
0.280
2.600
.700
4.216
5.797
3.689
14.756
137.020
52
0.080
0.110
0.070
0.280
2.600
.700
4.216
5.797
3.689
14.756
137.020
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODE PRODUCTION
FLOW (I/kg)*
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
COD
TSS
AIR SCRUBBERS
844
0.051
0.051
0.248
0.560
140.000
0.705
.000
43.044
43.044
209.312
472.640
118160.000
595.020
0.089
0.089
0.100
0.410
10.000
1.230
483.900
43.044
43.044
48.390
198.399
4839.000
595.020
135
0.120
0.317
0.100
0.410
10.000
4.382
.800
16.296
43.044
13.580
55.678
1358.000
595.020
135
0.080
0.220
0.070
0.280
10.000
2.600
.800
10.864
29.876
9.506
38.024
1358.000
353.080
135
0.080
0.220
0.070
0.280
10.000
2.600
.800
10.864
29.876
9.506
38.024
1358.000
353.080
FLOW (I/kg)* 206.500 206.500 206.500
TSS 1208.750 249606.875 12.000 2478.000 12.000 2478.000
* Normalized flow based on weight of process element(s) production normalizing parameters.
I/ Asbestos is millions of fibers per liter and millions of fibers per kilogram.
206.500
12.000 2478.000
206.500
2.600
536.900
-------
TABLE X-37
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
VO
00
VO
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE BPT & PSES 0
kg/yr
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Removed Discharged Removed
kg/yr kg/yr kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr
116 ASBESTOS
119 CHROMIUM
TSS
(106) 2.60
I/ 819.00
158.60
956.80
792.08
158.39
925.60
2.60
26.92
0.21
31.20
813.17
158.42
950.04
2.60
5.83
0.18
6.76
CELL TESTING AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
FLOW 1/yr
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
TSS
(106) 0.11
0.13
0.01
1.61
0.21
91.08
0.12 0.01
0.00
1.60
0.16
89.76
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.05
1.32
0.12
0.00
1.60
0.16
89.76
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.05
1.32
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODE PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
COD
TSS
AIR SCRUBBERS
FLOW 1/yr
TSS
(106) 0.75
0.04
0.04
0.19
0.42
105.00
0.53
(106) 0.45
543.94
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.24
100.70
0.00
538.54
0.43
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.18
4.30
0.53
0.45
5.40
0.03
0.00
0.18
0.37
103.80
0.00
538.54
0.12
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.05
1.20
0.53
0.45
5.40
BAT 2
Removed
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
956.80
0.12
0.00
1.60
0.18
90.79
0.03
0.01
0.18
0.39
103.80
0.22
538.54
& PSES 2
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.29
0.12
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.03
1.20
0.31
0.45
5.40
BAT 3
Removed
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
956.80
0.12
0.00
1.60
0.18
90.79
0.03
0.01
0.18
0.39
103.80
0.22
542.77
& PSES 3
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.29
0.12
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.03
1.20
0.31
0.45
1.17
}J Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
-------
10
vo
o
TABLE X-37
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
MAGNESIUM SUBCATBQORY
BAT 2 & PSES 2
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BPT
Removed
fcg/yr
& PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT
Removed
kg/yr
1 & PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
MAGNESIUM SUBCATBSORY SUMMARY iJ
FLOW 1/yr (106)
116 ASBESTOS I/
119 CHROMIUM
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
COD
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVEWriONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
3.91
819.00
158.60
0.17
0.05
1.80
0.63
105.00
1592.35
160.62
1592.35
1858.60
792.08
158.39
0.12
0.00
1.75
0.40
100.70
1553.90
160.26
1553.90
1815.26
3.59
26.92
0.21
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.23
4.30
38.45
0.36
38.45
43.34
813.17
158.42
0.15
0.00
1.78
0.53
103.80
1578.34
160.35
1578.34
1843.02
3.28
5.83
0.18
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.10
1.20
14.01
0.27
14.01
15.58
SLUDGE GEN
9514.35
9638.83
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
2/ For direct dischargers only multiply totals by 0.05.
For indirect dischargers only multiply totals by 0.95.
Removed
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
0.15
0.01
1.78
0.57
103.80
1586.35
160.54
1586.35
1851.26
9681.63
Discharged
kg/yr
0.68
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.06
1.20
6.00
0.08
6.00
7.34
BAT 3 & PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
0.15
0.01
1.78
0.57
103.80
1590.58
160.54
1590.58
2674.49
13797.78
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.06
1.20
1.77
0.08
1.77
3.11
-------
TABLE X-38
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - CHEMICALLY REDUCED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
LEAD 368.700 319.540
NICKEL 3465.780 2458.000
SILVER 1007.780 417.860
IRON 3023.340 1548.540
COD 122900.000 59975.200
TABLE X-39
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - ELECTROLYTIC
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
LEAD 21.750 18.850
NICKEL 204.450 145.000
SILVER 59.450 24.650
IRON 178.350 91.350
COD 7250.000 3538.000
991
-------
TABLE X-40
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
LEAD 7.890 6.838
NICKEL 74.166 52.600
SILVER 21.566 8.942
IRON 64.698 33.138
COD 2630.000 1283.440
TABLE X-41
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
LEAD 0.014 0.012
NICKEL 0.133 0.094
SILVER 0.039 0.016
IRON 0.116 0.059
COD 4.700 2.294
992
-------
TABLE X-42
Process Element
Anodes
Zinc Powder-Wet Amalgated
Zinc Powder-Gelled Amalgam
Zinc Oxide Powder-Pasted or
Pressed, Reduced
Zinc Electrodeposited
Cathodes
Silver Powder Pressed and
Electrolytically Oxidized
Silver Oxide Powder - Thermally
Reduced or Sintered,
Electrolytically Formed
Silver Peroxide Powder
Nickel Impregnated
Ancillary Operations
Cell Wash
Electrolyte Preparation
Silver Etch
Mandatory Employee Wash
Reject Cell Handing
Floor & Equipment Wash
Silver Peroxide Production
Silver Powder Production
PROCESS ELEMENT FLOW SUMMARY
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
Flow (I/kg)
Median
2.2
0.68
117.
3190.
Mean
3.8
0.68
143.
3190.
BPT
3.8
0.68
143.
3190.
BAT 1&2
(PSES1&2)
0.55
0.068
21.67
241.7
BAT 3
(PSF.S 3)
0.55
0.0
21.67
241.7
BAT 4
(PSES 4)
0.0
0.0
3.251
36.26
196.
196.
196.
29.70
29.70
4.45
131.
12.8
1720.
0.34
0.0
49.1
0.27
0.002
7.23
52.2
21.2
131.
31.4
1640.
1.13
0.12
49.1
0.27
0.01
7.23
52.2
21.2
131.
31.4
1640.
1.13
0.12
49.1
0.27
0.01
7.23
52.2
21.2
19.85
4.76
200.0
0.17
0.0
7.44
0.27
0.01
0.84
7.91
3.21
19.85
4.76
200.0
0.17
0.0
7.44
0.27
0.01
0.84
7.91
3.2]
2.978
0.714
30.0
0.026
0.0
1.116
0.041
0.002
0.126
1,187
0.482
-------
TKBLE X-43
MANUERC1URING EXMNT WftSTEWVTCR SUMARY
ZINC SUBCATB30K5r
ANCDES
Zinc Powder
Wet Amalgamated
mg/1
Zinc Powder
Gelled Amalgamated
mg/1 kg/yr
Zinc Cbd.de Powder
Pressed & Reduced
mg/1
Zinc
Electrodeposited
mg/1
Flow 1/yr (106) 5.60
Pollutants
115 Arsenic 0.050 0.280
118 Cartniun 0.001 0.006
119 Qironiun 0.068 0.381
120 Ccfper 0.014 0.078
121 Cyanide 0.005 0.028
122 Lead 0.0 0.0
123 Mercury 0.453 2.537
124 Nickel 0.0 0.0
125 Selenium 0.0 0.0
126 Silver 0.009 0.050
128 Zinc 301.8 1690.
Aluminun 0.0 0.0
Iron NA NA
Manganese 0.043 0.241
Oil & Grease 9.2 51.5
TSS 12.00 67.2
0.475
0.512 0.243
0.058 0.028
0.025 0.012
0.344 0.163
0.002 0.001
0.017 0.008
0.595 0.283
0.006 0.003
0.063 0.030
0.004 0.002
488.1 231.8
3.13 1.487
0.522 0.248
1.774 0.843
14.60 6.94
282.6 134.2
4.86
0.047 0.228
0.044 0.214
0.021 0.102
0.303 1.473
NA NA
0.073 0.355
0.069 0.335
0.018 0.087
0.0 0.0
0.098 0.476
46.3 225.0
0.160 0.778
NA NA.
0.004 0.019
NA NA
57.0 277.0
15.60
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.012 0.187
0.013 0.203
0.007 0.109
0.015 0.234
14.71 229.5
0.003 0.047
0.0 0.0
0.175 2.730
12.26 191.3
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
4.233 66.0
7.83 122.1
7.90
0.022 0.174
0.043 0.340
2.323 18.35
2.010 15.88
NA NA
0.342 2.702
0.034 0.269
0.188 1.485
0.0 0.0
1.904 15.04
64.7 511.
0.888 7.02
NA NA
0.016 0.126
NA NA
143.8 1136.
0.066
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.009 0.001
0.001 0.000
0.003 0.000
0.0 0.0
0.017 0.001
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
8.50 0.561
0.014 0.001
0.175 0.012
NA NA
0.0 0.0
10.65 0.703
3.55 0.234
CAQHCCES
Silver Powder
Electro. Gbddized
mg/1
Silver Cfecide Powder
Electro. Ftorraed
mg/1
kg/yr
-------
TMLB X-43
Hflฎnป WVSTOttlER SWART
ZINC SUBCKEEQOnr
CAOTODBS
Silver Peroxide
Powder
mg/1 kg/yr
Impregnated
Nickel
mg/1
ANCH1AFY ttBRMICNS
Cell Wash
kg/yr
Electrolyte
Preparation
mg/1
Silver Etch
mg/1
Reject GeU
Handling
mg/1 kg/yr
Flew Vyr (106) 0.230
Pollutants
115 Arsenic 0.0 0.0
118 Cadmiun 2.905 0.668
119 Chromium 0.119 0.027
120 Ccfper 0.003 0.001
121 Cyanide 0.007 0.002
122 lead 0.0 0.0
123 Mercury 0.007 0.002
124 Nickel 0.002 0.001
125 Selenium 0.0 0.0
126 Silver 43.40 9.98
128 Zinc 0.136 0.031
Aluminum 0.890 0.205
Iron NA NA
Manganese 0.0 0.0
Oil & Grease 16.0 3.680
TSS 459.5 105.7
*
MA
12.98
0.061
NA
0.054
0.003
0.004
117.3
NA
NA
0.198
NA
NA
NA
6.80
539.0
19.11
0.007 0.134
0.047 0.898
77.1 1473.
0.254 4.854
2.208 42.19
0.015 0.287
1.019 19.47
4.967 94.9
0.015 0.287
0.203 3.879
9.99 190.9
0.028 0.535
NA NA
15.89 303.6
72.2 1380
40.3 770
1.26
1 i
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
0.040 0.050
0.220 0.277
i i
0.790 0.995
19.20 24.19
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
NA NA
70.0 88.2
0.003
0.0 0.0
0.040 0.000
0.009 0.000
0.088 0.000
0.010 0.000
0.047 0.000
0.009 0.000
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
36.30 0.109
1.060 0.003
0.65 0.002
NA NA
0.013 0.000
0.0 0.0
7.0 0.021
0.022
0.147 0.003
0.006 0.000
0.030 0.001
1.539 0.034
0.055 0.001
0.100 0.002
4.710 0.104
0.207 0.005
NA NA
0.898 0.020
396.8 8.73
106.0 2.332
0.565 0.012
0.159 0.003
12.76 0.281
857 18.85
10
Ul
Negligable Flew.
Invalid Analysis.
-------
TBHtE X-43
MANUFACTURING HZM0W WftSTEWOER SUMMARY
ZINC SUBCKEEBGRY
ANCHIARY OPERATIONS
Equipment Wash
mg/1 kg/yr
Floor Wash
mg/1
Qrployee
Wash
mg/1
Silver Powder
Production
mg/1 kgfyr
Silver Peroxide
Powder
mg/1 kg/yr
Flow Vyr (106) 1.180
Pollutants
115 Arsenic 0.049 0.058
118 Cadmium 0.062 0.073
119 Chromium 0.006 0.007
120 Copper 0.024 0.028
121 Cyanide NA NA
122 Lead 0.002 0.002
123 Marcury I/ 0.194 0.229
124 Nickel 0.072 0.085
125 Selenium 0.030 0.035
126 Silver 0.336 0.396
128 Zinc 2.971 3.506
Aluminum 0.041 0.048
Iron NA NA
Manganese 0.028 0.033
Oil & Grease NA NA
TSS 82.4 97.2
0.240
0.0 0.0
0.040 0.010
0.350 0.084
0.230 0.055
NA NA
4.130 0.991
I I
0.380 0.091
0.0 0.0
49.50 11.88
600 144.0
5.83 1.399
NA NA
0.340 0.082
NA NA
2800 672
2.610
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.022 0.057
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
0.113 0.347
NA NA
NA NA
0.228 0.595
17.43 45.49
90.8 237.0
0.800
0.0 0.0
0.002 0.002
0.933 0.746
6.41 5.13
NA NA
0.147 0.118
0.003 0.002
0.877 0.702
0.0 0.0
16.67 13.34
0.333 0.266
5.29 4.232
NA NA
0.096 0.077
NA NA
21.00 16.80
0.365
5.91 2.157
0.0 0.0
0.09 0.033
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
0.037 0.014
0.0 0.0
4.800 1.752
0.770 0.281
0.075 0.027
0.0 0.0
NA NA
0.0 0.0
NA NA
31.0 11.32
60.31
0.054 3.26
0.037 2.23
24.76 1493.28
0.464 27.98
0.702 42.34
0.078 4.70
12.71 766.54
1.620 97.70
0.035 2.11
0.991 59.77
53.4 3220.55
0.299 18.03
0.004 0.24
5.07 305.77
25.78 1554.79
62.26 3754.90
1COKL SUBCATE3CRY
RAW WASTE
mg/1
I Analytical Interference.
V See discussion of Analytical Interference in Section IX.
-------
TABLE X-44
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT EFFECTIVENESS
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PARAMBITKR
FLOW (I/kg)*
115 ARSENIC
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
VO 121 CYANIDE
VO 122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
125 SELENIUM
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
MWGANESE
OIL S. GREASE
RAW
mg/1
0.054
0.037
24.760
0.464
0.702
0.078
12.710
1.620
0.035
0.991
53.4OO
0.299
0.004
5.070
25.780
WASTE
mg/kg
16.55O
0.894
. 0.612
409.778
7.679
11.618
1.291
210.351
26.811
0.579
16.401
883.770
4.948
0.066
83.909
426.659
BPT
mg/1
0.054
0.037
0.080
0.464
0.070
0.078
0.060
0.570
0.010
0.100
0.300
0.299
0.004
0.210
10.000
(PSES 0)
mg/kg
16.550
0.394
0.612
1.324
7.679
1.159
1.291
0.993
9.434
0.166
1.655
4.965
4.948
0.066
3.476
165.500
BAT
mg/1
0.401
0.079
0.080
0.580
0.070
0.120
0.060
0.570
0.010
0.100
0.300
1.110
0.030
0.210
10.000
1 (PSES 1)
mg/kg
2.226
0.893
0.176
0.178
1.291
0.156
0.267
0.134
1.269
0.022
0.223
0.668
2.471
0.066
0.467
22.260
BAT
mg/1
0.340
0.049
0.070
0.390
0.047
0.080
0.036
0.220
0.007
0.070
0.230
0.740
0.030
0.140
10.000
2 (PSES 2)
mg/kg
2.226
0.757
0.109
0.156
0.868
0.105
0.178
0.080
0.490
0.016
0.156
0.512
1.647
0.066
0.312
22.260
UAT
mg/1
0.340
0.010
0.050
0.050
0.047
0.010
0.034
0.050
0.007
0.050
0.010
0.740
0.031
0.140
10.000
3 (PSES 3)
mg/kg
2.097
0.713
0.021
0.105
0.105
0.099
0.021
0.071
0.105
0.015
0.105
0.021
1 .552
O.O66
0.294
20.970
UAT 4 (PSES
mg/1
0.283
0.340
0.010
0.0r>0
0.050
0.047
0.010
0.034
0.05O
0.007
0.0r)0
0.010
0.74O
0.233
0.140
10.000
4)
m:j/kq
0.0'K)
0.00.3
0.014
0.014
0.013
0.003
0.010
0.014
0.002
0.014
0.001
0.209
0.066
0.040
2.8.10
TSS 62.260 1030.403 12.000 198.600 12.000
* Normalized flow based on total subcategory zinc anode weight.
26.712
2.600
5.788
2.600
5.452
2.600
0.73G
-------
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
TABLE X-45
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OP CONTROL SYSTEMS
ZINC SUBCATEGORY - TOTAL
BPT & PSES 0
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 1 & PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 3 & PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 4 & PSES 4
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
FLOW 1/yr (106) 60.31
60.31
8.11
8.11
7.64
1.03
115 ARSENIC
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
^ 120 COPPER
vo 121 CYANIDE
00 122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
125 SELENIUM
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
MANGANESE
OIL & GREASE
3.26
2.23
1493.28
27.98
42.34
4.70
766.54
97.70
2.11
59.77
3220.55
18.03
0.24
305.77
1554.79
0.00
0.00
1488.46
0.00
38.12
0.00
762.92
63.32
1.51
53.74
3202.46
0.00
0.00
293.10
951.69
3.26
2.23
4.82
27.98
4.22
4.70
3.62
34.38
0.60
6.03
18.09
18.03
0.24
12.67
603.10
0.00
1.59
1492.63
23.28
41.77
3.73
766.05
93.08
2.03
58.96
3218.12
9.03
0.00
304.07
1473.69
3.26
0.64
0.65
4.70
0.57
0.97
0.49
4.62
0.08
0.81
2.43
9.00
0.24
1.70
81.10
0.50
1.83
1492.71
24.82
41.96
4.05
766.25
95.92
2.05
59.20
3218.68
12.03
0.00
304.63
1473.69
2.76
0.40
0.57
3.16
0.38
0.65
0.29
1.78
0.06
0.57
1.87
6.00
0.24
1.14
81.10
0.66
2.15
1492.90
27.60
41.98
4.62
766.28
97.32
2.06
59.39
3220.47
12.38
0.00
304.70
1478.39
2.60
0.08
0.38
0.38
0.36
0.08
0.26
0.38
0.05
0.38
0.08
5.65
0.24
1.07
76.40
2.91
2.22
1493.23
27.93
42.29
4.69
766.50
97.65
2.10
59.72
3220.54
17.27
0.00
305.63
1544.49
0.35
0.01
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.01
0.05
0.01
0.76
0.24
0.14
10.30
TSS
TOXIC METALS
OONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
3754.90
5678.12
5309.69
11354.19
3031.18
5572.41
3982.87
9886.50
723.72
105.71
1326.82
1467.69
3657.58
5659.47
5131.27
11145.61
97.32
18.65
178.42
208.58
3733.81
5666.01
5207.50
11232.13
21.09
12.11
102.19
122.06
3735.04
5673.45
5213.43
11245.94
19.86
4.67
96.26
108.25
3752.22
5677.49
5296.71
11339.39
2.68
0.63
12.98
14.80
SLUDGE GEN
77122.08
85026.60
85644.34
85789.68
86415.27
-------
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BPT
Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr
TABLE X-46
POTJUPAMT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
ZINC SUBCATHGORY - DIRECT DISCHARGERS
BAT I
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 2
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
BAT 3
Removed
kg/yr
Di sdvirged
kg/yr
1WT 4
kq/vr
FLOW 1/yr (106) 13.87
13.87
1.87
1.87
1.76
0.24
115 ARSENIC
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
125 SELENHM
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
AUJMINIJM
IRON
MANGANESE
OIL & GREASE
0.75
0.51
343.42
6.44
9.74
1.08
176.29
22.47
0.49
13.75
740.66
4.15
0.06
70.32
357.57
0.00
0.00
342.31
0.00
8.77
0.00
175.46
14.56
0.35
12.36
736.50
0.00
0.00
67.41
218.87
0.75
0.51
1.11
6.44
0.97
1.08
0.83
7.91
0.14
1.39
4.16
4.15
0.06
2.91
138.70
0.00
0.36
343.27
5.36
9.61
0.86
176.18
21.40
0.47
13.56
740.10
2.07
0.00
69.93
338.87
0.75
0.15
0.15
1.08
0.13
0.22
0.11
1.07
0.02
0.19
0.56
2.08
0.06
0.39
18.70
O.ll
0.42
343.29
5.71
9.65
0.93
176.22
22.06
0.48
13.62
740.23
2.77
0.00
70.06
338.87
0.64
0.09
0.13
0.73
0.09
0.15
0.07
0.41
0.01
0.13
0.43
1.38
0.06
0.26
18.70
0.15
0.49
343.33
6.35
9.66
1.06
176.23
22.38
0.48
13.66
740.64
2.85
0.00
70.07
339.97
0.60
0.02
0.09
0.09
O.O8
0.02
0.06
0.09
0.01
0.09
0.02
1.30
0.06
0.25
17.60
0.67
O.S1
343.41
6.43
9.73
1.03
17G.28
22.46
0.49
13.74
740.66
3.97
0.00
70.29
355.17
O.OB
O.OO
0.01.
0.01
0.01
O.OO
0.01
0.01
O.OO
0.01
0.00
0.18
0.06
0.03
2.40
TSS
TOXIC MEl'AI.S
CONVENriONALS
TOTAL POF1JU.
863.55
1305.86
1221.12
2611.25
697.11
1281.54
915.98
2273.70
166.44
24.32
305.14
337.55
841.11
1301.56
1179.98
2563.15
22.44
4.30
41.14
48.10
858.69
1303.07
1197.56
2583.11
4.86
2.79
23.56
28.14
858.97
1304.77
1198.94
2586.29
4.58
1.09
22.18
24.96
862.93
1305.73
1218.10
2607.R2
0.62
0.13
3.02
3.43
SLUUGE GEN
17736.59
19553.59
19696.31
19729.74
19873.97
-------
TABLE X-47
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
WET AMALGAMATED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
'CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
GELLED AMALGAM
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
'CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
'MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
'SILVER
'ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
POWDER ANODES
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib
1.149
0.176
0.231
1.045
0.160
0.083
0.137
0.775
0.022
0.226
0.732
2.503
0.676
0.237
TABLE X-48
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ANODES
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 00 0,000 Ib
0.142
0.022
0.029
0.129
0.020
0.010
0.017
0.096
0.003
0.028
0.090
0.309
0.084
0.029
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
OF ZINC
0.473
0.083
0.093
0.550
0.066
0.072
0.055
0.550
0.011
0.093
0.308
1.023
0.347
0.187
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
OF ZINC
0.058
0.010
0.012
0.068
0.008
0.009
0.007
0.068
0.001
0.012
0.038
0.126
0.043
0.023
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1000
-------
TABLE X-49
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ZINC OXIDE ANODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
* CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
45.290
6.934
9.101
41.173
6.284
3.251
5.418
30.555
0.867
8.885
28.821
98.599
26.654
9.318
18.636
3.251
3.684
21.670
2.600
2.817
2.167
21.670
0.433
3.684
12.135
40.306
13.652
7.368
TABLE X-50
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
505.153
77.344
101.514
459.230
70.093
36.255
60.425
340.797
9.668
99.097
321.461
1099.735
297.291
103.931
207.862
36.255
41.089
241.700
29.004
31.421
24.170
241.700
4.834
41.089
135.352
449.562
152.271
82.178
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1001
-------
TABLE X-51
ZINC SDBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
62.073
9.504
12.474
56.430
8.613
4.455
7.425
41.877
1.188
12.177
39.501
135.135
36.531
12.771
25.542
4.455
5.049
29.700
3.564
3.861
2.970
29.700
0.594
5.049
16.632
55.242
18.711
10.098
TABLE X-52
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER OXIDE POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC 41.487 17.071
CADMIUM 6.352 2.978
*CHROMIUM 8.337 3.375
COPPER 37.715 19.850
CYANIDE 5.757 2.382
LEAD 2.978 2.581
*MERCURY 4-963 1.985
NICKEL 27.989 19.850
SELENIUM 0.794 0.397
*SILVER 8.139 3.375
*ZINC 26.401 11.116
ALUMINUM 90.318 36.921
IRON 24.416 12.506
*MANGANESE 8.536 6.749
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1002
-------
TABLE X-53
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
9.948
1.523
1.999
9.044
1.380
0.714
1.190
6.712
0.190
1.952
6.331
21.658
5.855
2.047
4.094
0.714
0.809
4.760
0.571
0.619
0.476
4.760
0.095
0.809
2.666
8.854
2.999
1.618
TABLE X-54
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
ARSENIC 418.000 172.000
CADMIUM 64.000 30.000
*CHROMIUM 84.000 34.000
COPPER ,380.000 200.000
CYANIDE 58.000 24.000
LEAD 30.000 26.000
*MERCURY 50.000 20.000
*NICKEL 282.000 200.000
SELENIUM 8.000 4.000
*SILVER 82.000 34.000
*ZINC 266.000 112.000
ALUMINUM 910.000 372.000
IRON 246.000 126.000
*MANGANESE 86.000 68.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1003
-------
TABLE X-55
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELT. WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELT.S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
ARSENIC 0.355 0.146
CADMIUM
'CHROMIUM
COPPER
'CYANIDE
LEAD
'MERCURY
'NICKEL
SELENIUM
'SILVER
ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
TABLE X-56
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER ETCH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
0.054
0.071
0.323
0.049
0.025
0.042
0.240
0.007
0.070
0.226
0.773
0.209
0.073
0.025
0.029
0.170
0.020
0.022
0.017
0.170
0.003
0.029
0.095
0.316
0.107
0.058
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
'CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
'MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
'SILVER
'ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
15.550
2.381
3.125
14.136
2.158
1.116
1.860
10.490
0.298
3.050
9.895
33.852
9.151
3.199
6.398
1.116
1.265
7.440
0.893
0.967
0.744
7.440
0.149
1.265
4.166
13.838
4.687
2.530
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1004
-------
TABLE X-57
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CRT.T.S PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
0.564
0.086
0.113
0.513
0.078
0.040
0.068
0.381
0.011
0.111
0.359
1.229
0.332
0.116
0.232
0.040
0.046
0.270
0.032
0.035
0.027
0.270
0.005
0.046
0.151
0.502
0.170
0.092
TABLE X-58
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
REJECT CELL HANDLING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
0.021
0.003
0.004
0.019
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.014
0.000
0.004
0.013
0.046
0.012
0.004
0.009
0.002
0.002
0.010
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.010
0.000
0.002
0.006
0.019
0.006
0.003
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1005
-------
TABLE X-59
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CKT.T.S PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ner.T.g PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
1.756
0.269
0.353
1.596
0.244
0.126
0.210
1.184
0.034
0.344
1.117
3.822
1.033
0.361
0.722
0.126
0.143
0.840
0.101
0.109
0.084
0.840
0.017
0.143
0.470
1.562
0.529
0.286
TABLE X-59A
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CELL WASH, EMPLOYEE WASH, REJECT CELL HANDLING, AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
"""^" WtTI"*l*TI*JL11IW ~"rl' ~-~m^^~mt^^^~m'tmwm ^ซ MWMMMWMWMMMWMMW ! II MOMM WM WMMMMMMM^MM^MM M^M^ WซB^ซ
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CKTiTปS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
2.696
0.413
0.542
2.451
0.374
0.193
0.323
1.819
0.052
0.529
1.716
5.870
1.587
0.555
1.109
0.193
0.219
1.290
0.155
0.168
0.129
1.290
0.026
0.219
0.722
2.399
0.813
0.439
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1006
-------
TABLE X-60
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
ARSENIC 16.532 6.303
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
2.531
3.322
15.029
2.294
1.186
1.978
11.153
0.316
3.243
10.520
35.991
9.729
3.401
1.186
1.345
7.910
0.949
1.028
0.791
7.910
0.158
1.345
4.430
14.713
4.983
2.689
TABLE X-61
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
* MANGANESE
6.709
1.027
1.348
6.099
0.931
0.481
0.802
4.526
0.128
1.316
4.269
14.606
3.948
1.380
2.761
0.481
0.546
3.210
0.385
0.417
0.321
3.210
0.064
0.546
1.798
5.971
2.022
1.091
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1007
-------
O
O
00
TABLE X-62
BATTERY CATEGORY COSTS
BPT (PSES 0)
Capital Annual
Cost $ Cost $
BAT 1 (PSES 1)
Capital Annual
Cost $ Cost $
BAT 2 (PSES 2)
Capital Annual
Cost $ Cost $
60472.
330090.
390562.
23434.
23434.
23065,
75625,
98690
7338,
7338,
122762. 37576,
318290. 109185
441052. 146761
146732. 48575,
416245. 140330,
562977. 188905,
0.
0.
9554
9554
4412.
4412.
3322,
3322,
656400. 253816
7301303. 2293924
7957703. 2547740,
1847257. 545971,
17765228. 4306833,
19612485. 4852804,
2251816. 678232
20237086. 5119444
22488902. 5797676,
Subcategory
Cadmium
Direct Dischaigers
Indirect Dischaigers
Subcategory Total
Calcium
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers
Subcategory Total 2
Lead
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers
Subcategory Total
Leclanche
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers
Subcategory Total3
Lithium
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers
Subcategory Total 2
Magnesium
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers
Subcategory Total-*
Zinc
Direct Dischargers
Indirect Dischargers4 258474.
Subcategory Total
^Reflect contract hauling costs when less than treatment costs. Costs are in 1978 dollars.
^Regulation proposed for new sources only.
-^Regulation proposed for existing pretreatment and new sources only.
Compliance cost for the selected PSES technology are $28,000 capital and $12,000 annual.
BAT 3 (PSES 3)
Capital Annual
Cost $ Cost $
181070. 65933
622480. 183368
803550. 249301
2251816. 678232
20237086. 5119444
22488902. 5797676
42845.
42845.
0.
0.
0.
20908.
28272.
49180.
50294.
58474.
08768.
21603.
21603.
494.
6080.
6574.
8134.
14571.
22705.
18219.
88243.
102462.
0.
0.
0.
0.
37371.
37371.
90013.
346662.
436675.
494.
6080.
6574.
14230.
22407.
36637.
23918.
100197.
123415.
0.
0.
0.
0.
37371.
37371.
102156.
405624.
507780.
494.
6080.
6574.
14230.
20236.
34466.
38187.
159308.
197495.
0.
0.
0.
0.
73784.
73784.
102156.
405624.
507780.
494
6080
6574
14230
27846
42076
38187
159308
197495
BAT 4 (PSES 4)
Capital Annual
Cost $ Cost $
624290. 133643,
1501581. 490754,
2125871. 624397,
3560616. 1009569
26565175. 7542289
30J25791. 8551858
109028. 55191,
547387. 252265
656415. 307456,
-------
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
This section presents effluent characteristics attainable by new
sources through the applcation of the best available demonstrated
control technology (BDT), processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives including, where practicable, a standard permitting no
discharge of pollutants. Three levels of technology are discussed;
cost, performance and environmental benefits are presented, and the
rationale for selecting one of the levels is outlined. The selection
of pollutant parameters for specific regulations is discussed and
discharge limitations for the regulated pollutants are presented for
each subcategory.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO BDT
As a general approach for the category, three and four levels of BDT
technology options were evaluated. The levels evaluated are generally
identical to the BAT technology options. These options and the
detailed discussion and evaluation carried out in conjuntion with
Section X will be incorporated here by specific reference rather than
duplicate previous explanation and discussion.
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
The four options considered for BDT in the cadmium subcategory are
identical with the four options considered at BAT. These options are
described in summary form and in detail on pages 896-901. Schematics
of the treatment systems are displayed on pages 938-941.
As discussed in the BAT options selection discussions on pages 901-
904, the fourth treatment option, which includes process flow control,
lime, settle and filter, ion exchange, and vapor recompression
evaporation, results in no discharge. This option is fully
demonstrated in an existing plant, and is therefore selected as the
technology option basic to new source performance standards for this
subcategory. In addition two other plants attain no discharge by
selection of process used.
Problems associated with this option were only for existing sources.
New plants will not have retrofitting problems and can also consider
all available process operations. Plants can achieve no discharge by
the choice of process operations or by wastewater treatment. Costs
associated with this option in Table X-62 (page 1008) are for existing
sources and do include some retrofitting costs. Therefore these costs
overstate the actual costs for a new plant. Even so, no plant
closures were expected from implementation of this option at existing
1009
-------
sources. As is discussed in the "Economic Impact Analysis Report for
Battery Manufacturing" (EIA), no entry impacts are projected from the
selection of this option for new sources.
New Source Performance Standards
The new source performance standard for the cadmium subcategory is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered as BDT for the calcium subcategory are
identical with the two options considered in Section X. These options
are described in summary form and detail on pages 905-907 and
schematics of the processes are displayed on pages 942-943.
As discussed in substantial detail in the options selection
discussions on pages 907 to 908, the second option, which includes
process flow control, settling and complete recycle of process water
results in no discharge of pollutants. This option was selected as
the preferred technology option because the treatment costs associated
with the removal of hexavalent chromium are eliminated by the
implementation of recycle and reuse. One plant already achieves no
discharge of wastewater pollutants. Therefore, this option is
selected as the technology option basic to the new source performance
standards for this subcategory. As discussed in the EIA, no entry
impacts are projected with the selection of this option.
New Source Performance Standards
The new-source performance standard for the calcium subcategory is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
The technology options considered as possible BDT for the lead
subcategory are similar to the options considered at BAT. These
options are discussed in outline form and in detail on pages 908-914
and are depicted schematically on pages 944-947. These options were
evaluated for their applicability cost, and pollutant reduction
benefits. Option 1 was selected as the preferred technology option
for BAT. In making a selection of BAT, it was pointed out in the
discussion that operational and applicability problems with sulfide as
a precipitant, and retrofitting costs at existing plants were taken
into account and heavily weighted in the decision not to select a
sulfide based treatment option. Additionally, the high cost of
disposing of a toxic, reactive sludge was weighted in the decision.
These considerations, which were basic to the BAT selection, do not
1010
-------
apply when considering these technology options for application in a
new plant. The handling, application, and control of the use of the
sulfide precipitation, as well as adequate ventilation and other
necessary precautions, can be readily and inexpensively built into a
new plant. Also, retrofitting costs do not apply to new plants.
Similarly, the point of siting for a new plant can be adjusted over a
wide geographic area to provide an opportunity for convenient and
inexpensive disposal of toxic sludges. Hence, the major technology
objections to options 3 and 4 are overcome by the inherent advantages
of a new plant.
Option 4 is selected as the preferred option because it improves
pollutant removal and the technology is demonstrated. As an
alternative to flow reduction and treatment, new plants can select dry
manufacturing processes and water conservation practices and achieve
no discharge of pollutants. No discharge of wastewater pollutants is
practiced by 51 existing plants. Also, as discussed in the EIA, no
entry impacts are projected with the selection of this option.
As shown in Table X-23 (page 976), option 4 removes 85 percent of the
pollutants remaining after option 3 treatment. All of the steps in
the option 4 technology have been demonstrated at the full scale
level. Reverse osmosis has been used on heavily polluted wastewater
such as coal mine drainage with outstanding results. Sulfide
precipitation has been applied in some segments of battery
manufacturing and in nonferrous metals refining. Compliance costs
associated with this option at existing plants are shown in Table X-62
(page 1008). These costs overstate what would actually be incurred at
a new plant because some retrofitting costs are included. For
existing plants, only one was projected for closure with the option 4
costs. To reduce compliance costs, new plants also can decide on
whether to use processes which do not generate wastewater or implement
end-of-pipe treatment to comply with the standard.
New Source Performance Standards
New source performance standards for this subcategory are based on the
wastewater flow reductions achieved by improved in-process control and
recycle and the pollutant concentrations achievable by sulfide, settle
and filter end-of-pipe treatment. Only three process element
wastewater streams are treated at option 4. The reverse osmosis
treatment of option 4 returns 85 percent of the wastewater flow to the
process. Flows used as the basis for new source standards are
displayed under BAT (PSES)-4 in Table X-19 (page 972). Effluent
concentrations achievable by the application of new source technology
are displayed in Table VII-20 (page 712).
1011
-------
The pollutants to be regulated are copper, lead, iron, oil and grease,
TSS, and pH. These are the same pollutants considered at BAT with the
addition of oil and grease, TSS, and pH.
Tables XI-1, 2 and 3 (pages 1016-1017) display NSPS for the lead
subcategory.
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
The technology selected for existing plants in this subcategory is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants. Twelve existing plants
already achieve no discharge of pollutants. This level of performance
is continued for new sources and the new source standard for the
Leclanche subcategory is no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants.
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered for BDT in the lithium subcategory are
identical with the three options considered in Section X. These
options are described in summary form and detail on pages 919-922 and
schematics of the processes are displayed on pages 948-950.
As discussed in the technology options selection discussions (pages
XXX-XXX), the second option, provides the greatest level of toxic
pollutant removal and is therefore selected as the basis for new
source performance standards for the lithium subcategory. Two
existing plants in the subcategory achieve no discharge of pollutants
by choice of manufacturing processes. Many alternatives can be
considered when constructing new plants. As discussed in the EIA, no
entry impacts are projected with the selection of this option.
New Source Performance Standards
New source performance standards for the lithium subcategory are based
on recycle and reuse technology for heat paper production, LS&F
technology for the cathode process elements, and L&S technology for
the air scrubber element. These standards are set forth in Tables
XI-4 to XI-7 (pages 1018 to 1019) . Flows used as the basis for new
source standards are displayed under BAT (PSES) in Table X-29 (page
981). Effluent concentrations achievable by the applications of the
new source technology are displayed in Table VI1-20. Pollutants
regulated by the new source standards are: chromium, lead, iron, TSS,
and pH for the cathode process elements, and the combined stream which
includes floor and equipment wash, cell testing and lithium scrap
disposal wastewater, TSS and pH were regulated for the air scrubber.
process element. The effluent standard for the heat paper element and
cell wash element is no discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
1012
-------
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered for BDT in the magnesium subcategory are
identical with the three options considered in Section X. These
options are described in summary form and in detail on pages 924-926
and schematics of processes are displayed on pages 951-953.
As discussed in the technology options selection discussion section
(pages 926-928) the second option, provides the greatest levels of
toxic pollutant removal, and is therefore selected as the basis for
new source performance standards for the magnesium subcategory. Four
of the eight existing plants in the subcategory achieve no discharge
by choice of manufacturing processes. Many alternatives can be
considered when constructing a new plant. As discussed in the EIA, no
entry impacts are projected with the selection of this option.
New source performance standards for the magnesium subcategory are
based on recycle and reuse technology for heat paper production, L&S
technology for the air scrubber process elements, and and LS&F
technology for all other waste streams. These standards are set forth
in Tables^xi-8 to XI-12 (pages 1020-1022). Flows used as the basis for
new source standards are displayed under BAT (PSES) in Table X-35
(page 987). Effluent concentrations achievable by the application of
the new source technology are displayed in Table VII-20. Pollutants
regulated by the new source standards are: lead, silver, iron, COD,
TSS, and pH. The effluent standard for the heat paper production
element is no discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
The technology options considered as possible BDT for the zinc sub-
category are similar to the options considered at BAT. These options
are discussed in outline form and in detail on pages 928;-933 and are
depicted schematically on pages 954-957. These options were evaluated
for their applicability, cost, and pollution reduction benefits.
Option 1 was selected as the preferred technology option for BAT. In
making a selection of BAT, it was pointed out in the discussion that
operational and applicability problems with sulfide as a precipitant
and retrofitting costs at existing plants were taken into account and
heavily weighted in the decision to not select a sulfide based
treatment option. Additionally, the high cost of disposing of a toxic
reactive sludge was weighed in the decision. The considerations,
which were basic to the BAT selection, do not apply in a new plant.
The handling, application and control of the use of sulfide
precipitation, as well as adequate ventilation and other necessary
precautions, can be readily and inexpensively built into a new plant.
Also, retrofitting costs do not apply to new plants. Similarly, the
1013
-------
point of siting for a new plant can be adjusted over a wide geographic
area to provide an opportunity for convenient and inexpensive disposal
of toxic sludges. Hence, the major technology objections to options 3
and 4 are overcome by the inherrent advantages of a new plant.
Option 4 is selected as the preferred technology option because it
improves pollutant removal and the technology is demonstrated. Also,
as discussed in the EIA no entry impacts are projected with the
selection of this option. Two plants presently achieve no discharge
of pollutants by process selection and treatment. One other plant has
installed settling and ion exchange, and is attempting to achieve no
discharge of pollutants. New plants can select processes, install the
recommended technology or use other technologies to comply with the
new source standards.
As shown in Table X-45, option 4 removes about 85 percent of ^the
pollutants remaining after the application of option 3 treatment,
making option 4 the more desirable option from the standpoint of
pollutant reduction benefits. All of the option 4 technology is
demonstrated at the full scale level. Reverse osmosis has been used
on heavily polluted wastewaters such as coal mine drainage with
outstanding results. Sulfide precipitation is applied in some
segments of the battery manufacturing and other industrial segments
such as nonferrous metals refining. Compliance costs associated with
this option at existing plants are shown in Table X-62 (page 1008).
These costs overstate what would actually be incurred at a new plant
because some retrofitting costs are included. To reduce compliance
costs, new plants can also decide on whether to use processes which do
not generate wastewater or implement end-of-pipe treatment to comply
with the standard.
New Source Performance Standards
New source performance standards for this subcategory are based on the
wastewater flow reductions achieved by improved control and recycle,
and the pollutant concentrations achievable by sulfide, settle and
filter end-of-pipe treatment. Some (15) process element streams are
treated at new sources. The reverse osmosis treatment as option 4
returns 85 percent of the wastewater to the process for recycle.
Flows used as the basis for new source standards are displayed under
BAT (PSES)-4 in Table X-42 (page 993). Effluent concentrations
achievable by the application of new source technology are displayed
in Table VII-20.
The pollutants to be regulated are chromium, mercury, silver, zinc,
manganese, oil and grease, TSS, and pH. Nickel is to be regulated for
the nickel impregnated cathode and cell wash elements only. Cyanide
1014
-------
is to be regulated for cell wash only. These are the same pollutants
regulated at BAT with the addition of oil and grease, TSS, and pH.
Tables XI-13 to XI-25 (pages 1023-1029) display the new source
performance standards for each element in the zinc subcategory. To
alleviate some of the monitoring burden, several process elements
which occur at most plants and have the same pnp are combined in one
regulatory table. Table XI-23A (page 1028) is the combined table for
Tables XI-19, 21, 22 and 23.
1015
-------
TABLE XI-1
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
OPEN FORMATION - DEHYDRATED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH WITHIN
0.029
0.008
0.039
0.039
0.008
0.027
0.039
0.039
0.008
0.251
2.040
3.060
N THE RANGE OF
0.012
0.003
0.021
0.016
0.002
0.012
0.017
0.017
0.004
0.129
2.040
2.244
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-2
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
BATTERY WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.008
0.002
0.010
0.010
0.002
0.007
0.010
0.010
0.002
0.066
0.540
0.810
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.003
0.001
0.005
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.001
0.034
0.540
0.594
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1016
-------
TABLE XI-3
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
BATTERY REPAIR
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
*IRON
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.003
0.001
0.004
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.001
0.026
0.210
0.315
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.013
0.210
0.231
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1017
-------
TABLE XI-4
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
LEAD IODIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg LEAD
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD
*CHROMIUM 23.340 9.462
*LEAD 6.308 5.677
ZINC 64.342 26.494
COBALT 13.247 5.677
*IRON 77.588 39.740
*TSS 946.200 693.880
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-5
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF IRON DISULFIDE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF IRON DISULFIDE
*CHROMIUM 2.790 1.131
*LEAD 0.754 0.679
ZINC 7.691 3.167
COBALT 1.583 0.679
*IRON 9.274 4.750
*TSS 113.100 82.940
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1018
-------
TABLE XI-6
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH, CELL TESTING,AND LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ROMIUM
AD
NC
HALT
ON
S
WITHIN
0.040
0.011
0.110
0.023
0.133
1.620
THE RANGE OF
0.016
0.010
0.045
0.010
0.068
1.188
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-7
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
AIR SCRUBBERS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*TSS 434.190 211.800
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1019
-------
TABLE XI-8
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - CHEMICALLY REDUCED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - rag/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF SILVER PROCESSED
*LEAD 8.190 7.371
NICKEL 45.045 30.303
*SILVER 23.751 9.828
*IRON 100.737 51.597
*COD 4095.000 1998.360
*TSS 1228.500 900.900
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-9
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - ELECTROLYTIC
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF SILVER PROCESSED
*LEAD 14.500 13.050
NICKEL 79.750 53.650
*SILVER 42.050 17.400
*IRON 178.350 91.350
*COD 7250.000 3538.000
*TSS 2175.000 1595.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1020
-------
TABLE XI-10
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CELL TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD 5.260 4.734
NICKEL 28.930 19.462
*SILVER 15.254 6.312
*IRON 64.698 33.138
*COD 2630.000 1283.440
*TSS 789.000 578.600
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-11
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD
NICKEL
*SILVER
*IRON
*COD
*TSS
*PH
0.009
0.052
0.027
0.116
4.700
1.410
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.008
0.035
0.011
0.059
2.294
1.034
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1021
-------
TABLE XI-12
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
AIR SCRUBBERS
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - ntg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*TSS 8466.500 4130.000
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1022
-------
TABLE XI-13
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
ZINC OXIDE ANODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 000,000 Ib OF ZINC
4.519
0.120
0.618
0.618
0.650
0.120
0.423
0.618
0.098
0.618
0.120
9.851
3.999
0.975
32.510
48.765
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT
1.853
0.055
0.328
0.254
0.260
0.036
0.185
0.270
0.033
0.273
0.062
4,031
2.048
0.748
32.510
35.761
ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-14
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
50.401
1.342
6.889
6.889
7.252
1.342
4.714
6.889
1.088
6.889
1.342
109.868
44.600
10.878
362.600
543.900
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
20.668
0.616
3.662
2.828
2.901
0.399
2.067
3.010
0.363
3.046
0.689
44.962
22.344
8.340
362.600
398.860
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1023
-------
TABLE XI-15
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*2INC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH-
6.185
0.165
0.846
0.846
0.890
0.165
0.579
0.846
0.133
0.846
0.165
13.484
5.474
1.335
44.500
66.750
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
2.537
0.076
0.449
0.347
0.356
0.049
0.254
0.369
0.045
0.374
0.085
5.518
2.804
1.024
44.500
48.950
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-16
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER OXIDE POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
4.139
0.110
0.566
0.566
0.596
0.110
0.387
0.566
0.089
0.566
0.110
9.023
3.663
0.893
29.780
44.670
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
1.697
0.051
0.301
0.232
0.238
0.033
0.170
0.247
0.030
0.250
0.057
3.693
1.876
0.685
29.780
32.758
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1024
-------
TABLE XI-17
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.992
0.026
0.136
0.136
0.143
0.026
0.093
0.136
0.021
0.136
0.026
2.163
0.878
0.214
7.140
10.710
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.407
0.012
0.072
0.056
0.057
0.008
0.041
0.059
0.007
0.060
0.014
0.885
0.450
0.164
7.140
7.854
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-18
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF NICKEL APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
41.700
1.110
5.700
5.700
6.000
1.110
3.900
5.700
0.900
5.700
1.110
90.900
36.900
9.000
300.000
450.000
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
17.100
0.510
3.030
2.340
2.400
0.330
1.710
2.490
0.300
2.520
0.570
37.200
18.900
6.900
300.000
330.000
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1025
-------
TABLE XI-19
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CELL WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*PH
0.036
0.001
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.001
0.003
0.005
0.001
0.005
0.001
0.079
0.032
0.008
0.260
0.390
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.015
0.000
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.032
0.016
0.006
0.260
0.286
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-20
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER ETCH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
1.551
0.041
0.212
212
223
041
145
212
033
.212
041
.381
373
0.335
11.160
16.740
0.636
0.019
0.113
0.087
0.089
0. 012
0.064
0.093
0.011
0.094
0.021
1.384
0.703
0.257
11.160
12.276
WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
-------
TABLE XI-21
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
EMPLOYEE HASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.057
0.002
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.002
0.005
0.008
0.001
0.008
0.002
0.124
0.050
0.012
0.410
0.615
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.023
0.001
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.000
0.002
0.003
0.000
0.003
0.001
0.051
0.026
0.009
0.410
0.451
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-22
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
REJECT CELL HANDLING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC 0.003 0.001
CADMIUM 0.000 0.000
*CHROMIUM 0.000 0.000
COPPER 0.000 0.000
CYANIDE 0.000 0.000
LEAD 0.000 0.000
*MERCURY 0.000 0.000
NICKEL 0.000 0.000
SELENIUM 0.000 0.000
*SILVER 0.000 0.000
*ZINC 0.000 0.000
ALUMINUM 0.006 0.002
IRON 0.002 0.001
*MANGANESE 0.001 0.000
*OIL & GREASE 0.020 0.020
*TSS 0.030 0.022
*pH WITHIN THE RANGE OF 7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
-------
TABLE XI-23
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
mmmmm^mmmtmmm^wm ซซ ^^^^^^.^^^^^^M
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.175
0.005
0.024
0.024
0.025
0.005
0.016
0.024
0.004
0.024
0.005
0.382
0.155
0.038
1.260
1.890
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.072
0.002
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.001
0.007
0.010
0.001
0.011
0.002
0.156
0.079
0.029
1.260
1.386
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-23A
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CELL WASH, EMPLOYEE WASH, REJECT CELL HANDLING, AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - rag/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
0.271
0.007
0.037
0.037
0.039
0.007
0.025
0.037
0.006
0.037
0.007
0.591
0.240
0.059
1.950
2.925
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.111
0.003
0.020
0.015
0.016
0.002
0.011
0.016
0.002
0.016
0.004
0.242
0.123
0.045
1.950
2.145
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1028
-------
TABLE XI-24
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*pH
1.650
0.044
0.226
0.226
0.237
0.044
0.154
0.226
0.036
0.226
0.044
3.597
1.460
0.356
11.870
17.805
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.677
0.020
0.120
0.093
0.095
0.013
0.068
0.099
0.012
0.100
0.023
1.472
0.748
0.273
11.870
13.057
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
TABLE XI-25
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
*OIL & GREASE
*TSS
*?H
0.670
0.018
0.092
0.092
0.096
0.018
0.063
0.092
0.014
0.092
0.018
1.460
0.593
0.145
'..820
7.230
WITHIN THE RANGE OF
0.275
0.008
0.049
0.038
0.039
0.005
0.027
0.040
0.005
0.041
0.009
0.598
0.304
0.111
4.320
5.302
7.5 TO 10.0 AT ALL TIMES
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1029
-------
1030
-------
SECTION XII
PRETREATMENT
Section 307(b) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
standards for existing sources (PSES), which must be achieved within
three years of promulgation. PSES are designed to prevent the
discharge of pollutants which pass through, interfere with, or are
otherwise incompatible with the operation of Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (POTW).
The legislative history of the 1977 Act indicates that pretreatment
standards are to be technology-based, and analogous to the best
available technology for removal of toxic pollutants. The general
pretreatment regulations can be found at 40 CFR Part 403. See 43 FR
27736 June 26, 1978, 46 FR 9404 January 28, 1981, and 47 FR 4518
February 1, 1982.
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 controls, and end-of-
pipe treatment technologies, and to use plant site selection to ensure
adequate treatment system installation.
This section describes the control technology for pretreatment of
process wastewaters from existing sources and new sources. The
concentrations and mass discharge limitations of regulated pollutants
for existing and new sources, based on the described control tech-
nology, are indicted by the data presented in Sections V and VII.
Most POTW consist of primary or secondary treatment systems which are
designed to treat domestic wastes. Many of the pollutants contained
in battery manufacturing wastes are not biodegradable and are,
therefore, ineffectively treated by such systems. Furthermore, these
wastes have been known to pass through or interfere with the normal
operations of these systems. Problems associated with the
uncontrolled release of pollutant parameters identified in battery
process wastewaters to POTW were discussed in Section VI. The
discussion covered pass-through, interference, and sludge useability.
The Agency based the selection of pretreatment standards for the
battery category on the minimization of pass through of toxic
pollutants at POTW. For each subcategory, the Agency compared the
removal rates for each toxic pollutant limited by the pretreatment
options to the removal rate for that pollutant at a well operated
POTW. The POTW removal rate were determined through a study conducted
10,31
-------
by the Agency at over 40 POTW and a statistical analysis of the data.
(See Fate of Priority Pollutants In Publicly Owned Treatment Works/
EPA 440/1-80-301, October, 1980; and Determining National Removal
Credits for Selected Pollutants for Publicly Owned Treatment Works,
EPA 440/82-008, September, 1982). The POTW removal rates are
presented below:
Toxic Pollutant POTW Removal Rate
Cadmium 38%
Chromium 65%
Copper 58%
Cyanide 52%
Lead 48%
Nickel 19%
Silver 66%
Zinc 65%
Mercury data at the POTW was not analyzed for national removal
credits. The range of removal from influent to POTW was 4 to 99
percent. However, as discussed in Section VI mercury has inhibiting
effects upon activated sludge POTW at levels of 0.1 mg/1 and loss of
COD removal efficiency of 59 percent is reported with 10.0 mg/1 of
mercury.
The pretreatment options selected provide for significantly more
removal of toxic pollutants than would occur if battery wastewaters
were discharged untreated to the POTW. Thus, pretreatment standards
will control the discharge of toxic pollutants to the POTW and prevent
pass through.
TECHNICAL APPROACH TO PRETREATMENT
As a general approach for the category, three or four options were
developed for consideration as the basis for PSES and three or four
for PSNS. These options generally provide for the removal of metals
by chemical precipitation and removal of suspended solids by
sedimentation or filtration. In addition, they generally provide for
the reduction or control of wastewater discharge volume through the
application of water use controls and a variety of in-process control
techniques. The goal of pretreatment is to control pollutants which
will pass through a POTW, interfere with its operation, or interfere
with the use or disposal of POTW sludge. Because battery manufac-
turing wastewater streams characteristically contain toxic heavy
metals which pass through POTW, pretreatment requirements for these
streams do not differ significantly from treatment requirements for
direct discharge. Consequently the options presented for PSES and
PSNS are identical to treatment and control options presented for BAT
and NSPS, respectively. These options generally combine both in-plant
1032
-------
technology and wastewater treatment to reduce the mass of pollutants
(especially heavy metals) which will pass through the POTW or
contaminate the POTW sludge.
Factors considered in selecting the specific technology options
presented have been discussed in Sections IX, X and XI. The same
considerations apply to pretreatment prior to introduction of the
wastewater into a POTW.
IDENTIFICATION OF PRETREATMENT OPTIONS
Option 0 for pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES) and
pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS) are identical to BPT
(option 0) for all subcategories as described in Section IX. PSES and
PSNS options 1-4 for each subcategory are identical to BAT options 1-4
respectively. End-of-pipe treatment systems for each of these options
are depicted in Sections IX or X as appropriate. Selected
pretreatment options for new sources are identical to BDT options for
each subcategory as described in Section XI.
Effluent performance achieved by these pretreatment options will be
the same as that provided by the respective BPT, BAT and BDT options
and is indicated by the flow rate information provided in Section V
and the technology performance data shown in Section VII. Compliance
cost data for all options is displayed in Table X-62 (page 1008).
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PSES options 0-4 are identical to BPT and BAT options 1-4 as discussed
on page 811 to 816 for BPT and pages 896 to 901 for BAT. Pollutant
removals and cost discussions are stated for existing indirect
discharges only. Pollutant removals for this subcategory are
displayed in Table XII-1 (page 1043).
Pretreatment Option Selection
Option 1_ is proposed as the selected PSES option because standards are
achievable using technologies and practices that are currently in use
at plants in the subcategory. Also the result of implementing this
technology is a significant reduction of toxic pollutant discharges to
POTW which would otherwise pass through. For this option flow is
reduced to 28.7 million 1/yr. The annual toxic pollutant removal is
54,456 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option, the
estimated compliance capital cost is $318,000 and annual cost is
$109,000.
Option 0. is rejected because significant amounts of cadmium, nickel
and zinc would pass through POTW and not be controlled. For this
option flow is 210 million 1/yr and annual toxic pollutant removal is
1033
-------
54,261 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option, the
estimated compliance capital cost is $330,000 and annual cost is
$76,000.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X the technology
yields small incremental removals when compared with option 1. This
option will be considered for the final regulation however because of
the toxicity of the pollutant mix (cadmium, nickel, zinc) in this
subcategory. For this option flow is the same as option 1 but the
annual toxic pollutant removal is 54,471 kg/yr. For plants to comply
directly with this option, the estimated compliance capital cost is
$416,000 and annual cost is $140,000.
Option 3^ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X, the
wastewater discharge flow from this technology requires modification
of production processes and rerouting of wastewater streams which
result with substantial retrofitting of both production and wastewater
treatment processes at existing plants. For this option, discharge
flow is reduced to 4.25 million 1/yr and annual toxic pollutant
removal is 54,489 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this
option, the estimated compliance capital cost is $622,000 and annual
cost is $183,000.
Option ฃ is rejected because as discussed above for option 3 and in
Section X, this technology option requires substantial retrofitting of
both production and wastewater treatment processes, at existing
plants. No discharge flow is allowed and toxic pollutant removal is
54,492 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option, the
estimated compliance capital cost is $1.5 million and annual cost is
$491,000. In addition, product line closures were predicted in the
economic analysis for this option at PSES. This option is proposed
for new "sources, however because as discussed in Section XI, the
problems associated with this option at existing plants will not be a
major factor at new plants. As discussed in Section XI, the
technology is demonstrated at one plant, and two other existing plants
achieve no discharge by choice of manufacturing processes. Also, as
discussed in the "Economic Impact Analysis Report" (EIA), no entry
impacts are projected.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
Pollutant parameters selected for pretreatment regulation in this
subcategory are cadmium, nickel, silver, zinc and cobalt. As
discussed in Section X, these pollutants were selected for their
toxicity, use within the subcategory and treatability. For the
pretreatment standards, POTW treatment and pass through (for cadmium,
nickel, silver, and zinc) was also considered. Conventional
pollutants are not specifically regulated because POTW are
specifically designed to treat the conventional pollutants.
1034
-------
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
Effluent standards for existing pretreatment sources are identical to
the BAT limitations as discussed in Section X. These standards are
expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per kg of production normalizing
parameter for each process element. PSES are presented in Tables XII-
2 to XI1-12 (pages!044-1049). To alleviate some of the monitoring
burden, several process elements which occur at most plants and have
the same pnp are combined in one regulatory table. Table XII-12A is
the combined table for. Tables XI1-6 to XI1-8. These standard tables
list all the pollutants which were considered for regulation, and
those proposed for regulation are *'d.
PSNS are identical to NSPS and are no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants for reasons discussed in Section XI.
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered for pretreatment are identical to option 0
discussed in Section IX (pages 817-818) and the two options discussed
in Section X (pages 905-907).
Pretreatment Options Selection
Currently, the discharge by indirect dischargers of process wastewater
from this subcategory is small (less than 4,000,000 1/yr) and the
quantity of toxic pollutants is also small (less than 50 kg/yr).
Because of the small quantities, the Agency has elected not to
establish national PSES for this subcategory. Applicable
technologies, and potential standards (in this case no discharge) are
set forth as guidance should a state or local pollution control agency
desire to establish such standards.
Pollutant removals for each option are shown in Table XII-13 (page
1050). The option proposed for new sources is equivalent to the one
selected for NSPS, as discussed on page 1010. This option results in
no discharge of pollutants. As discussed in the EIA, no entry impacts
are projected with the selection of this option, and as discussed in
Section XI one existing plant already achieves no discharge.
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
PSNS for the calcium subcategory is no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants.
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
1035
-------
PSES options 0-4 are identical to BPT and BAT options 1-4 as discussed
on pages 819 to 823 for BPT and pages 908 to 914 for BAT. Pollutant
removals and cost discussions are stated for existing indirect
discharges only. Pollutant removals for this subcategory are
displayed in Table XII-14 (page 1051).
Pretreatment Option Selection
Option ]_ is proposed as the selected PSES option because standards are
achievable using technologies and practices that are currently in use
at plants in the subcategory. Also the result of implementing this
technology is a significant reduction of toxic pollutant discharges to
POTW which would otherwise pass through. For this option flow is
reduced to 307.8 million 1/yr. The annual toxic pollutant removal is
937,750 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option the
estimated compliance capital cost is $17,765,000 and annual cost is
$4,307,000.
Option () is rejected because significant amounts of lead and copper
would pass through POTW and not be controlled. For this option flow
is 2,728 million 1/yr and annual toxic pollutant removal is 934,558
kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option, the estimated
compliance capital cost is $7,301,000 and annual cost is $2,294,000.
Option 2_ is rejected because as discussed in Section X the technology
yields small incremental removals when compared to option 1. This
option will be considered for the final regulation however, because of
the toxicity of the pollutant mix (lead and copper) in this
subcategory. For this option flow is the same as option 1, but the
annual toxic pollutant removal is 937,977 kg/yr. For plants to comply
directly with this option the estimated compliance capital cost is
$20,237,000 and annual cost is $5,119,000.
Option 3^ is rejected because as discussed in Section X, sulfide
technology at existing plants requires significant modification or
retrofitting of treatment and ventilation systems within the plant in
addition to just installing the treatment equipment. For this option
discharge flow is the same as for option 1. The annual toxic
pollutant removal is 938,247 kg/yr. As discussed in Section X,
compliance costs are estimated as equal to the option 2 costs.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X, this
technology option requires substantial retrofitting of both production
and wastewater treatment processes at existing plants. For this
option discharge flow is reduced to 46 million 1/yr. The annual toxic
toxic pollutant removal is 938,321 kg/yr. For plants to comply
directly with this option the estimated compliance capital cost is
$26,565,000 and annual cost is $7,542,000. This option is proposed
for PSNS, however, because as discussed in Section XI, the problems
1036
-------
associated with this option at existing plants will not be a major
factor at new plants. There are 51 existing plants which achieve no
discharge by treatment and choice of manufacturing processes. Also,
as discussed in the EIA, no entry impacts are projected.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
Pollutant parameters selected for pretreatment regulation in this
subcategory are copper and lead. As discussed in Section X these
pollutants were selected for their toxicity, use within the
subcategory and treatability. For the pretreatment standards POTW
treatment/ incompatability and pass-through of copper and lead were
also considered. Conventional pollutants and iron are not
specifically regulated because a POTW may use iron as a coagulant in
the treatment process and is specifically designed to treat the
conventional pollutants.
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
Effluent standards for existing pretreatment sources are identical to
the BAT limitations discussed in Section X. These standards are
expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per kg of production normalizing
parameter for each process element. PSES are displayed in Tables
XII-15 to XII-17 (pages 1052-1053). These standard tables list all the
pollutants which were considered for regulation, and those proposed
for regulation are *'d.
PSNS are identical to NSPS discussed in Section XI except that
conventional pollutants and iron are not proposed for regulation, and
standards are displayed in Tables XII-18 to XII-20 (pages 1054-1055>.
LECLANCHE SUBCATEGORY
Pretreatment Option Selection
PSES and PSNS option 0 is identical to BPT as discussed on pages 827-
830. The option allows no discharge of wastewater pollutants, and is
selected for the pretreatment standards because mercury and zinc,
which would pass through POTW treatment, would be controlled.
Pollutant reduction benefits are displayed in Table XII-21 (page 1056)
and estimated compliance costs are in Table X-62. No discharge of
wastewater pollutants is achieved by 12 existing plants, and as
discussed in the EIA, no entry impacts are projected.
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
PSES and PSNS are no discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
1037
-------
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered for pretreatment are identical to option 0
discussed in Section IX (pages B30-:8;34) and the three options
discussed in Section X (pages ;919-.922).
Pretreatment Option Selection
Currently, the discharge by indirect dischargers of process wastewater
from this subcategory is small (less than 4,000,000 1/yr) and the
quantity of toxic pollutants is also small (less than 50 kg/yr).
Because of the small quantities, the Agency has elected not to
establish national PSES standards for this subcategory. Applicable
technologies, and potential standards are set forth as guidance should
a state or local polution control agency desire to establish such
standards.
Pollutant reduction benefits for the technology options are shown in
Table XII-22 (page 1057). The option proposed for new sources option
2, is equivalent to the one selected for NSPS, as discussed on page
1012. This option allows no discharge from heat paper production and
allows treated wastewater discharge from other subcategory processes
which provides the greatest level of toxic pollutant removal. As
discussed in the EIA, no entry impacts are projected with the
selection of this option. Also, two existing plants in the
subcategory achieve no discharge of pollutants by choice of
manufacturing processes. Many alternatives can be considered when
constructing a new plant.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
For pretreatment, chromium and lead are selected for regulation in
this subcategory. As discussed in Section X these pollutants were
selected for their toxicity, use within the subcategory and
treatability. For the pretreatment standards POTW treatment,
incompatability and pass-through of chromium and lead were also
considered. In this subcategory asbestos is used as a raw material
and would be controlled by regulating TSS. < Because POTW are designed
for treatment of conventional pollutants and adequately control TSS
and thus asbestos, a specific standard for TSS is not proposed. Also,
POTW may use iron as a coagulant in the treatment process and iron is
not proposed for regulation.
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
Effluent standards for existing pretreatment sources are identical to
the limitations presented in Section X. These standards are expressed
in terms of mg of pollutant per kg of production normalizing parameter
for each process element. Recommended standards for existing sources
1038
-------
are displayed in Tables XII-23 to XII-25 (pages 1059-1060). These
standard tables are presented as guidance should a state or local
pollution control agency desire to establish such standards.
PSNS are identical to NSPS presented in Section XI with one exception;
air scrubbers are proposed for regulation at NSPS and not PSNS to
control TSS and thus, asbestos. Standards are displayed in Tables
XII-26 to XII-28 (pagesl061-1062). These standard tables list all the
pollutants which were considered for regulation, and those proposed
for regulation are *'d.
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
The options considered for pretreatment are identical to option 0
discussed in Section IX (pages 835-837) and the three options
discussed in Section X (pages 924-9.26). Pollutant removals for this
subcategory are displayed in Table XII-29 (page 1063) . Compliance
costs for existing plants are display in Table X-62 for each
technology option.
Pretreatment Option Selection
Option ฃ is proposed as the selected PSES option for all process
wastewater streams except heat paper production, and option 2 is
proposed as the selected option for heat paper production because the
standards are achievable at existing plants and the result of
implementing the proposed PSES is a significant reduction in the toxic
pollutant discharges which would otherwise pass through POTW. For the
proposed PSES, discharge flow is reduced to 1 million 1/yr and the
annual toxic pollutant removal is 160 kg/yr. For plants to comply
directly with this option, the estimated compliance capital cost is
$28,000 and the annual cost is $15,000 for existing plants, which is
the least costly alternative for indirect dischargers in this
subcategory.
All other options were rejected for existing sources because the toxic
pollutant removals are about equal and the compliance costs for the
options are higher than for the selected PSES. For option 0,
estimated compliance capital costs are $28,000 and annual costs are
$15,000.
For tion 1 estimated compliance capital cost is $37,000 and annual
cost is $22,000. For option 2 estimated compliance capital cost is
$37,000 and annual cost is $20,000. For option 3 estimated compliance
capital cost is $74,000 and annual cost is $28,000.
For new sources as discussed in Section XI, option 2 is selected
because it provides for the greatest level of toxic pollutant removal.
As discussed in the EIA, no entry impacts are projected with the
1039
-------
selection of this option. Also, four existing plants in the
subcategory achieve no discharge by choice of manufacturing processes.
Many alternatives can be considered when constructing a new plant.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
For pretreatment lead, nickel and silver are selected for regulation
in this subcategory. As discussed in Section X these pollutants were
selected for their toxicity, use within the subcategory and
treatability. For the pretreatment standards POTW treatment,
incompatability and pass-through of these pollutants were also
considered. In this subcategory asbestos is used as a raw material
and would be controlled by regulating TSS. Because POTW are designed
for treatment of conventional pollutants and adequately control TSS,
and thus asbestps, a specific standard for TSS is not proposed. Also,
iron and COD are not regulated because POTW may use iron as a
coagulant in the treatment process and are designed to treat oxygen
demand.
Pretreatment Effluent Standards
PSES are identical to the limitations presented in Section X. These
standards are expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per kg of
production normalizing parameter for each process element. Standards
for existing sources are presented in Tables XI1-30 to XI1-33 (pages
1065~1066 . These standard tables list all the pollutants which were
considered for regulation, and those proposed for regulation are *'d.
PSNS are identical to NSPS presented in Section XI with one exception;
air scrubbers are proposed for regulation at NSPS and not PSNS to
control TSS and thus asbestos. Standards are displayed in Tables
XII-34 to XII-37 (pages 1067-1068).
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PSES options 0-4 are identical to BPT and BAT options 1-4 as discussed
on pages 838 to 843 for BPT and pages 928 to 933 for BAT. Pollutant
removals and cost discussions are stated for existing indirect
discharges only. Pollutant removals for this subcategory are
displayed in Table XII-38 (page 1069).
Pretreatment Option Selection
Option ]_ is proposed as the selected PSES option because standards are
achievable using technologies and practices that are currently in use
at plants in the subcategory. Also, the result of implementing this
technology is a signficant reduction of toxic pollutants to POTW which
would otherwise pass through. For this option flow is reduced to 6.25
1040
-------
million 1/yr. The annual toxic pollutant removal is 4,390 kg/yr. For
plants to directly comply with this option the estimated compliance
capital cost is $347,000 and annual cost is $100,000.
Option ฃ is rejected because significant amounts of toxic metals would
pass/through POTW and not be controlled. Also, the use of mercury in
this subcategory usually prevents the POTW from using their sludges
for land use purposes. For this option flow is 46 million 1/yr and
annual toxic pollutant removal is 4,320 kg/yr. For plants to comply
directly with this option, the estimated compliance capital cost is
$258,000 and annual cost is $88,000.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X the technology
yields small incremental removals when compared to option 1. This
option will be considered for the final regulation however, because of
the toxicity of the pollutant mix (chromium, copper, mercury, nickel,
silver and zinc) in this subcategory. For this option flow is the
same as option 1, but the annual toxic pollutant removal is 4,395
kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with this option the estimated
compliance capital cost is $406,000 and annual cost is $159,000.
Option 3^ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X, sulfide
technology at existing plants requires significant modification or
retrofitting of treatment and ventilation systems within the plant in
addition to just installing the treatment equipment. For this option
discharge flow is reduced to 5.9 million 1/yr and the toxic pollutant
removal is 4401 kg/yr. As discussed in Section X, compliance costs
are estimated as equal to the option 2 costs.
Option ฃ is rejected because, as discussed in Section X, this
technology option requires substantial retrofitting of both production
and wastewater treatment processes at existing plants. For this
option discharge flow is reduced to 790,000 1/yr. The annual toxic
pollutant removal is 4404 kg/yr. For plants to comply directly with
this option the estimated compliance capital cost is $547,000 and
annual cost is $252,000. This option is proposed for PSNS however,
because as discussed in Section XI, the problems associated with this
option at existing plants will not be a major factor at new plants.
There are two existing plants which achieve no discharge of pollutants
by process selection and treatment. One other plant has installed
settling and ion exchange, and is attempting to achieve no discharge
of pollutants. New plants can select processes, install the
recommended technology or use other technologies to comply with the
new source standards. Also, as discussed in the EIA, no entry
impacts are projected.
Pollutant Parameters for Regulation
1041
-------
Pollutant parameters selected for pretreatment regulation in this
subcategory are chromium, mercury, silver, zinc and manganese. As
discussed in Section X these pollutants were selected for their
toxicity, use within the subcategory, and treatability. For the
pretreatment standards POTW treatment, incompatability, and
pass-through (for chromium, mercury, silver and zinc) were also
considered. Conventional pollutants are not specifically regulated
because POTW are specifically designed to treat conventional
pollutants.
Effluent Standards
Effluent standards for existing pretreatment sources are identical to
the BAT limitations discussed in Section X. These standards are
expressed in terms of mg of pollutant per kg of production normalizing
parameter for each process element. PSES are displayed in Tables
XII-39 to XII-53 )pagesl070-1077). To alleviate some of the monitoring
burden, several process elements which occur at most plants and have
the same pnp are combined in one regulatory table. Table XII-51A is
the combined table for tables XII 47, 49, 50, and 51. These standard
tables list all the pollutants which were considered for regulation,
and those proposed for regulation are *'d.
PSNS are identical to NSPS discussed in Section XI. Standards are
displayed in Tables XII-54 to XII-66. Table XII-64A is the combined
table for tables XII-60, 62, 63, and 64.
1042
-------
TABLE XII-1
POLLLTTAOT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY - INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
PARAMETER RAW WASTE
FLOW 1/yr (106)
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
121 CYANIDE
^ 122 LEAD
w 123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
COBALT
OIL & GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
kg/yr
209.90.
6918.30
15.32
10.29
0.42
1.68
14839.93
3.78
32702.42
98.44
1358.05
81378.23
54481.85
82736.28
137326.86
PSES O
Removed
kg/yr
6901.72
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
14720.29
0.00
32639.45
83.75
0.00
78859.43
54261 .46
78859.43
133204.64
Discharged
kg/yr
209.90
16.58
15.32
10.29
0.42
1.68
119.64
3.78
62.97
14.69
1358.05
2518.80
220.39
3876.85
4122.22
PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
6916.03
13.02
8.28
0.00
0.00
14823.58
0.91
32693.81
96.43
1071.15
81033.95
54447.35
82105.10
136657.16
Discharged
kg/yr
28.69
2.27
2.30
2.01
0.42
1.68
16.35
2.87
8.61
2.01
286.90
344.28
34.50
631.18
669.70
PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
6916.89
13.31
8.94
0.00
0.65
14833.62
1.77
32695.82
97.01
1071.15
81303.64
54462.06
82374.79
136942.80
Discharged
kg/yr
28.69
1.41
2.01
1.35
0.42
1.03
6.31
2.01
6.60
1.43
286.90
74.59
19.79
361.49
384.06
PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
6918.09
15.02
10.09
0.08
1.53
14838.99
3.48
32701.44
98.23
1315.55
81367.18
54478.63
82682.73
137269.68
Discharged
kg/yr
4.25
0.21
0.30
0.20
0.34
0.15
0.94
0.30
0.98
0.21
42.50
11.05
3.22
53.55
57. 1R
PSES 4
Renewed
kg/yr
6918.30
15.32
10.29
0.42
1.68
14839.93
3.78
32702.42
98.44
1358.05
81378.23
54481.85
82736.28
137326.86
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
SLUDGE GEN
1253939.88
1275089.82
1276872.00
1278757.53
1279089.70
-------
TABLE XII-2
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
11.248
14.763
10.194
5.273
8.788
49.561
46.750
10.194
5.272
5.976
4.218
4.570
3.515
35.150
19.684
4.218
TABLE XII-3
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
IMPREGNATED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CADMIUM
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
64.000
84.000
58.000
30.000
50.000
282.000
266.000
58.000
30.000
34.000
24.000
26.000
20.000
200.000
112.000
24.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1044
-------
TABLE XII-4
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
NICKEL ELECTRODEPOSITED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
10.560
13.860
9.570
4.950
8.250
46.530
43.890
9.570
4.950
5.610
3.960
4.290
3.300
33.000
18.480
3.960
TABLE XII-5
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
* COBALT
64.000
84.000
58.000
30.000
50.000
282.000
266.000
58.000
30.000
34.000
24.000
26.000
20.000
200.000
112.000
24.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1045
-------
TABLE XII-6
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CELT. WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
* CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.240
0.315
0.218
0.113
0.188
1.058
0.998
0.218
0.113
0.128
0.090
0.098
0.075
0.750
0.420
0.090
TABLE XII-7
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.026
0.034
0.023
0.012
0.020
0.113
0.106
0.023
0.012
0.014
0.010
0.010
0.008
0.080
0.045
0.010
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1046
-------
TABLE XII-8
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.480
0.630
0.435
0.225
0.375
2.115
1.995
0.435
0.225
0.255
0.180
0.195
0.150
1.500
0.340
0.180
TABLE XII-8A
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CELL WASH, ELECTROLYTE PREPARATION, AND EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.746
0.979
0.676
0.350
0.583
3.285
3.099
0.676
0.350
0.396
0.280
0.303
0.233
2.330
1.305
0.280
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1047
-------
TABLE XII-9
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM POWDER PRODUCED
*CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
2.102
2.759
1.905
0.986
1.643
9.264
8.738
1.905
0.985
1.117
0.788
0.854
0.657
6.570
3.679
0.788
TABLE XII-10
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER POWDER PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
* CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
* SILVER
*ZINC
*COBALT
1.027
1.348
0.931
0.432
0.803
4.526
1.316
4.269
0.931
0.481
0.546
0.385
0.417
0.321
3.210
0.546
1.798
0.385
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1048
-------
TABLE XII-11
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CADMIUM HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CADMIUM USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CADMIUM USED
'CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
*NICKEL
*ZINC
*COBALT
0.045
0.059
0.041
0.021
0.035
0.197
0.186
0.041
0.021
0.024
0.017
0.018
0.014
0.140
0.078
0.017
TABLE XII-12
CADMIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
NICKEL HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF NICKEL USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL USED
DMIUM 5.280
ROMIUM 6.930
ANIDE 4.785
AD 2.475
RCURY 4.125
CKEL 23.265
NC 21.945
BALT 4.785
2.475
2.805
1.980
2.145
1.650
16.500
9.240
1.980
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1049
-------
TABLE XII-13
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
CALCIUM SUBCATEGORY - TOTAL
PARAMETER
FLOW 1/yr (106)*
116 ASBESTOS!/
119 CHROMIUM
H TSS
o
O
TOXIC METALS
OWEOTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
0.13
40.95
7.93
47.84
7.93
47.84
55.77
BPT
Removed
kg/yr
39.60
7.92
46.28
7.92
46.28
54.20
& PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
0.13
1.35
0.01
1.56
0.01
1.56
1.57
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
40.66
7.92
47.50
7.92
47.50
55.42
& PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
0.13
0.29
0.01
0.34
0.01
0.34
0.35
BAT 2 & PSES 2
SLUDGE GEN
317.73
323.83
Removed
kg/yr
40.95
7.93
47.84
7.93
47.84
55.77
325.64
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
* 100% of the total flow is for indirect dischargers.
I/ Asbestos is in trillions of fibers per year; not included in total.
-------
TABLE XII-14
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LEAD SUBCATEGORY - INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
PARAMETER RAW WASTE
kg/yr
PSES O
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
PSES 4
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
FLOW 1/yr (106) 6253.19
2728.09
307.80
307.80
307.80
46.43
114 ANTIMONY
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
Q 120 COPPER
(jl 122 LEAD
H 123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
312.65
25.01
1225.63
1250.64
932350.63
6.26
906.72
87.54
2169.86
IRON 77289.42
OIL & GREASE 260758.02
TSS 5515313.58
' 176.24
0.00
1007.38
0.00
932023.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
1351.43
76170.90
233477.12
5482576.50
136.41
25.01
218.25
1250.64
327.37
6.26
906.72
87.54
818.43
1118.52
27280.90
32737.08
297.26
0.70
1201.01
1072.11
932313.70
0.00
731.27
56.76
2077.52
77163.22
257680.02
5511619.98
15.39
24.31
24.62
178.53
36.93
6.26
175.45
30.78
92.34
126.20
3078.00
3693.60
302.19
9.93
1204.09
1130.60
932326.01
0.00
839.00
66.00
2099.06
77203.23
257680.02
5514513.30
10.46
15.08
21.54
120.04
24.62
6.26
67.72
21.54
70.80
86.19
3073.00
800.28
302.19
21.93
1210.24
1235.25
932347.55
0.00
891.32
72.15
2166.78
77203.25
257680.02
5514513.30
10.47
3.08
15.39
15.39
3.08
6.25
15.39
15.39
3.08
86.18
3078.00
800.28
311.08
24.55
1223.31
1248.32
932350.17
4.67
904.39
85.22
2169.40
77276.43
260293.72
5515192.86
1.58
0.46
2.32
2.32
0.46
1.58
2.32
2.32
0.46
13.00
464.30
120.72
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONAIJS
TOTAL POLLU.
938334.94 934558.31
5776071.60 5716053.62
6791695.96 6726782.86
3776.63 937750.33
60017.98 5769300.00
64913.10 6784213.55
584.61 937976.88 358.06 938247.41
6771.60 5772193.32 3878.28 5772193.32
7482.41 6787373.43 4322.53 6787643.98
87.52 938321.11 13.02
3878.28 5775486.58 585.02
4051.98 6791084.12 611.84
SLUDGE GEN
40899049.50
41225380.19
41245258.45
41249078.35
41267372.22
-------
TABLE XII-15
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
OPEN FORMATION - DEHYDRATED
MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
0.286
0.435
0.571
2.584
0.204
0.340
1.918
0.558
1.809
1.673
0.122
0.204
0.231
1.360
0.177
0.136
1.360
0.231
0.762
0.857
TABLE XII-16
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
BATTERY WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF
0.076
0.115
0.151
0.684
0.054
0.090
0.508
0.148
0.479
0.443
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
LEAD USED
0.032
0.054
0.061
0.360
0.047
0.036
0.360
0.061
0.202
0.227
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1052
-------
TABLE XII-17
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
BATTERY REPAIR
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
0.029
0.045
0.059
0.266
0.021
0.035
0.197
0.057
0.186
0.172
0.013
0.021
0.024
0.140
0.018
0.014
0.140
0.024
0.078
0.088
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1053
-------
TABLE XII-18
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
OPEN FORMATION - DEHYDRATED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
0.029
0.008
0.039
0.039
0.008
0.027
0.039
0.039
0.008
0.251
0.012
0.003
0.021
0.016
0.002
0.012
0.017
0.017
0.004
0.129
TABLE XII-19
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
BATTERY WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 000, 000 Ib OF LEAD
0.008
0.002
0.010
0.010
0.002
0.007
0.010
0.010
0.002
0.066
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
USED
0.003
0.001
0.005
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.001
0.034
1054
-------
TABLE XII-20
LEAD SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
BATTERY REPAIR
POL TANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROT ^RTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF LEAD USED
ANTIMONY
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
*COPPER
*LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SILVER
ZINC
IRON
0.003
0.001
0.004
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.001
0.026
0.001
0.000
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.013
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1055
-------
TABLE XII-21
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL OPTIONS
LBCLANCHE SUBCATBGOK?
RAW WASTE
BPT & BAT (PSES)
Flow 1/yr (106)
I/kg
POLLUTANTS
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil & Grease
TSS
Toxic Metals
Conventionals
All Pollutants
mg/1
0.090
0.053
0.409
0.466
0.101
13.40
1.212
0.086
317.5
69.3
115.0
2,536.
0.758
rag/kg
0.068
0.040
0.310
0.353
0.076
10.16
0.919
0.065
240.7
52.5
87.2
1,922.
16.71
kg/yr
1.503
0.881
6.84
7.78
1.684
223.9
20.25
1.435
5,306.
1,158.
1,922.
42,369.
5,570.
44,291.
51,019.
Removed
kg/yr
1.503
0.881
6.84
7.78
1.684
223.9
20.25
1.435
5,306.
1,158.
1,922.
42,369.
5,570.
44,291.
51,019.
0.0
Discharged
kg/yr
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Sludge Generated
294,166.
1056
-------
TABLE XII-22
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LITHIUM SUBCATBQORY
PARAMETER RAW WASTE
kg/yr
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.04
116 ASBESTOS!/ 12. 60
119 CHROMIUM 2.44
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COBALT
IRON
TSS 14.72
CATHODE AND ANCILLARY OPERATIONS
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.21
116 ASBESTOS!/ 1.35
119 CHROMIUM 0.16
122 LEAD 1.02
128 ZINC 0.10
COBALT 0.04
IRON 11.37
COD 299.09
TSS 9.09
AIR SCRUBBER WASTEWATERS
BPT &
Removed
kg/yr
12.19
2.44
(-0.005)
(-0.010)
(-0.002)
(-0.014)
14.24
0.00
0.14
0.995
0.050
0.032
11.294
296.99
6.57
PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
0.04
0.41
0.00
0.005
0.010
0.002
0.014
0.48
0.21
1.35
0.02
0.025
0.050
0.008
0.076
2.10
2.52
FLOW 1/yr (106) 0.11
TSS 132.96 131.64
\J Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year;
BAT 1 & PSES 1
RemovedDischarged
kg/yr kg/yr
12.51
2.44
(-0.003)
(-O.008)
(-0.002)
(-0.010)
14.62
0.88
0.15
1.003
0.058
0.032
11.320
296.99
8.54
0.11
1.32 131.64
not included in totals.
0.04
0.09
0.00
0.003
0.008
0.002
0.010
0.10
0.21
0.11
1.32
BAT 2 & PSES 2
Removed
kg/yr
12.60
2.44
14.72
0.47
0.01
0.017
0.042
0.008
0.050
2.10
0.55
0.88
0.15
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
8.54
131.64
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
0.55
0.11
1.32
BAT 3 & PSES 3
Renewed
kg/yr
12.60
2.44
14.72
0.88
0.15
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
8.54
132.67
Discharged
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
0.55
0.11
0.29
-------
O
Ul
00
TABLE XII-22
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PARAMETER RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BPT
Removed
kg/yr
fc FSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 2
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 2
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 3
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 3
Discharged
kg/yr
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY SUMMARY 2/
FLOW 1/yr (106)
116 ASBESTOS I/
119 CHROMIUN
122 LEAD
128 ZINC
COBALT
IRON
COD
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
0.36
13.95
2.60
1.02
0.10
0.04
11.37
299.09
156.77
3.72
156.77
470.99
12.19
2.58
0.99
0.04
0.03
11.28
296.99
152.45
3.61
152.45
464.36
0.36
1.76
0.02
0.03
0.06
0.01
0.09
2.10
4.32
0.11
4.32
6.63
13.39
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
154.80
3.64
154.80
466.77
0.36
0.56
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
1.97
0.08
1.97
4.22
13.48
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
154.90
3.64
154.90
466.87
0.32
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
1.87
0.08
1.87
4.12
13.48
2.59
1.00
0.05
0.03
11.31
296.99
155.93
3.64
155.93
467.90
0.32
0.47
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.01
0.06
2.10
0.84
0.08
0.84
3.09
SLUD3E GEN
922.02
934.41
934.91
940.06
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
2/ For direct dischargers only multiply totals by 0.01.
For indirect dischargers only multiply totals by 0.99.
-------
TABLE XII-23
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
LEAD IODIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD USED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD USED
CHROMIUM
LEAD
ZINC
COBALT
IRON
26.494
9.462
83.896
18.293
77. 588
10.724
8.200
35.325
7.570
39.740
TABLE XII-24
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODES
MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF IRON DISULFIDE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF IRON DISULFIDE
CHROMIUM
LEAD
ZINC
COBALT
IRON
3.167
1.131
10.028
2.187
9.274
1.282
0.980
4.222
0.905
4.750
1059
-------
TABLE XII-25
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH, CELL TESTING, & LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
CHROMIUM 0.045 0.018
LEAD 0.016 0.014
ZINC 0.144 0.060
COBALT 0.031 0.013
IRON 0.133 0.068
1060
-------
TABLE XII-26
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
LEAD IODIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
AN? ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF LEAD
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF LEAD
* CHROMIUM
*LEAD
ZINC
COBALT
IRON
23.340
6.308
64.342
13.247
77.588
9.462
5.677
26.494
5.677
39.740
TABLE XII-27
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
IRON DISULFIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF IRON DISULFIDE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF IRON DISULFIDE
*CHROMIUM
*LEAD
ZINC
COBALT
IRON
2.790
0.754
7.691
1.583
9.274
1.131
0.679
3.167
0.679
4.750
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1061
-------
TABLE XII-28
LITHIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT NASH, CELL TESTING, AND LITHIUM SCRAP DISPOSAL
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
*CHROMIUM
*LEAD
ZINC
COBALT
IRON
0.040
0.011
0.110
0.023
0.133
0.016
0.010
0.045
0.010
0.068
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1062
-------
XII-29
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
MAGNESIUM SUBCATBGORY
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BPT
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
HEAT PAPER PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr (106)
116 ASBESTOS i/
119 CHROMIUM
TSS
2.60
819.00
158.60
956.80
792.08
158.39
925.60
2.60
26.92
0.21
31.20
813.17
158.42
950.04
2.60
5.83
0.18
6.76
CELL TESTING AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
FLOW 1/yr (106)
122 LEAD 0.
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
TSS
0.11
13
0.01
1.61
0.21
91.08
0.12
0.00
1.60
0.16
89.76
0.11
0.01 0.
0.01
0.01
0.05
1.32
12
0.00
1.60
0.16
89.76
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.05
1.32
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODE PRODUCTION
FLOW 1/yr (106)
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
COD
TSS
AIR SCRUBBERS
FLOW 1/yr (106)
TSS
0.75
0.04
0.04
0.19
0.42
105.00
0.53
0.45
543.94
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.24
100.70
0.00
538.54
0.43
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.18
4.30
0.53
0.45
5.40
0.03
0.00
0.18
0.37
103.80
0.00
538.54
0.12
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.05
1.20
0.53
0.45
5.40
BAT 2 & PSES 2 BAT 3 & PSES3
Renewed Discharged Removed Discharged
kg/yr kg/yr kg/yr kg/yr
0.00 0.00
819.00 0.00 819.00 0.00
158.60 0.00 158.60 0.00
956.80 0.00 956.80 0.00
0.11 0.11
0.12 0.01 0.12 0.01
0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
1.60 0.01 1.60 0.01
0.18 0.03 0.18 0.03
90.79 0.29 90.79 0.29
0.12 0.12
0.03 0.01 0.03 0.01
0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03
0.18 0.01 0.18 0.01
0.39 0.03 0.39 0.03
103.80 1.20 103.80 1.20
0.22 0.31 0.22 0.31
0.45 0.45
538.54 5.40 542.77 1.17
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
-------
TABLE XII-29
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OP CONTROL SYSTEMS
MAGNESIUM SUBCATBQORY
BAT 2 & PSES 2
PARAMETER
RAW WASTE
kg/yr
BET
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 0
Discharged
kg/yr
BAT 1
Removed
kg/yr
& PSES 1
Discharged
kg/yr
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY SUMMARY iJ
FLOW 1/yr (106)
116 ASBESTOS I/
119 CHROMIUM
122 LEAD
124 NICKEL
126 SILVER
IRON
COD
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
3.91
819.00
158.60
0.17
0.05
1.80
0.63
105.00
1592.35
160.62
1592.35
1858.60
792.08
158.39
0.12
0.00
1.75
0.40
100.70
1553.90
160.26
1553.90
1815.26
3.59
26.92
0.21
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.23
4.30
38.45
0.36
38.45
43.34
813.17
158.42
0.15
0.00
1.78
0.53
103.80
1578.34
160.35
1578.34
1843.02
3.28
5.83
0.18
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.10
1.20
14.01
0.27
14.01
15.58
SLUDGE GEN
9514.35
9638.83
I/ Asbestos is trillions of fibers per year; not included in totals.
2/ For direct dischargers only multiply totals by 0.05.
For indirect dischargers only multiply totals by 0.95.
Removed
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
0.15
0.01
1.78
0.57
103.80
1586.35
160.54
1586.35
1851.26
9681.63
Discharged
kg/yr
0.68
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.06
1.20
6.00
0.08
6.00
7.34
BAT 3 & PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
819.00
158.60
0.15
0.01
1.78
0.57
103.80
1590.58
160.54
1590.58
2674.49
13797.78
0.68
0.68
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.06
1.20
1.77
0.08
1.77
3.11
-------
TABLE XII-30
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - CHEMICALLY REDUCED
flM^MMMKH0^MBaB(w^B^M^B^B^,wwv^lw^MBaM,n^BV|M>^^^^wv^,M^^Bflv^^^B4>MBflM
-------
TABLE XII-32
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CELL TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD
NICKEL
*SILVER
IRON
COD
7.890
74.166
21.566
64.698
2630.000
6.838
52.600
8.942
33.138
1283.440
TABLE XII-33
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD
NICKEL
* SILVER
IRON
COD
0.014
0.133
0.039
0.116
4.700
0.012
0.094
0.016
0.059
2.294
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1066
-------
TABLE XII-34
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - CHEMICALLY REDUCED
MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
*LEAD 8.190 7.371
NICKEL 45.045 30.303
SILVER 23.751 9.828
IRON 100.737 51.597
COD 4095.000 1998.360
TABLE XII-35
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
SILVER CHLORIDE CATHODES - ELECTROLYTIC
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS ซ mg/kg OF SILVER PROCESSED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
*LEAD v
NICKEL
* SILVER
IRON
COD
14.500
79.750
42.050
178.350
7250.000
13.050
53.650
17.400
91.350
3538.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1067
-------
TABLE XII-36
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
CELL TESTING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD
NICKEL
*SILVER
IRON
COD
5.260
28.930
15.254
64.698
2630.000
4.734
19.462
6.312
33.138
1283.440
TABLE XII-37
MAGNESIUM SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
*LEAD
NICKEL
*SILVER
IRON
COD
0.009
0.052
0.027
0.116
4.700
0.008
0.035
0.011
0.059
2.294
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1068
-------
TABLE XII-38
POLLUTANT REDUCTION BENEFITS OF CONTROL SYSTEMS
ZINC SUBCATBQORY - INDIRECT DISCHARGERS
PARAMETER RAW WASTE
FLOW 1/yr (106)
115 ARSENIC
118 CADMIUM
119 CHROMIUM
120 COPPER
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
123 MERCURY
124 NICKEL
125 SELENIUM
126 SILVER
128 ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
MANGANESE
OIL & GREASE
TSS
TOXIC METALS
CONVENTIONALS
TOTAL POLLU.
kg/yr
46.44
2.51
1.72
1149.86
21.54
32.60
3.62
590.25
75.23
1.62
46.02
2479.89
13.88
0.18
235.45
1197.22
2891.35
4372.26
4088.57
8742.94
PSES O
Removed
kg/yr
0.00
0.00
1146.15
0.00
29.35
0.00
587.46
48.76
1.16
41.38
2465.96
0.00
0.00
225.69
732.82
2334.07
4290.87
3066.89
7612.80
Discharged
kg/yr
46.44
2.51
1.72
3.71
21.54
3.25
3.62
2.79
26.47
0.46
4.64
13.93
13.88
0.18
9.76
- 464.40
557.28
81.39
1021.68
1130.14
PSES 1
Removed
kg/yr
0.00
1.23
1149.36
17.92
32.16
2.87
589.87
71.68
1.56
45.40
2478.02
6.96
0.00
234.14
1134.82
2816.47
4357.91
3951.29
8582.46
Discharged
kg/yr
6.24
2.51
0.49
0.50
3.62
0.44
0.75
0.38
3.55
0.06
0.62
1.87
6.92
0.18
1.31
62.40
74.88
14.35
137.28
160.48
PSES 2
Removed Disdharged
kg/yr kg/yr
0.39
1.41
1149.42
19.11
32.31
3.12
590.03
73.86
1.57
45.58
2478.45
9.26
0.00
234.57
1134.82
2875.12
4362.94
4009.94
8649.02
6.24
2.12
0.31
0.44
2.43
0.29
0.50
0.22
1.37
0.05
0.44
1.44
4.62
0.18
0.88
62.40
16.23
9.32
78.63
99.92
PSES 3
Removed
kg/yr
Discharged
kg/yr
0.51
1.66
1149.57
21.25
32.32
3.56
590.05
74.94
1.58
45.73
2479.83
9.53
0.00
234.63
1138.42
2876.06
4368.68
4014.49
8659.65
5.88
2.00
0.06
0.29
0.29
0.28
0.06
0.20
0.29
0.04
0.29
0.06
4.35
0.18
0.82
58.80
15.28
3.58
74.08
83.29
PSES 4
Removed
kg/yr
2.24
1.71
1149.82
21.50
32.56
3.61
590.22
75.19
1.61
45.98
2479.88
13.30
0.00
235.34
1189.32
2889.29
4371.76
4078.61
8731.57
Discharged
kg/yr
0.79
0.27
0.01
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.04
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.58
0.19
0.11
7.90
2.06
0.50
9.96
11.37
SLUDGE GEN
59385.49
65473.01
65948.03
66059.94
66541.30
-------
TABLE XII-39
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
WET AMALGAMATED POWDER ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
MANGANESE
GELLED AMALGAM
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
SILVER
ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF
1.149
0.176
0.231
1.045
0.160
0.083
0.137
0.775
0.022
0.226
0.732
2.503
0.676
0.237
TABLE XII-40
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SC
ANODES
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF
0.142
0.022
0.029
0.129
0.020
0.010
0.017
0.096
0.003
0.028
0.090
0.309
0.084
0.029
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ZINC
0.473
0.083
0.093
0.550
0.066
0.072
0.055
0.550
0.011
0.093
0.308
1.023
0.347
0.187
XJRCES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ZINC
0.058
0.010
0.012
0.068
0.008
0.009
0.007
0.068
0.001
0.012
0.038
0.126
0.043
0.023
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1070
-------
TABLE XII-41
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
ZINC OXIDE ANODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
ARSENIC 45.290 18.636
CADMIUM 6.934 3.251
CHROMIUM 9.101 3.684
COPPER 41.173 21.670
CYANIDE 6.284 2.600
LEAD 3.251 2.817
*MERCURY 5.418 2.167
NICKEL 30.555 21.670
SELENIUM 0.867 0.433
'SILVER 8.885 3.684
*ZINC 28.821 12.135
ALUMINUM 98.599 40.306
IRON 26.654 13.652
MANGANESE 9.318 7.368
TABLE XII-42
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
ELECTRODEPOSITED ANODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ARSENIC 505.153 207.862
CADMIUM 77.344 36.255
*CHROMIUM 101.514 41.089
COPPER 459.230 241.700
CYANIDE 70.093 29.004
LEAD 36.255 31.421
*MERCURY 60.425 24.170
NICKEL 340.797 241.700
SELENIUM 9.668 4.834
*SILVER 99.097 41.089
*ZINC 321.461 135.352
ALUMINUM 1099.735 449.562
IRON 297.291 152.271
*MANGANESE 103.931 82.178
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1071
-------
TABLE XII-43
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC 62.073 25.542
CADMIUM 9.504 4.455
*CHRDMIUM 12.474 5.049
COPPER 56.430 29.700
CYANIDE 8.613 3.564
LEAD 4.455 3.861
*MERCURY 7.425 2.970
NICKEL 41.877 29.700
SELENIUM 1.188 0.594
*SILVER 12.177 5.049
*ZINC 39.501 16.632
ALUMINUM 135.135 55.242
IRON 36.531 18.711
'MANGANESE 12.771 10.098
TABLE XII-44
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER OXIDE POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC 41.487 17.071
CADMIUM 6.352 2.978
*CHROMIUM 8.337, 3.375
COPPER 37.715 19.850
CYANIDE 5.757 2.382
LEAD 2.978 2.581
*MERCURY 4.963 1.985
NICKEL 27.989 19.850
SELENIUM 0.794 0.397
*SILVER 8.139 3.375
*ZINC 26.401 11.116
ALUMINUM 90.318 36.921
IRON 24.416 12.506
*MANGANESE 8.536 6.749
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1072
-------
TABLE XII-45
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
0.714
1.190
6.712
0.190
1.952
6.331
21.658
5.855
2.047
0.619
0.476
4.760
0.095
0.809
2.666
8.854
2.999
1.618
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC 9.948 4.094
CADMIUM 1.523 0.714
'CHROMIUM 1.999 0.809
COPPER 9.044 4.760
CYANIDE 1.380 0.571
LEAD
'MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
TABLE XII-46
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
ARSENIC 418.000 172.000
CADMIUM 64.000 30.000
'CHROMIUM 84.000 34.000
COPPER 380.000 200.000
CYANIDE 58.000 24.000
LEAD 30.000 26.000
'MERCURY 50.000 20.000
'NICKEL 282.000 200.000
SELENIUM 8.000 4.000
'SILVER 82.000 34.000
'ZINC 266.000 112.000
ALUMINUM 910.000 372.000
IRON 246.000 126.000
'MANGANESE 86.0 0 0 68.00 0
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1073
-------
TABLE XII-47
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CELL WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
SILVER ETCH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.355
0.054
0.071
0.323
0.049
0.025
0.042
0.240
0.007
0.070
0.226
0.773
0.209
0.073
TABLE XII-48
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXIST
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
15.550
2.381
3.125
14.136
2.158
1.116
1.860
10.490
0.298
3.050
9.895
33.852
9.151
3.199
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODUCED
Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.146
0.025
0.029
0.170
0.020
0.022
0.017
0.170
0.003
0.029
0.095
0.316
0.107
0.058
ING SOURCES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
R PROCESSED
Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
6.398
1.116
1.265
7.440
0.893
0.967
0.744
7.440
0.149
1.265
4.166
13.838
4.687
2.530
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1074
-------
TABLE XII-49
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
REJECT CELT.
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.564
0.086
0.113
0.513
0.078
0.040
0.068
0.381
0.011
0.111
0.359
1.229
0.332
0.116
TABLE XII-50
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXIST
HANDLING
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.021
0.003
0.004
0.019
0.003
0.002
0.003
0.014
0.000
0.004
0.013
0.046
0.012
0.004
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODUCED
lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.232
0.040
0.046
0.270
0.032
0.035
0.027
0.270
0.005
0.046
0.151
0.502
0.170
0.092
ING SOURCES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODEUCED
lb OF CELLS PRODEUCED
0.009
0.002
0.002
0.010
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.010
0.000
0.002
0.006
0.019
0.006
0.003
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1075
-------
" TABLE XII-51
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mgA9 OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.722
0.126
0.143
0.840
0.101
0.109
0.084
0.840
0.017
0.143
0.470
1.562
0.529
0.286
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
1.756
0.269
0.353
1.596
0.244
0.126
0.210
1.184
0.034
0.344
1.117
3.822
1.033
0.361
TABLE XII-51A
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
CELL WASH, EMPLOYEE WASH, REJECT CELL HANDLING, AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
2.696
0.413
0.542
2.451
0.374
0.193
0.323
1.819
0.052
0.529
1.716
5.870
1.587
0.555
1.109
0.193
0.219
1.290
0.155
0.168
0.129
1.290
0.026
0.219
0.722
2.399
0.813
0.439
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1076
-------
TABLE XII-52
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
METRIC
ENGLIS
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
SILVER POWDER
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER IN SILVER
H UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER
16.532
2.531
3.322
15.029
2.294
1.186
1.978
11.153
0.316
3.243
10.520
35.991
9.729
3.401
TABLE XII-53
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTIN
PRODUCTION
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 000,000 Ib
6.709
1.027
1.348
6.099
0.931
0.481
0.302
4.526
0.128
1.316
4.269
14.606
3.948
1.380
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PEROXIDE PRODUCED
IN SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
6.803
1.186
1.345
7.910
0.949
1.028
0.791
7.910
0.158
1.345
4.430
14.713
4.983
2.689
G SOURCES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
POWDER PRODUCED
OF SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
2.761
0.481
0.546
3.210
0.385
0.417
0.321
3.210
0.064
0.546
1.798
5.971
2.022
1.091
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1077
-------
TABLE XII-54
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
ZINC OXIDE ANODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
'MANGANESE
ELECTRODEPOS ITED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
4.519
0.120
0.618
0.618
0.650
0.120
0.423
0.618
0.098
0.618
0.120
9.851
3.999
0.975
TABLE XII-55
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
ANODES
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF ZINC DEPOSITED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF ZINC
50.401
1.342
6.889
6.889
7.252
1.342
4.714
6.889
1.088
6.889
1.342
109.868
44.600
10.878
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
1.853
0.055
0.328
0.254
0.260
0.036
0.185
0.270
0.033
0.273
0.062
4.031
2.048
0.748
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
DEPOSITED
20.668
0.616
3.662
2.828
2.901
0.399
2.067
3.010
0.363
3.046
0.689
44.962
22.844
8.340
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1078
-------
TABLE XII-56
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
SILVER POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
* MANGANESE
SILVER OXIDE
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mgAg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 00 0,000 Ib OF SILV
6.185
0.165
0.846
0.846
0.890
0.165
0.579
0.846
0.133
0.846
0.165
13.484
5.474
1.335
TABLE XII-57
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
POWDER CATHODES, FORMED
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1, 000, 000 Ib OF SILV
4.139
0.110
0.566
0.566
0.596
0.110
0.387
0.566
0.089
0.566
0.110
9.023
3.663
0.893
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ER APPLIED
2.537
0.076
0.449
0.347
0.356
0.049
0.254
0.369
0.045
0.374
0.085
5.518
2.804
1.024
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ER APPLIED
1.697
0.051
0.301
0.232
0.238
0.033
0.170
0.247
0.030
0.250
0.057
3.693
1.876
0.685
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1079
-------
TABLE XII-58
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
SILVER PEROXIDE CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER APPLIED
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
* MANGANESE
0.992
0.026
0.136
0.136
0.143
0.026
0.093
0.136
0.021
0.136
0.026
2.163
0.878
0.214
TABLE XII-59
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
0.407
0.012
0.072
0.056
0.057
0.008
0.041
0.059
0.007
0.060
0.014
0.885
0.450
0.164
NICKEL IMPREGNATED CATHODES
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF NICKEL APPLIED
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF NICKEL APPLIED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
41.700
1.110
5.700
5.700
6.000
1.110
3.900
5.700
0.900
5.700
1.110
90.900
36.900
9.000
17.100
0.510
3.030
2.340
2.400
0.330
1.710
2.490
0.300
2.520
0.570
37.200
18.900
6.900
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1080
-------
TABLE XII-60
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
CELL WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
SILVER ETCH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.036
0.001
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.001
0.003
0.005
0.001
0.005
0.001
0.079
0.032
0.008
TABLE XII-61
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVE
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
1.551
0.041
0.212
0.212
0.223
0.041
0.145
0.212
0.033
0.212
0.041
3.381
1.373
0.335
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODUCED
Ib OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.015
0.000
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.000
0.001
0.002
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.032
0.016
0.006
SOURCES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
R PROCESSED
Ib OF SILVER PROCESSED
0.636
0.019
0.113
0.087
0.089
0.012
0.064
0.093
0.011
0.094
0.021
1.384
0.703
0.257
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1081
-------
TABLE XII-62
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
EMPLOYEE WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.057
0.002
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.002
0.005
0.008
0.001
0.008
0.002
0.124
0.050
0.012
TABLE XII-63
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODUCED
lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.023
0.001
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.000
0.002
0.003
0.000
0.003
0.001
0.051
0.026
0.009
SOURCES
REJECT CELL HANDLING
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
* MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000
0.003
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.006
0.002
0.001
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
PRODUCED
lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.001
0.000
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1082
-------
TABLE XII-64
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
FLOOR & EQUIPMENT WASH
^^^^^ งปซ! ! *m*m^mป+ma*mm^mm*m^wm งซ ^immt^mmmm ^ ^^ซป ^i ^iปซปซปซปซป ^ ปซป
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
* MANGANESE
0.175
0.005
0.024
0.024
0.025
0.005
0.016
0.024
0.004
0.024
0.005
0.382
0.155
0.038
0.072
0.002
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.001
0.007
0.010
0.001
0.011
0.002
0.156
0.079
0.029
TABLE XII-64A
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
CELL WASH, EMPLOYEE WASH, REJECT CELL HANDLING, AND FLOOR AND EQUIPMENT WASH
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT MAXIMUM FOR MAXIMUM FOR
PROPERTY ANY ONE DAY MONTHLY AVERAGE
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF CELLS PRODUCED
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 lb OF CELLS PRODUCED
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
*CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
*NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
0.271
0.007
0.037
0.037
0.039
0.007
0.025
0.037
0.006
0.037
0.007
0.591
0.240
0.059
0.111
0.003
0.020
0.015
0.016
0.002
0.011
0.016
0.002
0.016
0.004
0.242
0.123
0.045
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1083
-------
TABLE XII-65
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCTION
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
METRIC
ENGLIS
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
*SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*M.*NGANESE
SILVER POWDER
POLLUTANT OR
POLLUTANT
PROPERTY
ARSENIC
CADMIUM
*CHROMIUM
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
*MERCURY
NICKEL
SELENIUM
* SILVER
*ZINC
ALUMINUM
IRON
*MANGANESE
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER IN SILVER PERC
H UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF SILVER IN
1.650
0.044
0.226
0.226
0.237
0.044
0.154
0.226
0.036
0.226
0.044
3.597
1.460
0.356
TABLE XII-66
ZINC SUBCATEGORY
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURC
PRODUCTION
MAXIMUM FOR
ANY ONE DAY
METRIC UNITS - mg/kg OF SILVER POWI
ENGLISH UNITS - lb/1,000,000 Ib OF
0.670
0.018
0.092
0.092
0.096
0.018
0.063
0.092
0.014
0.092
0.013
1.460
0.593
0.145
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
)XIDE PRODUCED
SILVER PEROXIDE PRODUCED
0.677
0.020
0.120
0.093
0.095
0.013
0.068
0.099
0.012
0.100
0.023
1.472
0.748
0.273
:ES
MAXIMUM FOR
MONTHLY AVERAGE
)ER PRODUCED
SILVER POWDER PRODUCED
0.275
0.008
0.049
0.038
0.039
0.005
0.027
0.040
0.005
0.040
0.009
0.598
0.304
0.111
* THIS POLLUTANT IS PROPOSED FOR REGULATION
1084
-------
SECTION XIII
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The 1977 amendments added section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act,
establishing "best conventional pollutant control technology" {BCT)
for discharges of conventional pollutants from existing industrial
point sources. Conventional pollutants are those defined in section
304(a)(4) - BOD, TSS, fecal coliform and pH - and any additional
pollutants defined by the Administrator as "conventional." On July 30,
1979, EPA designated oil and grease as a conventional pollutant (44
Fed. Reg. 44501).
This section is reserved. The Agency is not proposing BCT for this
category at this time, but expects to propose and promulgate BCT at a
later date. At that time the development of the BCT evaluation will
be explained.
1085
-------
-------
SECTION XIV
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
Data collection, data compilation, field sampling and analysis,
wastewater treatment costing, and initial drafts for this project were
prepared under Contracts 68-01-4668 and 68-01-5827 by the Hamilton
Standard Division of United Technologies Corporation. Assistance with
the assembling of the proposed document was done under Contract 68-01-
6469 by Versar Inc. The proposed document has been revised
substantially by and at the direction of EPA personnel.
Hamilton Standard's effort was managed by Daniel J. Lizdas, Walter
Drake, and Robert W. Blaser. Edward Hodgson directed the engineering
activities and field sampling operations were under the direction of
Richard Kearns. Major contributions to the report were made by Dana
Pumphrey, Remy Halm, Robert Lewis, Joel Parker, Peter Williams and
other technical and support staff at Hamilton Standard.
Versar's effort was managed by Lee McCandless and Jerome Strauss.
Efforts done by Whitescarver Associates were managed by John P.
Whitescarver. Lawrence Davies directed the project activities of the
support staff at Versar Inc. and made contributions to the report.
Contributions to the report were made by Robert W. Hardy of
Whitescarver Associates, and Pamela Hillis, Jean Moore, Gayle Riley
and other technical and support staff at Versar.
The project was conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency,
Ernst P. Hall, P.E., Chief, Metals and Machinery Branch, Mary L.
Belefski, Project Officer, and the staffs from the Office of General
Counsel (Susan Lepow, Dov Weitman, Ellen Siegler, and Mark Greenwood),
the Office of Analysis and Evaluation (Economics - Louis DuPuis, Ellen
Warhit, Debra Maness, Mary Ives, Allen Leduc, Emily Hartnell, and
William Webster; Statistics - Maurice Owens, Henry Kahn and Richard
Kotz), and the Monitoring and Data Support Division (Alec McBride and
Eleanor Zimmerman). Acknowledgement is given to Robert W. Hardy,
formerly of the Environmental Protection Agency for his technical
contributions to the report.
The efforts of the Effluent Guidelines Division word processing staff
(Pearl Smith, Glenda Nesby, Carol Swann, Kaye Storey, and Nancy
Zrubeck) are also acknowledged and appreciated.
Finally, appreciation is also extended to all battery manufacturing
plants and individuals who contributed comments and data for the
formulation of this document.
1087
-------
-------
SECTION XV
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Antimony" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117319, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Arsenic" Final Water Quality Criteria, FBI 17327, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Batteries find a niche on the circuit board." Machine Design, L.
Teschler (editor), p. 75-79 (May 10, 1979).
"A big breakthrough in batteries...almost." Mechanix Illustrated, p.
50-51, 115 (March 1978).
Bellack, Ervin, "Arsenic Removal from Potable Water," Journal American
Water Works Association, July, 1971.
Bhattacharyya, 0., Jumawan, Jr., A.B. and Grieves, R.B., "Separation
of Toxic Heavy Metals by Sulfide Precipitation," Separation Science
and Technology, 14(5), 1979, pp. 441-452.
Birk, J.R., K. Klunder, and J.C. Smith. "Superbatteries: a Engineers
(IEEE) Spectrum, 16(3):49-55 (March 1979).
Brown, H.G., Hensley, C.P., McKinney, G.L. and Robinson, J.L.,
"Efficiency of Heavy Metals Removal in Municipal Sewage Treatment
Plants, "Environmental Letters, 5 (2), 1973, pp. 103-114.
"Cadmium" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117368, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980.
Chamberlin, N.S. and Snyder, Jr., H.B., "Technology of Treating
Plating Waste," 1Oth Industrial Waste Conference.
Chen, K.Y., Young, C.S., Jan, T.K. and Rohatgi, N., "Trace Metals in
Wastewater Effluent," Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 46, No. 12, December, 1974, pp. 2663-2675.
"Chlorinated Ethanes" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117400, and
Standards (45 FR 79318-79379, Nobember 28, 1980).
1089
-------
"Chloroform" Final Water Quality Criteria, FBI 17442, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Chromium" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117467, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Collins, D.H. Power Sources 3. New Castel upon Tyne: Oriel Press,
1971.
The Condensed Chemical Dictionary. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Ninth
Edition, 1977.
"Control technology for the metal finishing industry - sulfide
precipitation." Centec Corporation, Reston, VA., Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Contract No. 68-03-2672
Work Directive 14, September, 1979.
"Copper" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB 117475, Criteria and
Standards Division Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Curry, Nolan A., "Philogophy and Methodology of Metallic Waste
Treatment," 27th Industrial Waste Conference.
"Cyanide" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117483, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Dean, J. Lange's Handbook of Chemistry. McGraw Hill, 1973.
Davis, III, James A., and Jacknow, Joel, "Heavy Metals in Wastewater
in Three Urban Areas", Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation,
September, 1975, pp. 2292-2297.
"Development document for interim final and proposed effluent
limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the
ore mining and dressing point source category." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA 440/1-75/061-c, October, 1975.
"Development document for proposed effluent limitations guidelines and
new source performance standards for the battery manufacturing point
source category." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR 461,
1977.
"Development document for proposed existing source pretreatment
standards for the electroplating point source category." U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 440/1-78/085, February 1978.
109Q
-------
"Dichloroethylenes" Final Water Quality Criteria, FBI 17525, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards {45
FR 79318-79379, November 28,1980).
"Draft development document for effluent limitations guidelines and
new source performance standards for the miscellaneous nonferrous
metals segment of the nonferrous metals manufacturing point source
category." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 440/1-76/067,
March 1977.
Electrochemical Power Sources: Primary and Secondary Batteries, Edited
by M. Barak, Peter Peregrimus Ltd. 1980.
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Interscience, Second Edition,
1963.
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Third
Edition, 1978.
"Ethylbenzene" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117590, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Everready" Battery Applications and Engineering Data. Union Carbide
Corporation, 1971.
Falk, S.U., and A.J. Salkind. Alkaline Storage Batteries. John Wiley
& Sons Inc., 1969.
Flynn, G. "Slowly but surely...batteries move up the power ladder."
Product Engineering, p. 81-84 (September 1978).
"General Electric Company." Communication from Environmental Industry
Council to Effluent Limitations Guidelines Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, April 1980.
Ghosh, Mriganka M. and Zugger, Paul D., "Toxic Effects of Mercury on
the Activated Sludge Process," Journal of. Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 45, No. 3, March, 1973, pp. 424-433.
Graham, R.W. Primary Batteries - Recent Advances. Noyes Data
Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ, Chemical Technology Review No. 105,
Energy Technology Review No. 25, 1978.
Graham, R.W. Secondary Batteries - Recent Advances . Noyes Data
Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ, Chemical Technology Review No. 106,
Energy Technology Review No. 26, 1978.
-------
Hall, Ernst P. and Barnes, Devereaux, "Treatment of Electroplating
Rinse Waters and Effluent Solutions, "presented to the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers, Miami Beach, Fl., November 12, 1978.
"Halomethanes" Final Water Quality Criteria, FBI 17624, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Handbook of Analytical Chemistry. L. Meites (editor), McGraw Hill, no
date provided.
Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. R.C. Weast (editor), Chemical
Rubber Company, Cleveland, OH, 50th Edition, 1969.
Hayes, Thomas D. and Theis, Thomas L., "The Distribution of Heavy
Metals in Anaerobic Digestion," Journal of Water Pollution Control
Federation, January, 1978, pp. 61-72.
Heise, G.W., and Cahoon, N.C. The Primary Battery. John Wiley &
Sons, 1971.
Howes, R., and R. Kent. Hazardous Chemicals Handling and Disposal.
Noyes Data Corporation, 1970.
"Inside the C&D Battery." C&D Batteries Division, Plymouth Meeting,
PA., no date provided.
"Insulation keeps lithium/metal sulfide battery over 400C."
Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., p. 67-70 (June 1979).
"An Investigation of Techniques for Removal of Cyanide from
Electroplating Wastes," Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Industrial
Pollution Control Section, November, 1971.
"Ionic equilibrium as applied to qualitative analysis." Hogness &
Johnson, Holt, Rinehart & Winston Co., 1954, complete citation not
available.
Intersociety of Energy Conversion Engineering Converence, Proceedings
of the 7th Annual Conference, 1972.
Intersociety of -Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Proceedings
of the 9th Annual Conference, 1974.
Intersociety of Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Proceedings.
of the 10th Annual Conference, 1975.
Jasinski, R. High Energy Batteries. Plenum Press, 1967.
1092
-------
Jenkins, S. H., Keight, D.G. and Humphreys, R.E., "The Solubilities of
Heavy Metal Hydroxides in Water, Sewage and Sewage Sludge-I. The
Solubilities of Some Metal Hydroxides," International Journal of Air
and Water Pollution, Vol. 8^ 1964. pp. 537-556.
Jones, H. R. Environmental Control in the Organic and Petro-
chemical Industries. Noyes Data Corp., 1971.
Klein, Larry A., Lang, Martin, Nash, Norman and Kirschner, Seymour E.,
"Sources of Metals in New York City Wastewater." Journal of Water
Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 46, No. 12, December, 1974, pp.
2653-2663.
Kopp, J. F., and R. C. Kroner. "Trace metals in waters of the United
States - a five year summary of trace metals in rivers and lakes of
the United States (October 1, 1962 - September 30, 1967)." U.S.
Department of the Interior, Cincinnati, OH, no date provided.
Langer, B. S. "Contractor's engineering report for the development of
effluent limitations guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry
(BATEA, NSPS, BCT, BMP, Pretreatment)." Burns and Roe Industrial
Services Corp., Paramus, NJ, Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, October 1979.
Lanouette, K. H. "Heavy metals removal." Chemical Engineering/
Deskbook Issue, 84(22);73-80 (October 17, 1977).
"Lead" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117681, Criteria and Standards
Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Lonouette, Kenneth H., "Heavy Metals Removal," Chemical Engineering,
October 17, pp. 73-80.
Martin, L. Storage Batteries and Rechargeable Cell Technology Noyes
Data Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ, Chemical Technology Review No. 37,
1974.
"Mercury" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117699, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Mezey, Eugene J. "Characterization of priority pollutants from a
secondary lead-acid battery manufacturing facility." U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/2-79-039, January 1979.
Mohler, J. B. "The rinsing equation." Metal Finishing, p. 64
(February 1978).
1093
-------
"More power to you." C&D batteries Division, Plymouth Meeting, PA, no
date provided.
Mowat, Anne, "Measurement of Metal Toxicity by Biochemical Oxygen
Demand," Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 48, No.
5, May, 1976, pp. 853-866.
Mytelka, Alan I., Czachor, Joseph S., Guggino William B. and Golub,
Howard, "Heavy Metals in Wastewater and Treatment Plant Effluents,"
Journal o_f Water. Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 45, No. 9,
September, 1973, pp. 1859-1884.
"Naphthalene" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117707, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Neufeld, Howard D. and Hermann, Edward R., "Heavy Metal Removal by
Activated Sludge," Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol.
47, No. 2, February, 1975, pp. 310-329.
Neufeld, Ronald D., Gutierrez, Jorge and Novak, Richard A., A Kinetic
Model and Equilibrium Relationship for Metal Accumulation," Journal of
Water Pollution Control Federation, March, 1977, pp. 489-498.
"New batteries." Recovery Engineering News - Recycling and
Reprocessing ojE Resources. L. Delpino (editor), ICON/ Information
Concepts, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, 4(1) January 1979.
"Nickel" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117715, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Oliver, Barry G. and Cosgrove, Ernest G., "The Efficiency of Heavy
Metal Removal by a Conventional Activated Sludge Treatment Plant,"
Water Research, Vol. 8, 1974, pp. 869-874.
"Organic electrolyte batteries." In: Intersociety of Energy
Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC) Proceedings. 7th Edition,
p. 71-74 (1972). Patterson, J. W. Wastewater Treatment Technology.
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, 1975.
Patterson, James W., "Carbonate Precipitation Treatment for Cadmium
and Lead," presented at WWEMA Industrial Pollutant conference, April
13, 1978.
Patterson, J. W., H. E. Allen, and J. J. Scala. "Carbonate pre-
cipitation for heavy metals pollutants." Journal of Water
Pollution Control Federation, p. 2397-2410 (December 1977).
1094
-------
Patterson, James W. and Minear, Roger A., "Wastewater Treatment
Technology," 2nd edition {State of Illinois, Institute for
Environmental Quality) January, 1973.
Peck, K., and J. C. Gorton. "Industrial waste and pretreatment
in the Buffalo municipal system." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1977.
"Pentachlorophenol" Final Water Quality Criteria PB117764, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water regulations and Standards {45
FR 79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Phenol" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117772, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards {45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Phthalate Esters" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117780, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards {45
FR 79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Poison, C.J. and Tattergall, R.N., "Clinical Toxicology.," (J.B.
Lipincott Company), 1976.
"Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons" Final Water Quality Criteria,
PB117806, Criteria and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations
and Standards (45 FR 79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Power Sources Conference, Proceedings ojฃ the 14th Annual Meeting,
1960.
Power Sources Conference, Proceedings of_ the 16th, 17th and 18th
Annual Meetings, 1962-1964.
Power Sources Conference, Proceedings of the 20th through 27th Annual
Meetings, 1966-1970, 1972, 1974, and 1976.
"Pretreatment of industrial wastes." Seminar Handout, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1978.
"Redox battery promising to store energy cheaply." Machine Design p.
6, no date available.
Remirez, R. "Battery development revs up." Chemical Engineering, p.
49-51 {August 27, 1979).
"Removal of priority pollutants by PACT* at the Chambers Works."
Letter communication from R. E. Funer, DuPont Nemours & Company to R.
Schaffer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 24, 1979.
1095
-------
Roberts, R. "Review of DOE battery and electrochemical technology
program." U.S. Department of Energy, ET-78-C-01-3295, September 1979.
Robinson, A. K. "Sulfide vs Hydroxide Precipitation of Heavy Metals
from Industrial Wastewater," Presented at EPA/AES First Annual
conference on Advanced Pollution Control for the Metal Finishing
Industry, January 17-19, 1978.
Rohrer, Kenneth L., "Chemical Precipitants for Lead Bearing
Wastewaters," Industrial Water Engineering, June/July, 1975.
Santo, J., J. Duncan, et al. "Removal of heavy metals from battery
manufacturing wastewaters by Hydroperm cross - flow microfiltration."
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Presented at the Second Annual
Conference on Advanced Pollution Control for the Metal Finishing
Industry, Kissimmee, FL, February 5-7, 1979.
Sax, N. I. Industrial Pollution. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1974.
Sax, N. I. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. Van
Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1975.
Schroder, Henry A. and Mitchener, Marian, "Toxic Effects of Trace
Elements on the Reproduction of Mice and Rats," Archives of
Environmental Health, Vol. 23, August, 1971, pp. 102-106.
Scott, Murray C., "Sulfex" - A new Process Technology for Removal of
Heavy Metals from Waste Streams," presented at 1977 Purdue Industrial
Waste Conference, May 10, 11, and 12, 1977.
Scott, Murray C., "Treatment of Plating Effluent by Sulfide Process,"
Products Finishing, August, 1978.
Schlauch, R. M., and A. C. Epstein. "Treatment of metal finishing
wastes by sulfide precipitation." U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA 600/2-77-049, February 1977.
"Selenium" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117814, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Shapira, N. I., H. Liu, et al. "The demonstration of a crossflow
microfiltration system for the removal of toxic heavy metals from
battery manufacturing wastewater effluents." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Presented at Division of Environmental Chemistry
179th National Meeting, American Chemical Society, Houston, TX, March
23-28, 1980.
1096
-------
"Silver" Final Water Quality Criteria, FBI 17822, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Sorg, Thomas J., "Treatment Technology to meet the Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations for Inorganics," Journal American Water
Works Association, February, 1978, pp. 105-112.
"Sources of metals in municipal sludge and industrial pretreatment as
a control option." ORD Task Force on Assessment of Sources of Metals
in Sludges and Pretreatment as a Control Option, U.S. EPA, 1977.
Stone, G. "Your best buy in small batteries." Popular Science, p.
76, 79-81, 116 (August 1979).
Stover, R.C., Sommers, L.E. and Silviera, D.J., "Evaluation of Metals
in Wastewater Sludge," Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 48, No. 9, September, 1976, pp. 2165-2175.
Strier, M. P. "Heavy metals in wastewater." U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Presented at National Association of Corrosion
Engineers Regional Meeting, Newport, RI, October 2-4, 1978.
Strier, Murray P., "Suggestions for Setting Pretreatment Limits for
Heavy Metals and further Studies of POTW's," memorandum to Carl J.
Schafer, Office of Quality Review, U.S. E.P.A., April 21, 1977.
Strier, M. P. "Treatability of Organic Priority Pollutants - Part E -
The Relationship of Estimated Theoretical Treatability With Water
Solubility, partition Coefficient, Bioconcentration and Aquatic Life
Toxicity." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 440/1-79/100,
May 22, 1979.
"Sulfext. Heavy Metals Waste Treatment Process," Technical Bulletin,
Vol. XII, code 4413.2002 (Permutitฎ) July, 1977.
"Sulfex TM Heavy Metals Waste Treatment Process." Permutit Co., Inc.,
Technical Bulletin 13(6), October 197<6.
Tappett, T. "Some facts about your car's battery." Mechanix
Illustrated, p. 100, 102-103 (March 1978).
"Tetrachloroethylene" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117830, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45
FR 79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"Toluene" Final Water Quality criteria, PB117855, Criteria and
Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
1097
-------
"Treatability of 65 chemicals - Part A - biochemical oxidation of
organic compounds." Memorandum from M. P. Strier to R. B. Schaffer,
June 24, 1977.
"Treatability of chemicals - Part B - adsorption of organic compounds
on activated carbon." Memorandum from M. P. Strier to R. B. Schaffer,
December 8, 1977.
"Treatability of the organic priority pollutants - Part C - their
estimated (30 day avg) treated effluents concentration - a molecular
engineering approach." Memorandum from M. P. Strier to R. B.
Schaffer, June 1978.
"Trichloroethylene" Final Water Quality criteria, PB117871, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45
FR 79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
Unit Operations for Treatment of Hazardous Industrial Wastewater. D.
J. Denyo (editor), 1978.
Vaccari, J. A. Product Engineering, p. 48-49 (January 1979).
Venugopal, B. and Luckey, T.D., "Metal Toxicity in Mammals .2,"
(Plenum Press, New York, N.Y.), 1978.
Verschueren, K. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1977.
Vinal, G. W. Primary Batteries. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1950.
Vinal, G. W. Storage Batteries. John Wiley & Sons, Fourth Edition,
1955.
Water Quality Criteria. The Resources Agency of California, State
Water Quality Control Board, Publication No. 3-A, Second Edition,
1963.
"Zinc" Final Water Quality Criteria, PB117897, Criteria and Standards
Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards (45 FR
79318-79379, November 28, 1980).
"1977 census of manufacturers - primary batteries, dry and wet (SIC
3692)." U.S. Department of Commerce, MC-77-I-36F-2(p), April 1979.
"1977 census of manufacturers - storage batteries (SIC 3691)." U.S.
Department of Commerce, MC-77-I-36F-1(p), April 1979.
1098
-------
SECTION XVI
GLOSSARY
Active Material - Electrode material that reacts chemically to produce
electrical energy when a cell discharges. Also, such material in its
original composition, as applied to make an electrode.
Air Scrubbing - A method of removing air impurities such as dust or
fume by contact with sprayed water or an aqueous chemical solution.
Alkalinity - (1) The extent to which an aqueous solution contains more
hydroxyl ions than hydrogen ions. (2) The capacity of water to
neutralize acids, a property imparted by the water's content of
carbonates, bicarbonates, hydroxides, and occasionally borates,
silicates and phosphates.
Amalgamation - (1) Alloying a zinc anode with mercury to prevent
internal corrosion and resultant gassing in a cell. (2) Treatment of
wastewater by passing it through a bed of metal particles to alloy and
thereby remove mercury from the water.
Anode - The electrode by which electrons leave a cell. The negative
electrode in a cell during discharge.
Attrition Mill - A ball mill in which pig lead is ground to a powder
and oxidized to make the active material (a mixture of lead and lead
oxide called leady oxide) in lead acid batteries.
Backwashing - The process of cleaning a filter or ion exchange column
by a reverse flow of water.
Baffles - Deflector vanes, guides, grids, gratings, or similar devices
constructed or placed in flowing water or wastewater to (1) effect a
more uniform distribution of velocities or (2) divert, guide, or
agitate the liquids.
Bag House - The large chamber for holding bag filters used to filter
gas streams from a furnace such as in manufacture of lead oxide.
Ball Mill - A reactor in which pig lead is ground to a powder and
oxidized to make the active material (a mixture of lead and lead oxide
called leady oxide) for lead acid batteries.
Barton Pot - A reactor vessel, used in the Barton process, into which
molten lead is fed and vigorously agitated to form fine lead droplets
in the presence of air. The resulting mixture of unoxidized lead and
1099
-------
lead oxides (leady oxide) comprises an active material in lead acid
batteries.
Batch Treatment - A waste treatment method where wastewater is
collected over a period of time and then treated before discharge,
often in the same vessel in which it is collected.
Battery - A device that transforms chemical energy into electrical
energy. This term usually applies to two or more cells connected in
series, parallel or a combination of both. Common usage has blurred
the distinction between the terms "cell" and "battery" and frequently
the term battery is applied to any finished entity sold as a single
unit, whether it contains one cell, as do most flashlight batteries,
or several cells, as do automotive batteries.
Bobbin - An assembly of the positive current collector and cathode
material, usually molded into a cylinder.
Buffer - Any of certain combinations of chemicals used to stabilize
the pH values or alkalinities of solutions.
Burn - Connection of terminals, posts, or connectors in a lead acid
battery by welding.
Button Cell - A tiny, circular battery, any of several types, made for
a watch or for other microelectronic applications.
Can - The outer case of a cylindrical cell.
Carcinogen - A substance that causes cancer.
Casting - The process by which grids for lead acid batteries are made
by pouring molten lead into molds and allowing solidification.
Cathode - The electrode by which electrons enter a cell. The positive
electrode in a cell during discharge.
Cathodic Polarization - Electrical connection of a nickel electrode
plaque to promote deposition of active nickel material.
Caustic - (1) An alkaline battery electrolyte, sodium or potassium
hydroxide. (2) Sodium hydroxide, used to precipitate heavy metals
from wastewater.
Cell - The basic building block of a battery. It is an
electrochemical device consisting of an anode and a cathode in a
common electrolyte kept apart with a separator. This assembly may be
used in its own container as a single cell battery or be combined and
1100
-------
interconnected with other cells in a container to form a multicelled
battery.
Central Treatment Facility - Treatment plant which co-treats process
wastewaters from more than one manufacturing operation or co-treats
process wastewaters with noncontact cooling water, or with nonprocess
wastewaters (e.g., utility blowdown, miscellaneous runoff, etc).
Centrifugation - Use of a centrifuge to remove water in the
manufacture of active material or in the treatment of wastewater
sludge.
Charge - The conversion of electrical energy into chemical energy
within a cell-battery. This restoration of active electronic
materials is done by forcing a current through the cell-battery in the
opposite direction to that during discharge. See "Formation."
Chemical Coagulation - The destablization and initial aggregation of
colloidal and finely divided suspended matter by the action of a floe-
forming chemical.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) - (1) A test based on the fact that
organic compounds, with few exceptions, can be oxidized to carbon
dioxide and water by the action of strong oxidizing agents under acid
conditions. Organic matter is converted to carbon dioxide and water
regardless of the biological assimilability of the substances. One of
the chief limitations is its inability to differentiate between
biologically oxidizable and biologically inert organic matter. The
major advantage of this test is the short time required for evaluation
(2 hrs). (2) The amount of oxygen required for the chemical
oxidization of organics in a liquid.
Chemical Precipitation - The use of an alkaline chemical to remove
dissolved heavy metals from wastewater.
Chemical Treatment - Treating contaminated water by chemical means.
Clarifier - A unit which provides settling and removal of solids from
wastewater.
CMC - Sodium carboxymethyl cellulose; an organic liquid used as a
binder in electrode formulations.
Colloids - A finely divided dispersion of one material called the
"Dispersed phase" (solid) in another material which is called the
"dispersion medium" (liquid).
Compatible Pollutant - An industrial pollutant that is successfully
treated by a secondary municipal treatment system.
1101
-------
Composite Wastewater Sample - A combination of individual samples of
water or wastewater taken at selected intervals and mixed in
proportion to flow or time to minimize the effect of stream
variability.
Concentration, Hydrogen Ion - The weight of hydrogen ions in grams per
liter of solution. Commonly expressed as the pH value that represents
the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentration.
Contamination - A general term signifying the introduction into water
of microorganisms, chemicals, wastes or sewage which renders the water
unfit for its intended use.
Contractor Removal - The disposal of oils, spent solutions,
wastewaters, or sludge by means of an approved scavenger service.
Cooling Tower - A device used to remove heat from cooling water used
in the manufacturing processes before returning the water for recycle
or reuse.
Countercurrent Rinsing - A method of rinsing or washing using a
segmented tank system in which water flows from one tank segment to
the next counter to the direction of movement of the material being
washed.
Current Collector - The grid portion of the electrode which conducts
the current to the terminal.
Cyclone Separator - A funnel-shaped device for removing particles from
air or other fluids by centrifugal means.
Decantation - A method for mechanical dewatering of a wet solid by
pouring off the liquid without disturbing the underlying sediment or
precipitate.
Demineralization - The removal from water of mineral contaminants
usually present in ionized form. The methods used include ion-
exchange techniques, flash distillation or reverse osmosis.
Depolarizer - A term often used to denote the cathode active material.
Dewatering - Any process whereby water is removed from sludge.
Discharge - Release of electric power from a battery.
Discharge of Pollutant(s) - The addition of any pollutant to waters of
the U.S. from any point source.
1102
-------
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) - The oxygen dissolved in sewage, water, or
other liquid, usually expressed in milligrams per liter.
Dissolved Solids - Theoretically the anhydrous residues of the
dissolved constituents in water. Actually the term is defined by the
method used in determination. In water and wastewater treatment, the
Standard Methods tests are used.
Dry Charge Process - A process for the manufacture of lead acid
storage batteries in which the plates are charged by electrolysis in
sulfuric acid, rinsed, and drained or dried prior to shipment of the
battery. Charging of the plates usually occurs in separate containers
before assembly of the battery but may be accomplished in the battery
case. Batteries produced by the dry-charge process are shipped
without acid electrolyte.
Drying Beds - Areas for dewatering of sludge by evaporation and
seepage.
Effluent - Industrial wastewater discharged to a sanitary sewer,
stream, or other disposal point outside the plant property.
Electrode - The positive (cathode) or negative (anode) element in a
cell or battery, that enables it to provide electric power.
Electrodeposition - Electrochemical deposition of an active material
from solution onto an electrode grid or plaque.
Electroforming - See (1) Electrodeposition, and (2) Formation.
Electroimpregnation - See Cathodic Polarization.
Electrolyte - The liquid or material that permits conduction of ions
between cell electrodes.
Electrolytic Precipitation - Generally refers to making powdered
active material by electrodeposition and physical removal; e.g.,
silver powder from silver bars.
Electroplating - (1) Electrodeposition of a metal or alloy from a
suitable electrolyte solution; the article to be plated is connected
as the cathode in the electrolyte solution; direct current is
introduced through the anode which consists of the metal to be
deposited. (2) The Electroplating Point Source Category.
Element - A combination of negative and positive plates and separators
to make a cell in a lead-acid storage battery.
1103
-------
End-of-Pipe Treatment - The reduction and/or removal of pollutants by
treatment just prior to actual discharge to a point outside an
industrial plant.
Equalization - The collection of waste streams from different sources,
which vary in pH, chemical constituents, and flow rates in a common
container. The effluent stream from this equalization tank has a
fairly constant flow and pH level, and will contain a homogeneous
chemical mixture. This tank helps to prevent an unnecessary shock to
the waste treatment system.
Evaporation Ponds - A pond, usually lined, for disposal of wastewater
by evaporation; effective only in areas of low rainfall.
Filter, Rapid Sand - A filter for the purification of water where
water which has been previously treated, usually by coagulation and
sedimentation, is passed through a filtering medium consisting of a
layer of sand or prepared anthracite coal or other suitable material,
usually from 24 to 30 inches thick and resting on a supporting bed of
gravel or a porous medium such as carborundum. The filtrate is
removed by a drain system. The filter is cleaned periodically by
reversing the flow of the water upward through the filtering medium.
Sometimes supplemented by mechanical or air agitation during
backwashing to remove impurities that are lodged in the sand.
Filter, Trickling - A filter consisting of an artificial bed of coarse
material, such as broken stone, clinkers, slats, or plastic media over
which wastewater is distributed and applied in drops, films, or spray,
from troughs, drippers, moving distributors or fixed nozzles and
through which it trickles to the under-drain, oxidizing organic
materials by means of microorganisms attached to the filter media.
Filter, Vacuum - A filter consisting of a rotating cylindrical drum
mounted on a horizontal axis, covered with a filter cloth partially
submerged in a liquid. A vacuum is maintained under the cloth for the
larger part of a revolution to extract moisture. Solids collected on
the surface of the filter cloth are continuously scraped off.
Filtrate - Liquid that has passed through a filter.
Filtration - Removal of solid particles from liquid or particles from
air or gas stream through a permeable membrane or deep bed. The
filter types include: Gravity, Pressure, microstraining,
ultrafiltration, Reverse Osmosis (hyperfiltration).
Float Gauge - A device for measuring the elevation of a liquid
surface, the actuating element of which is a buoyant float that rests
on the liquid surface and rises or falls with it. The elevation of
the surface is measured by a chain or tape attached to the float.
1104
-------
Floe - A very fine, fluffy mass formed
suspended particles.
by the aggregation of fine
Flocculator - An apparatus designed for the formation of floe in water
or sewage.
Flocculation - In water and wastewater treatment, the agglomeration of
colloidal and finely divided suspended matter after coagulation by
addition of chemicals and gentle stirring by either mechanical or
hydraulic means.
Flock - Natural or synthetic fiber added to lead-acid battery paste as
a stiffening agent.
Flow Proportioned Sample - See "Composite Wastewater Sample."
Formation - An electrochemical process which converts the battery
electrode material into the desired chemical condition. For example,
in a silver-zinc battery the silver applied to the cathode is
converted to silver oxide and the zinc oxide applied to the anode is
converted to elemental zinc. "Formation" is generally used
interchangeably with "charging," although it may involve a repeated
charge-discharge cycle.
Gelled Electrolyte - Electrolyte which may or may not be mixed with
electrode material, that has been gelled with a chemical agent to
immobilize it.
GPP - Gallons per day.
Grab Sample - A single sample of wastewater taken without a set time
or at a set flow.
Grease - In wastewater, a group of substances including fats, waxes,
free fatty acids, calcium and magnesium soaps, mineral oil, and
certain other nonfatty materials.
Grease Skimmer - A device for removing grease or scum from the surface
of wastewater in a tank.
Grid - The support for the active materials and a means to conduct
current from the active materials to the cell terminals; usually a
metal screen, expanded metal mesh, or a perforated metal plate.
Hardness - A characteristic of water, imparted by salts of calcium,
magnesium, and iron such as bicarbonates, carbonates, sulfates,
chlorides, and nitrates that cause curdling of soap, deposition of
scale in boilers, damage in some industrial processes, and sometimes
objectionable taste. It may be determined by a standard laboratory
1105
-------
procedure or computed from the amounts of calcium and magnesium as
well as iron, aluminum, manganese, barium, strontium, and zinc, and is
expressed as equivalent calcium carbonate.
Heavy Metals - A general name given to the ions of metallic elements
such as copper, zinc, chromium, and nickel. They are normally removed
from wastewater by forming an insoluble precipitate (usually a
metallic hydroxide).
Holding Tank - A tank for accumulating wastewater prior to treatment.
Hydrazine Treatment - Application of a reducing agent to form a
conductive metal film on a silver oxide cathode.
Hydroguinone - A developing agent used to form a conductive metal film
on a silver oxide cathode.
Impregnation - Method of making an electrode by precipitating active
material on a sintered nickel plaque.
In-Process Control Technology - The regulation and conservation of
chemicals and rinse water throughout the operations as opposed to end-
of-pipe treatment.
Industrial Wastes - The liquid wastes from industrial processes as
distinct from domestic or sanitary wastes.
Influent - Water or other liquid, either raw or partly treated,
flowing into a treatment step or plant.
Ion Exchange - Wastewater treatment by contact with a resin that
exchanges harmless ions (e.g. sodium) for toxic inorganic ions (e.g.
mercury), which the resin adsorbs.
Jacket - The outer cover of a dry cell battery, usually a paper-
plastic laminate.
Kjeldahl Nitrogen - A method of determining the ammonia and
organically bound nitrogen in the -3 valence state but does not
determine nitrite, azides, nitro, nitroso, oximes or nitrate nitrogen.
Lagoon - A man-made pond or lake for holding wastewater for the
removal of suspended solids. Lagoons are also used as retention ponds
after chemical clarification to polish the effluent and to safeguard
against upsets in the clarifier; for stabilization of organic matter
by biological oxidation; for storage or sludge; and for cooling of
water.
1106
-------
Landfill - Land area used for controlled burial of solid wastes,
sludges, ashes, industrial wastes, construction wastes, or demonition
wastes. Solid wastes are garbage, refuse, and other discarded
material including solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous
material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and
agricultural operations, and from community activities.
Leaching - The solubilizing of pollutants by the action of a
percolating liquid, such as water, seeping through a landfill, which
potentially contaminates ground water.
Leady Oxide - Active material used for manufacture of lead-acid
battery plates consisting of a mixture of lead oxides and finely
divided elemental lead.
Lime - Any of a family of chemicals consisting essentially of calcium
hydroxide made from limestone (calcite) which is composed almost
wholly of calcium carbonates or a mixture of calcium and magnesium
carbonates.
Limiting Orifice - A device that limits flow by constriction to a
relatively small area. A constant flow can be obtained over a wide
range of upstream pressures.
Make-Up Water - Net amount of water used by any process/process step,
not including recycled water.
Mass - The active material used in a pocket plate cell, for example
"nickel mass."
Milligrams Per Liter (mg/1) - This is a weight per volume
concentration designation used in water and waste analysis.
Mixed Media Filtration - A depth filter which uses two or more filter
materials of differing specific gravities selected so as to produce a
filter uniformly graded from coarse to fine.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) - This federal
mechanism for regulating point source discharge by means of permits.
Neutralization - Chemical addition of either acid or base to a
solution to adjust the pH to approximately 7.
Non-Contact Cooling Water - Water used for cooling which does not come
into direct contact with any raw material, intermediate product, waste
product or finished product.
Outfall - The point or location where wastewater discharge from a
sewer, drain, or conduit.
1107
-------
Oxidation - 1. Chemical addition of oxygen atom(s) to a chemical
compound; 2. In general any chemical reaction in which an element or
iron is raised to a more positive valence state; 3. The process at a
battery anode during discharge.
Parshall Flume - A calibrated device developed by Parshall for
measuring the flow of liquid in an open conduit. It consists
essentially of a contracting length, a throat, and an expanding length
At the throat is a sill over which the flow passes as critical depth.
The upper and lower heads are each measured at a definite distance
from the sill. The lower head cannot be measured unless the sill is
submerged more than about 67 percent.
Paste - Powdered active material mixed with a liquid to form a paste
to facilitate application to a grid to make an electrode.
Pasting Machine - An automatic machine for applying lead oxide paste
in the manufacture of lead-acid batteries.
p_H - The reciprocal of the logarithm of the hydrogen ion
concentration. The concentration is the weight of hydrogen ions, in
grams per liter of solution. Neutral water, for example, has a pH
value of 7. At pH lower than 7, a solution is acidic. At pH higher
than 7, a solution is alkaline.
Adjustment - A means of treating wastewater by chemical addition;
usually the addition of lime to precipitate heavy metal pollutants.
Plaque - A porous body of sintered metal on a metal grid used as a
current collector and holder of electrode active materials, especially
for nickel-cadmium batteries.
Plate - A positive or negative electrode used in a battery, generally
consisting of active material deposited on or in a current-collecting
support .
Pocket Plate - A type of battery construction where the electrode is a
perforated metal envelope containing the active material.
Point Source - Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance,
including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel,
conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock,
concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating
craft, from which pollutants are or may be discharged.
Pollutant Parameters - Those constituents of wastewater determined to
be detrimental to the public health or the environment and, therefore,
requiring control.
1108
-------
Polvelectrolytes - Materials used as a coagulant or a coagulant aid in
water and wastewater treatment. They are synthetic or natural
polymers containing ionic constituents. They may be cationic,
anionic, or nonionic.
Post - A battery terminal, especially on a lead-acid battery.
Precipitation - Process of separation of a dissolved substance from a
solution or suspension by chemical or physical change, usually as an
insoluble solid.
Pressed Powder - A method of making an electrode by pressing powdered
active material into a metal grid.
Pressure Filtration - The process of solid-liquid phase separation
effected by forcing the more permeable liquid phase through a mesh
which is impenetrable to the solid phase.
Pretreatment - Any wastewater treatment process used to partially
reduce pollution load before the wastewater is introduced into a main
sewer system or delivered to a municipal treatment plant.
Primary Battery - A battery which must usually be replaced after one
discharge; i.e., the battery cannot be recharged.
Primary Settling - The first settling unit for the removal of
settleable solids through which wastewater is passed in a treatment
works.
Primary Treatment - A process to remove substantially all floating and
settleable solids in wastewater and partially reduce the concentration
of suspended solids.
Priority Pollutant - Any one of the 129 specific pollutants
established by the EPA from the 65 pollutants and classes of
pollutants as outlined in the Consent Decree of June 8, 1976.
Process Wastewater - Any water which, during manufacturing or
processing, comes into direct contact with or results from the
production or use of any raw materials, intermediate product, finished
product, by product, or waste product.
Raw Water - Plant intake water prior to any treatment or use.
Recycled Water - Process wastewater or treatment facility effluent
which is recirculated to the same process.
Reduction - 1. A chemical process in which the positive valence of
species is decreased. 2. Wastewater treatment to (a) convert
1109
-------
hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form, or (b) reduce and
precipitate mercury ions.
Reserve Cell - A class of cells which are designated as "reserve",
because they are supplied to the user in a non-activated state.
Typical of this class of cell is the carbon-zinc air reserve cell,
which is produced with all the components in a dry or non-activated
state, and is activated with water when it is ready to be used.
Retention Time - The time allowed for solids to collect in a settling
tank. Theoretically retention time is equal to the volume of the tank
divided by the flow rate. The actual retention time is determined by
the purpose of the tank. Also the design residence time in a tank or
reaction vessel which allows a chemical reaction to go to completion,
such as the reduction of hexavalent chromium or the destruction of
cyanide.
Reused Water - Process wastewater or treatment facility effluent For
example, the reuse of process wash water as non-contact cooling water.
which is further used in a different manufacturing process.
Reverse Osmosis (Hyperfiltration) - A treatment or recovery process in
which polluted water is put under a pressure greater than the osmotic
pressure to drive water across the membrane while leaving behind the
dissolved salts as a concentrate.
Reversible Reaction - A chemical reaction capable of proceeding in
either direction depending upon the conditions.
Rinse - Removal of foreign materials from the surface of an object by
flow or impingement of a liquid (usually water) on the surface. In
the battery industry, "rinse" may be used interchangeably with 'wash".
Ruben - Developer of the mercury-zinc battery; also refers to the
mercury-zinc battery.
Sand Filtration - A process of filtering wastewater through sand. The
waste water is trickled over the bed of sand, which retains suspended
solids. The clean water flows out through drains in the bottom of the
bed. The solids accumulating at the surface must be removed from the
bed periodically.
Sanitary Sewer - A sewer that carries liquid and water carried wastes
to a municipal treatment plant.
Sanitary Water - Wastewater from toilets, sinks, and showers.
Scrubber - General term used in reference to an air pollution control
device that uses a water spray.
1110
-------
Sealed Cell - A battery cell which can operate in a sealed condition
during both charge and discharge.
Secondary Cell - An electrochemical cell or battery system that can be
recharged; a storage battery.
Secondary Wastewater Treatment - The treatment of wastewater by
biological methods after primary treatment by sedimentation.
Sedimentation - The gravity induced deposition of suspended matte
carried by water, wastwater, or other liquids, by gravity. It is
usually accomplished by reducing the velocity of the suspended
material. Also called settling.
Separator - A porous material, in a battery system, used to keep
plates of opposite polarity separated, yet allowing conduction of ions
through the electrolyte.
Service Water - Raw water which has been treated preparatory
use in a process of operation; i.e., make-up water.
to its
Settling Ponds - A large shallow body of water into which industrial
wastewaters are discharged. Suspended solids settle from the
wastewaters due to the long retention time of the water in the pond.
Settleable Solids (1) That matter in wastewater which will not stay in
suspension during a preselected settling period, such as one hour, but
settles to the bottom. (2) In the Imhoff cone test, the volume of
matter that settles to the bottom of the cone in one hour.
Sewer - A pipe or conduit, generally closed, but normally not flowing
full or carrying sewage and other waste liquids.
SIC - Standard Industrial Classification -
accordance with the composition and structure
covers the entire field of economic activity.
Defines industries in
of the economy and
Silver Etch - Application of nitric acid to silver foil to prepare it
as a support for active material.
Sinter - Heating a metal powder such as nickel to an elevated
temperature below its melting point which causes it to agglomerate and
adhere to the supporting grid.
Slntered-plate Electrode - The electrode formed by sintering metallic
powders to form a porous structure, which serves as a current
collector, and on which the active electrode material is deposited.
1111
-------
Skimming Tank - A tank so designed that floating matter will rise and
remain on the surface of the wastewater until removed, while the
liquid discharges continuously under certain wall or scum boards.
Sludge - A suspension, slurry, or solids matter produced in a waste
treatment process.
Sludge Conditioning - A process employed to prepare sludge for final
disposal. Can be thickening, digesting, heat treatment etc.
Sludge Disposal - The final disposal of solid wastes.
Sludge Thickening - The increase in solids concentration of sludge in
a sedimentation or digestion tank or thickener.
Solvent - A liquid capable of dissolving or dispersing one or more
other substances.
Spills - A chemical or material spill is an unintentional discharge of
more than 10 percent of daily usage of a regularly used substance. In
the case of a rarely used (one per year or less) chemical or
substance, a spill is that amount that would result in 10% added
loading to the normal air, water or solid waste loadings measured as
the closet equivalent pollutant.
Sponge - A highly porous metal powder.
Stabilization Lagoon - A shallow pond for storage of wastewater before
dis harge. Such lagoons may serve only to detain and equalize
wastewater composition before regulated discharge to a stream, but
often they are used for biological oxidation.
Stabilization Pond - A type of oxidation pond in which biological
oxidation of organic matter is effected by natural or artificially
accelerated transfer of oxygen to the water from air.
Storage Battery - A battery that can store chemical energy with the
potential to change to electricity. This conversion of chemical
energy to electricity can be reversed thus allowing the battery to be
recharged.
Strap - A metal conductor connecting individual cells to form a
battery.
Sump - A pit or tank which receives and temporarily stores drainage or
wastewater at the lowest point of circulating or drainage system.
Suspended Solid - (1) Solids that are in suspension in water,
wastewater, or other liquids, and which are largely removable by
1112
-------
laboratory filtering. (2) The quantity of material removed from
wastewater in a laboratory test, as prescribed in "Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" and referred to as non-
filterable residue.
Surface Waters - Any visible stream or body of water.
Terminal - The part of a battery to which an external circuit is
connected.
Thickener - A device wherein the solids in slurries or suspensions are
increased by gravity settling and mechanical separation of the phases,
or by floation and mechanical separation of the phases.
Total Cyanide - The total content of cyanide including simple and/or
complex ions. In analytical terminology, total cyanide is the sum of
cyanide amenable to chlorination and that which is not amenable to
chlorination according to standard analytical methods.
Total Solids - The total amount of solids in wastewater including both
dissolved and suspended solids.
Toxicity - The ability of a substance to cause unjury to an organism
through chemical activity.
Treatment Efficiency - Usually refers to the percentage reduction of a
specific pollutant or group of pollutants by a specific wastewater
treatment step or treatment plant.
Treatment Facility Effluent - Treated process wastewater.
Turbidity - (1) A condition in water or wastewater caused by the
presence of suspended matter, resulting in the scattering and
absorption of light rays. (2) A measure of fine suspended matter in
liquids. (3) An analytical quantity usually reported in arbitrary
turbidity units determined by measurements of light diffraction.
Vacuum Filtration - See Filter, Vacuum.
Vented Cell - A type of battery cell which has a vent that allows the
escape of gas and the addition of water.
Wash - Application of water, an aqueous solution, or- an organic
solvent to a battery part to remove contaminating substances.
Water Balance - An accounting of all water entering and leaving a unit
process or operation in either a liquid or vapor form or via raw
material, intermediate product, finished product, by-product, waste
1113
-------
product, or via process leaks, so that the difference in flow between
all entering and leaving streams is zero.
Weir - A device that has a crest and some containment of known
geometric shape, such as a V, trapezoid, or rectangle and is used to
measure flow of liquid. The liquid surface is exposed to the
atmosphere. Flow is related to upstream height or water above the
crest, to position of crest with respect to downstream water surface,
and to geometry of the weir opening.
Wet Charge Process - A process for the manufacture of lead acid
storage batteries in which the plates are formed by electrolysis in
sulfuric acid. The plate forming process is usually done with the
plates inside the assembled battery case but may be done with the
plates in open tanks. In the case of large industrial wet lead acid
batteries, problems in formation associated with inhomogenities in the
large plants are alleviated by open tank formation. Wet charge
process batteries are shipped with acid electrolyte inside the battery
casing.
Wet Shelf Life - The period of time that a secondary battery can stand
in the charged condition before total degradation.
Wet Scrubber - A unit in which dust and fumes are removed from an air
or gas stream to a liquid. Gas-liquid contact is promoted by jets,
sprays, bubble chambers, etc.
1114
-------
SECTION XVII
ENGLISH TO METRIC CONVERSION" TABLE I/
ENGLISH UNIT
acre
acre - feet
British Thermal
Unit
British Thermal
Unit/pound
cubic feet/minute
cubic feet/second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Fahrenheit
feet
gallon
gallon/minute
horsepower
inches
inches of mercury
pounds
million gallons/day
mile
pound/square
inch (gauge)
square feet
square inches
ton (short)
yard
ABBREVIATION CONVERSION
ac 0.405
ac ft 1233.5
Btu 0.252
Btu/lb 0.555
cfm 0.028
cfs 1.7
cu ft 0.028
cu ft 28.32
cu in 16.39
ฐF 0.555(ฐ-32)*
ft 0.3048
gal 3.785
gpm 0.0631
hp 0.7457
in 2.54
in Hg 0.03342
Ib 0.454
mgd 3,785
mi 1.609
psig (0.06805 psig +1)*
sq ft 0.0929
sq in 6.452
ton 0.907
yd 0.9144
ABBREVIATION
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg cal/kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
ฐC
m
1
I/sec
kw
cm
atm
kg
cu m/day
km
atm
sq m
sq cm
kkg
m
METRIC UNIT
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram - calories
kilogram calories/kilogram
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
liters/second
killowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters/day
kilometer
atmospheres (absolute)
square meters
square centimeters
metric ton (1000 kilograms)
meter
I/ Multiply English units by conversion factor to obtain metric units.
* Actual conversion, not a multiplier
-------
------- |