United States Effluent Guidelines Division EPA 440/1-82/070-b
Environmental Protection WH-552 November 1982 „
Agency Washington DC 20460 '/r(, S~
Water
Development Proposed
Document for
Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and
Standards for the
Metal Molding and Casting
(Foundries)
Point Source Category
Volume II
-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
FOR
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
AND
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
FOR THE
METAL MOLDING AND CASTING
(FOUNDRIES)
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
VOLUME II
Anne M. Gorsuch
Administrator
Steven Schatzow
Director
Office of Water Regulations and Standards
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION SUBJECT
I. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
II. RECOMMENDATIONS 9
III. INTRODUCTION 23
Legal Authority 23
Background - The Clean Water Act 23
General Description of the Metal Molding
and Casting Industry 25
Plant Data Collection 30
Profile of Plant Data 33
Description of Metal Molding and Casting 34
Industry Processes ^
Anticipated Industry Growth
Profile of Plants in the Metal Molding
and Casting Point Source Category 47
Additional Data Collection Activities 52
IV. INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION 111
Introduction ,,,
Selected Subcategories
Subcategory Definitions
Subcategorization Basis 115
Production Normalizing Parameters ,„,
V. WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 127
Introduction
Information Collection 128
Production Profile 129
Process Wastewater Flow 129
Selection of Plants for Sampling 139
Water Use and Waste Characteristics 135
Incoming Water Analysis 135
Raw Waste Analysis 135
Effluent Analysis 135
Aluminum Casting Subcategory 135
Copper Casting Subcategory 144
Iron and Steel (Ferrous) Casting
Subcategory 147
Lead Casting Subcategory 164
Magnesium Casting Subcategory 166
Zinc Casting Subcategory 167
VI. SELECTION OF POLLUTANTS 287
Pollutants Not Detected in Raw 287
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
SECTION SUBJECT PAGE
Wastewaters
Pollutants Detected in Raw Wastewaters 287
Below Quantifiable Limits
Pollutants Present in Raw Wastewaters 287
Regulation of Specific Pollutants
Aluminum Casting Subcategory 377
Copper Casting Subcategory 389
Ferrous Casting Subcategory 396
Lead Casting Subcategory 409
Magnesium Casting Subcategory 411
Zinc Casting Subcategory 416
Summary
VII. CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 441
Introduction 441
End-of-Pipe Treatment Technologies 441
Major Technologies 442
Emulsion Breaking 442
Oxidation By Potassium Permanganate 450
Chemical Precipitation 451
Granular Bed Filtration 462
Pressure Filtration 466
Settling 468
Skimming 471
Major Technology Effectiveness 476
Minor Technologies 496
Carbon Adsorption 492
Centrifugation 498
Coalescing 500
Evaporation 502
Flotation 505
Gravity Sludge Thickening 507
Sludge Bed Drying 509
Ultrafiltration 511
Vacuum Filtration 515
In-Plant Technology 516
VIII. COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS 543
Introduction 543
Sampled Plant Treatment Costs 543
Development of Cost Models 544
Basis for Model Cost Estimates 546
Model Cost Estimates 547
Cost, Energy, and Non-Water Quality
Impacts Summary 547
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
SECTION SUBJECT
IX. EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Introduction 799
Factors Considered 799
Approach To BPT Development 800
Identification of Proposed BPT 810
Aluminum Casting Subcategory 810
Copper Casting Subcategory 822
Ferrous Casting Subcategory 824
Lead Casting Subcategory 831
Magnesium Casting Subcategory 835
Zinc Casting Subcategory 838
Analysis of BPT Discharge Options 843
Review 843
Cost Comparison of BPT Options 344
Comparison of Discharge Loads Between 846
BPT Options
Major Assumptions of BPT Options 847
Analysis
X. EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE 921
APPLICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE
TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
Introduction ^21
Development of BAT 921
Identification of BAT 922
XI. BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL 965
TECHNOLOGY
XII. EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE 967
APPLICATION OF NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
Introduction 967
Identification of NSPS 967
Rationale for NSPS 968
NSPS Effluent Levels 968
Selection of NSPS Alternatives 968
XIII. PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR DISCHARGERS TO 989
PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS
Introduction 989
General Pretreatment Standards 989
Categorical Pretreatment Standards 989
111
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
SECTION SUBJECT PAGE
Identification of Pretreatment 991
Rationale For PSES and PSNS
PSES and PSNS Effluent Levels 994
Selection of PSES and PSNS Alternative 993
XIV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1015
XV. REFERENCES 1017
XVI. GLOSSARY 1019
IV
-------
TABLES
NUMBER
III-l
III-2
III-3
III-4 thru
III-8
III-9 and
111-10
III-11 thru
111-15
111-16 and
111-17
111-18 and
111-19
TITLE
Foundry Shipments in the United States
Penton Foundry Census Information
Distribution of Additional 1000 Foundry
Plant Surveys
General Summary Tables - Aluminum Casting
Subcategory
General Summary Tables - Copper and Copper
Alloy Casting Subcategory
General Summary Tables - Ferrous Casting
Subcategory
General Summary Tables - Lead Casting
Subcategory
General Summary Tables - Magnesium Casting
Subcategory
PAGE
54
55
56
57
61
62
63
64
84
86
87
88
89
111-20 and
111-21
111-22
111-23
111-24
111-25
V-l
V-2 thru
V-7
V-8
General Summary Tables - Zinc Casting
Subcategory
Operating Modes, Control and Treatment
Technologies and Disposal Methods
Ferrous Mold Cooling Casting Quench
Operations
Distribution of Plants
Percentage of Active "Wet" Operations
Within Each Employee Group
Annual Production of Plants Which Generate
Process Wastewaters
Metals Casting Industry Discharge
Summaries
Active Foundry Operations; Discharge Mode
90
92
93
97
98
99
171
172
180
181
-------
TABLES (Continued)
NUMBER
V-9
v-i'o
V-l 1
V-l 2
TITLE
Profile
List of Toxic Pollutants
Conventional and Nonconventional
Pollutants
Plant Assessment of the Known or Believed
Presence of Toxic Pollutants in Foundry
Raw Process Wastewaters
Toxic Pollutants Considered to be Present
in Foundry Process Wastewaters
PAGE
182
186
187
192
V-13
V-14
V-l5 thru
V-l 9
V-20 and
V-21
V-22 thru
V-26
V-27
V-28 and
V-29
V-30 and
V-31
V-32 thru
V-37
VI-1
Inorganic Toxic Pollutants Selected for
Sampling and Analysis During
Verification Plant Visits
Types and Amounts of Binders Used in
Foundries
Characteristics of Aluminum Process
Wastewaters
Characteristics of Copper Process
Wastewaters
Characteristics of Ferrous Process
Wastewaters
Characteristics of Lead Process
Wastewaters
Characteristics of Magnesium Process
Wastewaters
Characteristics of Zinc Process Watewaters
Raw Wastewater Analyzed Data Profile
Profile
Toxic Pollutants Not Detected in the Metal
Molding and Casting Industry
195
196
197
201
203
204
205
222
224
225
226
227
228
229
244
427
VI
-------
TABLES (Continued)
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VI-2 Toxic Pollutants Detected Below 428
Quantifiable Limits in the Metal Molding
and Casting Category
VI-3 Toxic Pollutants Present in the Metal 429
Molding and Casting Category
VI-4 Toxic Pollutant Disposition; Metal Molding 431
and Casting Category
VI-5 Conventional and Non-conventional Pollutant 436
Disposition; Metal Molding and Casting
Industry
VI-6 Toxic, Conventional and Non-Conventional 437
Pollutants Considered for Regulation in
the Metal Molding and Casting Category
vn
-------
TABLES (Continued)
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
VII-1 Emulsion Breaking Performance Data 445
VI1-2 Emulsion Breaking Performance Data; Toxic 446
Organic Pollutants
VI1-3 Effect of pH Control on Metals Removal 454
VI1-4 Effectiveness of NaOH for Metals Removal 454
VI1-5 Effectiveness of Lime and NaOH for Metals 456
Removal
VII-6 Theoretical Solubilities of Hydroxides and 457
Sulfides of Selected Metals in Pure Water
VII-7 Sampling Data from Sulfide Precipitation- 457
Sedimentation Systems
VII-8 Sulfide Precipitation-Sedimentation 459
Performance
VI1-9 Ferrite Co-Precipitation Performance 460
VII-10 Multimedia Filter Performance 455
VII-11 Performance of Selected Settling Systems 479
VII-12 Skimming Performance 473
VII-13 Trace Organic Removal by Skimming; API 475
Plus Belt Skimmers
VI1-14 Combined Metals Data Effluent Values 483
VII-15 L&S Performance; Additional Pollutants 485
VI1-16 Combined Metals Data Set - Untreated 486
Wastewater
VI1-17 Maximum Pollutant Level in Untreated 486
Wastewater
VII-18, 19 Precipitation-Sedimentation-Filtration 488
and 20 (LS&F) Performance 490
Vlll
-------
NUMBER
VII-21
VII-22
VII-23
VII-24
VII-25
VIII-1 thru
VIII-5
VIII-6 thru
VIII-10
VIII-11 and
VIII-12
VIII-13 thru
VIII-17
VI11-18 and
VIII-19
TABLES (Continued)
TITLE
Summary of Treatment Effectiveness
Activated Carbon Performance (Mercury)
Treatability Rating of Priority Pollutants
Utilizing Carbon Adsorption
Classes of Organic Compounds Adsorbed on
Carbon
Ultrafiltration Performance
Effluent Treatment Costs
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Aluminum Foundries
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Copper and Copper Alloy
Foundries
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Ferrous Foundries
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Lead Foundries
PAGE
494
497
512
513
514
553
557
558
587
592
594
597
613
621
625
VIII
VIII
VIII-
VIII
VIII
VIII-
VIII-
VIII-
VIII-
VIII-
-20 and
-21
-22 and
-23
-24 thru
-34
•35 and
-36
-37 thru
•84
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Magnesium Foundries
Foundry Operations Control and Treatment
Technology; Zinc Foundries
Model Cost Data - Aluminum Foundries
Model Cost Data - Copper and Copper Alloy
Foundries
Model Cost Data - Ferrous Foundries
VII1-85 thru Model Cost Data - Lead Foundries
628
630
632
635
648
659
660
661
662
738
740
IX
-------
NUMBER
VIII-87
VIII-88 and
VIII-89
VIII-90 thru
VIII-94
VIII-95
VIII-96 thru
VIII-98
VIII-99 thru
VIII-101
VIII-102 thru
VIII-113
VIII-114
VIII-115
VIII-116 thru
VIII-118
VIII-119 thru
VIII-126
TABLES (Continued)
TITLE
Model Cost Data - Magnesium Foundries
Model Cost Data - Zinc Foundries
Procedure for Determining Industry Wide
Treatment Costs for Each Process
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Aluminum
Subcategory
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Copper
Subcategory
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Ferrous
Subcategory
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Lead
Subcategory
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Magnesium
Subcategory
Metals Casting Industry; Wastewater
Treatment Cost Summary; Zinc
Subcategory
Statistical Estimates of Foundry Operations
Operations
PAGE
742
743
744
745
749
750
751
753
754
756
757
768
769
770
771
773
774
787
VIII-127
VIII-128
Energy Requirements Due to Water Pollution
Control
Solid and Liquid Waste Generation Due to
Water Pollution Control
788
791
-------
TABLES (Continued)
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-1 Pollutants Selected for Regulation at BPT 850
IX-2 Operations with Recycle Systems Installed 853
IX-3 Zero Discharge Operation Data Summary 854
IX-4 Process Segments in Which the Proposed BPT 860
Limitations are No Discharge of Process
Wastewater Pollutants
IX-5 Summary of Treatment In-Place 861
IX-6 Comparison of BPT Model Costs; Selected 862
BPT Models vs. Discharge Options
IX-7 Dragout Tank Effluent Quality 864
IX-8 BPT and Discharge Option Monitoring Cost 865
Criteria
IX-9 Comparison of BPT Model Waste Loads; 866
Selected BPT Models vs Discharge
Options
IX-10 Comparison of Metals Casting Industry 868
Pollutant Waste Loads; Direct
Dischargers
IX-11 Toxic Organic Pollutants not Treated by 869
the BPT Discharge Alternative Treatment
Technologies
IX-12 Expected Compliance Strategy; Selected BPT 870
Treatment Models vs Discharge Options
IX-13 Differences in Cost Between Complete 871
Recycle and Partial Recycle
IX-14 Comparison of Metals Casting Industry 872
Treatment Costs and Total Pollutant
Waste Loads; Proposed BPT Levels of
Treatment vs Discharge Options
IX-15 Alternative Effluent Limitations; 90% 873
Recycle Discharge Alternative
XI
-------
TABLES (Continued)
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
IX-16 Alternative Effluent Limitations; 50% 883
Recycle Discharge Alternative
X-l Raw Wastewater and Treated Effluent 937
Pollutant Loads; Direct and Zero
Discharge Operations
X-2 Alternative Effluent Limitations; 90% 940
Recycle Discharge Alternative
X-3 Alternative Effluent Limitations; 50% 945
Recycle Discharge Alternative
XII
-------
NUMBER
III-l
III-2 thru
III-9
111-10
III-ll
V-l thru
V-40
VII-1
VII-2
VII-3
VII-4
VII-5
VII-6
VII-7 thru
VII-15
VII-16
VII-17
VII-18
FIGURES
TITLE
Product Flow Diagram
Process Flow Diagrams
Cast Metals Production at Five-Year
Intervals
Ferrous Foundry Trends in the United
States
Wastewater Treatment System Water Flow
Diagrams (Sampled Plants)
Comparative Solubilities of Metal
Hydroxides and Sulfide as a Function
of pH
Effluent Zinc Concentration vs Minimum
Effluent pH
Lead Solubility in Three Alkalies
Granular Bed Filtration
Pressure Filtration
Representative Types of
Sedimentation
Hydroxide Precipitation Sedimentation
Effectiveness
Activated Carbon Adsorption Column
Centrifugation
Types of Evaporation Equipment
PAGE
100
101
108
109
110
246
285
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
533
534
535
536
VII-19
VII-20
Dissolved Air Flotation
Gravity Thickening
537
538
xiii
-------
NUMBER
VII-21
VII-22
VII-23
VIII-1
VIII-2
VIII-3
VIII-4
IX-1 thru
IX-5
IX-6 and
IX-7
IX-8 thru
IX-1 3
IX-14 thru
IX-1 6
IX-17 and
IX-1 8
IX-19 and
IX-20
IX-21 and
IX-22
IX-23
IX-24
FIGURES (Continued)
TITLE
Sludge Drying Bed
Simplified Ultrafiltration Flow Schematic
Vacuum Filtration
Aluminum Foundries Die Casting and Casting
Quench; BPT Co-Treatment Model
Ferrous Foundries Dust Collection and Slag
Quench; BPT Co-Treatment Model
Ferrous Foundries Dust Collection and Sand
Washing; BPT Co-Treatment Model
Ferrous Foundries Slag Quench and Melting
Furnace Scrubber; BPT Co-Treatment Model
Aluminum Casting Operations; BPT Model
Treatment System
Copper and Copper Alloy Casting
Operations; BPT Model TReatment
System
Ferrous Casting Operations; BPT Model
Treatment System
Lead Casting Operations; BPT Model
Treatment System
Magnesium Casting Operations; BPT Model
Treatment System
Zinc Casting Operations; BPT Model
Treatment System
Discharge Options; Wastewater Flow
Diagrams
Metal Molding and Casting Alternative BPT
Analysis; BPT Costs
Ferrous Subcategory; Dust Collection
Operations - Discharge Alternative
PAGE
539
540
541
794
795
796
797
892
896
897
898
899
904
905
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
xiv
-------
NUMBER
IX-25 thru
IX-28
FIGURES (Continued)
TITLE
Treatment Model
Metal Molding and Casting; Alternative BPT
Analyses
PAGE
916
919
X-l thru
X-7
X-8 and
X-9
X-10 thru
X-.12
XII-1 thru
XII-10
XII-11 thru
XII-13
XII-14 thru
XII-17
XIII-1 thru
XIII-10
XIII-11 thru
XIII-13
XIII-14 thru
XIII-17
Aluminum Casting Operations; BAT
Alternatives
Lead Casting Operations; BAT Alternatives
Zinc Casting Operations; BAT Alternatives
Aluminum Casting Operations; NSPS
Alternatives
Lead Casting Operations; NSPS Alternatives
Zinc Casting Operations; NSPS Alternatives
Aluminum Casting Operations; PSES and PSNS
Alternatives
Lead Casting Operations; PSES and PSNS
Alternatives
Zinc Casting Operations; PSES and PSNS
Alternatives
952
958
959
960
961
963
972
981
982
984
985
988
997
1006
1007
1009
1010
1013
xv
-------
SECTION VIII
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
INTRODUCTION
This section addresses the cost, energy, and non-water quality
impacts of applying the different levels of wastewater pollution
control to foundry operations. It includes a discussion of
actual treatment costs incurred at sampled plants, alternative
treatment technologies, and the cost, energy, and other non-water
quality impacts associated with the application of the BPT, BAT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS alternative treatment systems. In addition,
the consumptive use of water is addressed.
SAMPLED PLANT TREATMENT COSTS
Tables VII1-1 through VII1-5 present the reported costs of
treatment for the sampled foundry operations. The costs were
derived from data supplied by the industry at the time of
sampling. Standard cost of capital and depreciation percentages
are applied because pertinent company supplied data were not
provided. Supplement B to this document provides additional
details on sampled plant costs of treatment. All costs have been
adjusted to July 1978 dollars.
A comparison of capital cost data from the sampled plants with
the Agency's estimated expenditures is shown below. Comparisons
were made for those plants listed in Tables VIII-1 through VII1-5
which had sufficient data available to determine the in-place
treatment components. The Agency's estimates were derived
directly from the model cost tables. As can be seen in the
following table, the agency's model costs compare favorably with
the actual costs reported by industry. Only four of the 15
plants listed show a plant supplied cost which exceeds the EPA
model cost. Overall, the Agency's total estimate is 36 percent
higher than the total reported cost. The Agency therefore
concludes that its cost models do not underestimate the costs of
treatment (construction, retrofit, etc.) which the metal molding
and casting industry may incur.
543
-------
Plant Reported EPA
Code Cost Model Cost
04704 $103,100 $207,000
04736 27,640 66,000
06809 9,170 43,000
06956 796,700 1,638,000
07170 12,380 167,000
07929 78,900 341,000
08146 9,300 26,000
09094 55,000 79,000
12040 491,100 439,000
15520 1,298,200 1,285,000
15654 10,540 256,000
17089 1,140,130 711,000
19872 7,550 47,000
20009 56,200 495,000
20147 280,450 152,000
TOTAL $4,376,360 $5,952,000
DEVELOPMENT OF COST MODELS
Model treatment systems were prepared to assist in the
development of the proposed limitations and standards and the
estimation of treatment costs. The selection of the model
treatment systems, upon which the proposed limitations and
standards are based, is discussed in Sections IX through XIII.
The model treatment components are described in Tables VII1-6
through VIII-23. In addition to listing the treatment
technologies, these tables also describe for each components
1. Status and reliability
2. Problems and limitations
3. Implementation time
4. Land requirement
5. Environmental impacts other than water
6. Solid waste generation
Note: Implementation time includes engineering, purchase,
delivery, and construction activities.
Model Flow
After selecting the treatment technologies, models were developed
to estimate the costs of treatment. The first step in the
development of cost models for each process segment involved the
determination of model flows. The Agency determined that gallons
544
-------
per ton of production was an appropriate unit for expressing
flow.
The model flow values (in liters per kkg or gallons per ton) are
based upon the "best" flow rates through the process (applied
flow) of the plants in each process segment. The "best" model
flows were determined to be the values of those plants which
demonstrate conservative water use practices. Additional details
on the development of applied and discharge model flows are
presented in Section IX and X.
Model Size
The next step in the development of cost models for each process
segment involved the determination of model size (tons/day). By
relating size, flow (gal/ton), and the length of the operating
day, treatment component sizes and, therefore, costs were
determined. The production data in each process segment were
separated by employee group and then averaged to determine the
various model sizes in each process segment. In the few
instances where there was insufficient production data for a
particular segment, data from other related segments were used.
Co-Treatment Models
As a further refinement of the cost models, several models were
developed to reflect co-treatment practices in the industry.
These co-treatment models more accurately mirror industry
operations and recognize the economies of scale in both
investment and annual expenditures. Following is a list of the
process combinations for which co-treatment models were
developed.
Aluminum Subcategory
Casting Quench and Die Casting
Ferrous Subcategory
Dust Collection and Slag Quench
Dust Collection and Sand Washing
Melting Furnace Scrubber and Slag Quench
These process combinations reflect the predominant treatment
combinations noted in the industry survey.
The co-treatment model sizes are based upon the average
production value of the plants in the particular process
combination and employee group. The co-treatment model flows are
based upon the sum of the model flows for each contributing
process. The co-treatment model systems are illustrated in
Figures VIII-1 through VIII-4.
545
-------
BASIS FOR MODEL COST ESTIMATES
Model investment (capital) costs are estimates of the equipment
and installation costs of each treatment component and its
ancillary facilities (pumps, piping, building, etc.). The annual
costs include capital recovery costs, operation and maintenance
costs, energy and power, chemical, and liquid and solid waste
disposal costs. All costs presented in this section are in July
1978 dollars.
Capital recovery costs consist of the charges for depreciation
and interest. Depreciation charges are based upon a ten year
straight line depreciation. Interest charges are calculated on
the basis of a seven percent interest rate. The capital recovery
factor (CRF) is typically used to allocate investment costs and
interest charges to the annual operating cost of a facility. The
CRF is equal to i (the interest rate) times the nth power (n is
equal to the depreciation period) of the quantity O+i), the
product of which is divided by the nth power of the quantity
(1+i) less 1. The investment cost is multiplied by the CRF to
obtain the capital recovery cost. The annual depreciation charge
is determined by dividing the initial investment by the number of
years in the depreciation period. The annual cost of capital is
equal to the total annual capital recovery (ACR) minus the annual
cost of depreciation (i.e. ACR-P/n = Annual cost of capital,
where P is the principal or initial investment cost).
To maintain consistency, the following parameters were
established as bases for the model cost estimates.
• The treatment facilities are contained within a
"battery limit" and are erected on a "green field"
site. Site clearance cost estimates are based upon
average site conditions with no allowances for
equipment relocation.
• Equipment costs are based upon specific flow rates.
• The treatment facilities are located in reasonable
proximity to the process "source." Piping and utility
costs for interconnecting runs between the treatment
facility's battery limits and process equipment areas
are based upon moderate linear distances.
• Land acquisition costs are not specifically included in
the cost estimates.
• Limited instrumentation, for pH and ORP measurement and
control, has been included. However, automatic
546
-------
samplers, temperature indicators, flow meters,
recorders, etc., have not been included in the cost
estimates.
• Control buildings are prefabricated structures.
In general, the model cost estimates reflect an on-site "battery
limit" treatment plant with: electrical substation and equipment
for supplying electrical power to the facilities; all necessary
pumps/ treatment facility interconnecting pipe lines; chemical
treatment facilities; foundations; structural steel; a control
house; access roadways; and a chain link fence. The cost
estimates also include a 15 percent contingency, 10 percent
contractor's overhead and profit, and engineering fees of 15
percent.
MODEL COST ESTIMATES
The cost estimates for the model treatment systems are presented
in Tables VI11-24 through VI11-94. Model treatment system cost
estimates were not developed for the melting furnace scrubber
process segment of the lead casting subcategory because the
proposed limitations and standards will not require additional
expenditures. Of the five plants in the lead subcategory melting
furnace scrubber process segment, four achieve "zero discharge"
through the use of internal recycle systems. As a result, these
four plants will not incur additional wastewater treatment costs.
The remaining melting furnace scrubber achieves 99% recycle. The
Agency believes that this plant will be able to achieve "zero
discharge" through the tightening of its recycle system: Since
tightening the recycle system is a treatment process adjustment,
no additional investment or annual expenditures are expected.
The pollution control expenditures for new source operations in
the lead subcategory melting furnace scrubber process segment
would be related to the purchase and operation of air pollution
control equipment packages as provided by equipment
manufacturers. As manufactured, these scrubber packages contain
wastewater reservoirs and recycle components. Therefore, the
investment and annual expenditures for water pollution control at
new source lead melting furnace scrubber operations are not
addressed as part of this document.
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
Following are the impacts, based upon the model treatment
systems, of the proposed BPT, BAT, and PSES levels of treatment.
Estimates of the cost, energy, and non-water quality impacts of
NSPS and PSNS are based upon the treatment models. Since new
547
-------
plants have no existing treatment equipment in place, total
treatment costs are not adjusted for existing treatment equipment
as is the case for BPT, BAT, and PSES. NSPS and PSNS costs are
estimated from model costs. The total energy and non-water
quality impacts of the proposed BAT and PSES levels of treatment
are based upon the selected treatment alternatives. For details
on the selection of the BAT and PSES alternatives, refer to
Sections X and XIII, respectively.
Estimated costs of_ Implementation of Pollution Control
Technologies
Tables VIII-96 through VIII-118 present estimates of the
investment and annual costs to the industry associate?d with the
treatment levels considered. These costs were developed by the
method outlined in Table VIII-95.
Tables VIII-119 through VIII-126 present summaries, (segmented by
discharge mode, process group or combination, and employee group)
of the number of foundries in each subcategory and segment.
These data are based upon statistical projections. These
summaries are current as of the industry update survey conducted
in mid-1981. No data are available to determine the number of
grid casting operations in the lead casting subcategory.
Energy Impacts
A summary, by subcategory, process segment, and employee group,
pf the energy requirements due to water pollution control
activities is presented in Table VIII-127. The data presented in
this table were developed by multiplying the model treatment
system energy consumption values by the number of plants
represented by each model. It should be noted that the totals
listed in Table VIII-127 do not include all operations. Those
operations which currently achieve "zero discharge" through
internal recycle or by holding quench tank wastes for contract
disposal do not incur, nor will they require, expenditures for
energy for wastewater treatment.
The total consumption of 107.5 million kwh represents 0.3% of the
industry's 1978 electrical energy consumption of 31.,3 billion
kilowatt hours.
Non-water Quality Impacts
Air Pollution
None or the processes or treatment technologies proposed generate
or contribute to the generation of any air pollutants.
548
-------
Therefore, there will be no impacts on air quality as a result of
water pollution control activities at the proposed levels of
treatment.
Solid and Liquid Waste Disposal
A summary, by subcategory, process segment, and employee group,
of solid and liquid waste disposal impacts due to water pollution
control activities is presented in Table VIII-128. The data
presented in this table were derived by multiplying model waste
loads by the number of plants in each model. The solid wastes
are comprised of dewatered wastewater treatment sludges (25%
solids). The liquid wastes are comprised of the surface
skimmings removed in wastewater treatment operations (specific
gravity = 0.85 gm/cc).
Other solid and liquid wastes are generated by this industry.
However, these other wastes (e.g., spent casting sand, furnace
dusts, and spent quenching solutions) are generated by the
process and not as a result of the proposed regulation and of
wastewater treatment operations associated with the process.
The Agency considered the requirements of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in developing the proposed
limitations and standards for this point source category. Since
publication of the original RCRA listings for wastewater
treatment sludges, the Agency has delisted those sludges
resulting from the hydroxide precipitation of toxic metals. The
solid wastes generated at the proposed levels of treatment by the
copper and ferrous dust collection, the ferrous sand washing, and
the electric furnace processes can contain toxic metals which
have not been fixed or have been incompletely fixed as metal
hydroxides. The Agency has, therefore, considered the impact on
the above processes attaining compliance with RCRA requirements.
The EP toxicity test (refer to RCRA Procedures) is designed to
provide an indication of the leachability of toxic materials from
various solid wastes. In this test, measured amounts (up to a
specific volume) of acetic acid are mixed with specific
quantities of solid wastes. The resulting liquid extract is then
analyzed for certain toxic metals. Concentrations found above
certain values indicate RCRA nonconformance. The previously
noted delistings were made because hydroxide fixation of the
toxic metals inhibits the leaching ot toxic metals from these
solid wastes. In the cases of the foundry processes noted above,
conformance with RCRA requirements could be ensured by adding
lime (a readily available hydroxide source) to the solid wastes
generated by these processes. The model treatment systems for
these foundry processes do not provide for the addition of a
549
-------
hydroxide source or provide
adjustment.
for only a limited level of pH
Sampled plant analytical data were reviewed to determine the
excess alkalinity typically available in wastes from these
processes. For this effort, the solid waste acidity and
alkalinity were considered to be similar to that of the process
wastewaters. The average excess alkalinity was found to be 230
gm per kkg of sludge. This amount represents approximately five
(5) equivalents of excess alkalinity. Following EP toxicity test
procedures, up to 2,000 equivalents of acid can be added per kkg
of sludge. Therefore, 1,995 (2,000-5) equivalents of hydroxide
would be needed to stabilize each kkg of sludge in these process
segments. This ratio of represents 148 Ib of lime per ton of
sludge. On a current dollar basis of $42.50 per ton of lime (in
bags), the resulting chemical cost is $3.14 per ton of sludge.
This value represents only the cost of chemicals as plants would
use their existing solid waste handling facilities to dispose of
their sludges.
The Agency estimates that 2,880 tons/year of sludge will be
generated in progressing from the current to the proposed levels
of treatment in the processes noted above. The resulting cost of
lime addition for the proposed regulation is $9,040 per year.
Consumptive Water Loss
In all but two of the process segments there will be no impacts
related to the consumptive loss of water due to water pollution
control activities. In the case of the two exceptions, the
copper and the ferrous subcategory mold cooling and casting
quench process segments, the use of evaporative cooling
technologies as model treatment components will result in a net
increase in the volume of water consumed in water pollution
control activities.
1. In the copper subcategory mold cooling and casting
quench process segment, the current level of water
consumption is estimated to be 33.4 million gallons per
year (126.6 million liters per year). Implementation
of the proposed limitations and standards would result
in the following net increases in annual water
consumption:
Proposed
Proposed
Total
BPT
PSES
0.22
0.09
Million
Million
gallons
gallons
(0.83
(0.34
Million
Million
liters)
liters)
0.31 Million gallons (1.27 Million liters)
550
-------
The preceding volumes are determined on the basis of a
2% loss due to evaporation, drift, etc., in evaporative
cooling components, and a 0,9% loss due to evaporation
from discharged wastewaters.
The following values show the net increases as
percentages of the total volume of water applied in
this process segment (1.66 billion gallons/year) and as
percentages of the total volume applied in the category
(110.9 billion gallons/year).
Percent of Volume Applied
Process Foundry
Segment Industry
Proposed BPT
Proposed PSES
Total
0.013
0.005
0.018
0.00020
0.00008
0.00028
2. In the ferrous subcategory mold cooling and casting
quench process segment, the current level of water
consumption is estimated to be 86.2 million gallons
(326.3 million liters) per year. Implementation of the
proposed limitations and standards would result in the
following net increases in annual water consumption.
Proposed
Proposed
BPT
PESE
6.58
4.57
Million
Million
Gallons
Gallons
(24.9
(17.3
Million
Million
Liters)
Liters)
11.15 Million Gallons (42.21 Million Liters)
The above volumes were determined on the same bases as
described above for copper mold cooling and casting
quench operations.
The following values show the net increases as
percentages of the total volume of water applied in
this process segment (4.87 billion gallons) and as
percentages of the total volume applied in the
category:
Percent of Volume Applied
Process Foundry
Segment Industry
Proposed BPT
Proposed PSES
0. 14
0.09
0.006
0.004
551
-------
Total 0.23 0.010
The Agency concludes that the substantial reductions in process
water requirements and discharge volumes achieved through recycle
outweigh the comparatively minor net increases in the volume of
water consumed in treatment operations. This favorable
comparison would apply in all geographic regions. In fact,
complete recycle is currently being practiced at operations in
water scarce areas of the U.S.
SUMMARY
The Agency concludes that the pollutant load reduction benefits
of the proposed limitations and standards outweigh any adverse
impacts which may be attributed to the implementation of water
pollution control facilities.
552
-------
TABLE VIII-1
EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS
ALUMINUM CASTING SUBCATEGORY
(ALL COSTS ARE EXPRESSED IN JULY 1978 DOLLARS)
Plant Code: 04704
Process Segment(s): Investment
Casting
Initial Investment Cost $103,100
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital $ 4,430
Depreciation 10,310
Operation and Maintenance 5,950
Energy and Power 375
Chemical Costs 1,500
Solid Waste Disposal 2,000
Other 26,450
Total Annual Cost $ 51,015
$/ton 118.64
(1)
12040
Die Casting
(Aluminum
and Zinc)
$491,100
$ 21,120
49,110
76,830
3,300
48,620
2,100
1,290
$202,370
6.29
17089
Melting Furnace
Scrubber, Die
Casting, and
Casting Quench
$1,140,130
$ 49,150
114,310
35,000
9,060
108,210
315,730
3.08
20147
Die Lube
$280,500
$ 12,060
28,050
55,100
800
$ 96,010
2.39
(1) Contract removal of spent acid
553
-------
TABLE VIII-2
EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS
COPPER CASTING SUBCATEGORY
(ALL COSTS ARE EXPRESSED IN JULY 1978 DOLLARS)
Plant Code:
Process Segment(s):
Initial Investment Cost
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital
•Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
Chemical Costs
Solid Waste Disposal
Other
Total Annual Cost
$/ton
04736
Mold Cooling
and Casting
Quench
$27,640
$ 1,190
2,760
6,290
3,270
10,900
$24,410
0.86
06809(1)
Mold Cooling
and Casting
Quench
$9,170
$ 390
920
930
440
380
$3,060
0.02
09094
Dust
Collection
$55,000
$ 2,360
5,500
22,000
2,000
5,000
$36,860
8.93
19872
Dust
Collection
$7,550
$ 320
760
625
13,250
250
$15,205
1.96
(1) Costs for this plant are apportioned from the total costs of a combined
treatment system. The apportionment is made on the basis of contributing
flow; this process contributes 5 percent of the total flow through the
system. This estimate was provided by the company.
554
-------
TABLE VIII-3
EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS
IRON AND STEEL CASTING SUBCATEGORY
(ALL COSTS ARE EXPRESSED IN JULY 1978 DOLLARS)
Plant Code:
Process Segment(s):
Initial Investment Cost
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital
Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
Chemical Costs
Solid Waste Disposal
Other
Total Annual Costs
$/ton
Plant Code:
Process Segment(s):
Initial Investment Cost
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital
Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
Chemical Costs
Solid Waste Disposal
Other
Total Annual Costs
$/ton
00001
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
: $106,700
N/A
lance
Dust
Collection
: $632,800
$ 27,210
63,280
lance 127,890
12,940
-
13,720(2)
$245,040
-
00002
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
$177,200
N/A
15520
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
$665,400
$ 28,610
66,540
451,260
26,400
4,000
3,310
140,680^
$720,800
-
06956
Dust
Collection,
Melting Furnace
Scrubbers, and
Slag Quench
$796,700
( 1 1
$ 33,750U;
79,670
232,160
5,000
35,300
160,000
$545,880
5.34
Total
07170
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
$12,400
$ 530
1,240
2,500
20
1,000
30
$ 5,320
26.60
15654
Mold
Cooling
and Casting
$1,298,200
$ 55,820
129,820
579,150
39,340
4,000
2) 3>31°(2)
L) 154,400U;
$ 965,840
5.80
Quench
$10,500
$ 450
1,050
100
-
-
-
$ 1,600
0.01
07929
Dust
Collection
$78,900
$ 3,390
7,890
2,560
4,110
-
1,940
$19,890
0.38
20009
Dust
Collection
and Sand
Washing
$56,200
$ 2,420
5,620
49,980
-
-
880(3)
$58,900
0.81
(1) Reported value
(2) Sewer charges, assessed costs to main plant treatment, etc.
(3) Fuel
N/A: Not Available. No operating data provided.
555
-------
TABLE VIII-4
EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS
MAGNESIUM CASTING SUBCATEGORY
(ALL COSTS ARE EXPRESSED IN JULY 1978 DOLLARS)
Plant Code: 08146
Process Segment(s): Grinding
Scrubbers
and Dust
Collection
Initial Investment Cost $ 9,300
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital $ 400
Depreciation 930
Operation and Maintenance 4,900
Energy and Power 3,270
Chemical Costs
Solid Waste Disposal 650
Other
Total Annual Cost $10,150
$/ton 52.86
556
-------
TABLE VIII-5
EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS
ZINC CASTING SUBCATEGORY
(ALL COSTS ARE EXPRESSED IN JULY 1978 DOLLARS)
Plant Code:
Process Segment(s):
Initial Investment Cost
Annual Costs
Cost of Capital
Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
Chemical Costs
Solid Waste Disposal
Other
Total Annual Cost
$/ton
04622
Casting
Quench
N/A
$ 17,040(1)
$ 17,040
1.60
10308
Casting
Quench
(Zinc and
Aluminum)
$257,800
$ 11,090
25,780
26,570
800
16,540
$ 80,780
9.02
18139
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber and
Casting 'Quench
(Zinc and
Aluminum)
$1,709,340
$ 73,500
170,930
419,500
8,500
1,000
10,000
683,430
16.26
(1) This value represents the cost of contractor disposal services.
N/A: Not Applicable
557
-------
TABLE VII1-6
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
INVESTMENT CASTING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Polymer addition - increases the settleability of the
wastewater solids by enhancing floe formation. Used in
conjunction with step B.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this process and other industrial wastewater
treatment operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper feed rate must be maintained. Feed system must be
periodically cleaned. Care must be used to assure proper
solution makeup.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
Included with step B.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See step C.
558
-------
TABLE VIII-6
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
INVESTMENT CASTING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarifier - provides solids sedimentation and removal
capability.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this process and in a wide variety of other foundry
and industrial wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Hydraulic overload would result in process upset. Excess
accumulation of settled solids would upset process and cause
mechanical overload.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 25'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See step C.
559
-------
TABLE VII1-6
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
INVESTMENT CASTING OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter-dewaters the sludge removed in step B.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of foundry and industrial wastewater
treatment sludge dewatering operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Routine maintenance must be provided. Periodic media
replacement is necessary.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based upon the model treatment system, 104.3 Ibs of
dewatered solids (25% by weight) are removed per ton of
metal poured (280.6 Ibs/day, 35.1 tons/year). These solids
consist of investment materials and entrained oils and
greases.
560
-------
TABLE VII1-6
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
INVESTMENT CASTING OPERATIONS
Step D (Alternative No. 1)
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle tank and pumps - recycle all process wastewaters to
the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a variety of foundry and other industrial wastewater
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning required, especially in case of treatment
process upset.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in step C.
561
-------
TABLE VII1-6
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
INVESTMENT CASTING OPERATIONS
Step E (Alternative No. 2)
1 . Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Filtration - provides a higher degree of suspended solids
removal. The backwash is returned to the floe tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a variety of industrial wastewater treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Surges must be controlled. Treatment process upset must be
avoided to prevent fouling and plugging. Excessive backwash
rate must be avoided.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Backwash would result in the additional generation of 16.1
pounds of sludge (25% by weight) per ton of metal poured
(32.3 Ibs/day, 4.0 tons/year) which would be removed in step
C. These solids are comprised of the same constituents
described in step C.
562
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Steb A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling Tank - provides primary sedimentation capability.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this subcategory and in a variety of other
wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning and solids removal required.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Infrequent (once or twice a year) solids removal required.
563
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Oil Skimmer - removes oils which may be released from
process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process segment, subcategory, and
category, and in other categories.
3. Problems and Limitations
The skimming equipment and media must be carefully
maintained.
4. Implementation Time
3 months
5. Land Requirements
No additional land required.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Any oils which are collected must receive proper disposal.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
564
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - 95% of the settling tank effluent is recycled.
2. Status and Reliability
Practiced by several plants in this process segment.
3. Problems and Limitations
Routine maintenance practices are imperative.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
565
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition - insures adequate pH control: also used for
its formation and sedimentation capabilities.
2. Status and Reliability
Very widely used in industrial wastewater treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper maintenance is required to keep the lime feed system
functioning properly.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Must amke provisions for dust collection while unloading the
lime.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
566
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Coagulant Aid Addition - used to enhance floe formation and
thus improve wastewater sedimentation characteristics.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely demonstrated in foundry and other industrial
wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Care must be taken to insure rate of addition and proper
solution makeup.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Solid wastes removed in step G must receive proper disposal.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
567
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step F
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarifier - provides for the sedimentation of wastewater
solids (precipitates, participates, etc.).
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of foundry and other industrial
wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Routine, or continuous, sludge removal is required.
Hydraulic overloads would result in poor solids removal.
Excess sludge accumulation results in reduced treatment
efficiency and mechanical overloads.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Refer to step G.
568
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step G
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter - used to dewater the sludges removed in step
F. The filtrate is returned to the mix tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and in a variety of other industrial
wastewater treatment applications. Dewaters the sludge to
25% solids.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary. Filter media must be
replaced periodically.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solid waste disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based upon a dewinering of the sludge removed at step F to
25% solids, about 0,38 Ibs of filter cake per ton of metal
poured (41 Ibs per day. 5.1 ton/year) would be generated by
this treatment component.
569
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step H
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Filter - provides the capacity for the removal of additional
suspended solids (and of the pollutants entrained in these
solids).
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of similar industrial wastewater
treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Hydraulic surges must be controlled. Treatment process
upsets must be curtailed in order to prevent the fouling or
plugging of the filter.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of backwash solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
This treatment component would generate an additional solid
waste load (removed in step G) of 0.065 Ibs of solid waste
per ton of metal poured (7 Ibs per day, 0.9 ton/year).
570
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step I
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - return the effluent from step H to the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated in various industrial wastewater treatment
applications. Refer to Section X for additional details
pertaining to this application.
3. Problems and Limitations
It is imperative that preventive maintenance procedures be
followed.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
No additional solid waste load.
571
-------
TABLE VII1-7
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step J
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Tighten the recycle rate of step C to 100%.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated at several melting furnace operations in this
industry.
3. Problems and Limitations
Preventive maintenance practices must be observed.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
No additional land required.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
No additional solid waste load.
572
-------
TABLE VIII-8
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling Tank - provides primary solids removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely practiced in plants using this process and in a wide
variety of other wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Tank must be cleaned periodically.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solids can be recovered for reuse.
573
-------
TABLES VIII-8
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Stefr B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Oil Skimmer - removes oils and greases which may separate
from the process waters.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in a number of similar applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Surface turbulence renders the skimmer ineffective. The
skimming medium must be properly maintained.
4. Implementation Time
3 months
5. Land Requirements
No additional land is required.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based on a skim with a density 85% that of water, 0.24 gal
of skim per ton of metal poured must be removed. Following
are the estimated volumes of oils .removed from the model
treatment systems.
<50 employees - 1.42 gal/day, 302 gal/year
>50 employees - 14.9 gal/day, 3725 gal/year
574
-------
TABLE VII1-8
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Pumps - recycle all wastewaters back to the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely practiced in this and other subcategories and
industries.
3. Problems and Limitations
Carelessness, resulting in the contamination of quench
solutions with other wastes, would degrade quench solution
quality and possibly negate 100% recycle.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
575
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Alum Addition-used in conjunction with steps B and C for oil
and grease removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used by several plants employing this process as well as in
a variety of other waste treatment operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Adds significant amounts of suspended solids. Care must be
used in handling alum powders and solutions.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the skim removed in step C must be
provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
576
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Sulfuric Acid Addition-used in conjunction with steps A and
C for oil and grease removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used by several plants employing this process and in a
variety of other pH adjustment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Extreme care must be used in the handling and storage of
acids.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the skim removed in step C must be
provided. Venting must be provided to avoid personnel
contact with fumes.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
577
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
C
Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Inclined plate separator - provides the capability oil and
grease separation.
Status and Reliability
Used in this and other processes in a variety of
installations.
Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning may be required. If an excessive amount
of skim is allowed to collect, the effectiveness of the unit
is degraded. Hydraulic overloads must be avoided to
maintain effectiveness.
Implementation Time
10-12 months
Land Requirements
20' x 50'
Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the oily skim must be provided.
Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based on a skim with a density 85% that of water, 0.86 gal
of skim per ton of metal poured must be removed (103
gal/day, 25,710 gal/year).
578
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition-Used for pH control and in conjunction with
steps E and F.
2. Status and Reliability
Lime addition for pH adjustment is very common in numerous
waste treatment operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper maintenance is required to keep the pH control and
lime feed systems operating.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Dust collection capability must be provided when unloading
lime.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G solids removals.
579
-------
TABLE VIII-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Coagulant Aid Addition-added to waste stream in clarifier
center-well. coagulant aid addition enhances floe
formation.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely practiced in this and a wide variety of other waste
treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper feed rate must be maintained.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
No additional land required.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
The solids removed in step G must receive proper disposal.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G solids removal.
580
-------
TABLE VIII-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step F
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarification-provides solids removal via settling.
2. Status and Reliability
Very widely used in this and other process waste treatment
operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Sludge cannot be allowed to accumulate to an excess.
Hydraulic overload results in poor solids removal.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
30' x 60'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper sludge disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G solids removal.
581
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step G
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter - ised to dewater the sludge removed in step
F. The filtrate is returned to the neutralization tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and in numerous other process wastewater
treatment applications to dewater sludge to 25% solids.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of filter cake is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
At a solids concentration of 25%, the vacuum filter would
dewater the solids (which consist of debris, oils, chemical
precipitates, etc.) to about 33.2 Ibs filter cake per ton of
metal poured (2.0 ton/day, 497 ton/year).
582
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step H
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Filter - provide additional suspended solids removal
Backwash is returned to the neutralization tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a variety of similar waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Plant upsets result in fouling and plugging of the filter,
Hydraulic surges must be avoided.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of filter backwash solids is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
583
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle tank and pumps - to return 85% of the treated
effluent to the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Practiced in this subcategory.
3. Problems and Limitations
Pump maintenance required.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Minimal to none.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are removed in step G.
584
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step J
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Tighten Recycle of step I to 95%
2. Status and Reliability
Practiced in several wastewater treatment applications,
3. Problems and Limitations
Same as step I.
4. Implementation Time
Same as step I.
5. Land Requirements
Same as step I.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Same as step I.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Same as step I.
585
-------
TABLE VII1-9
FOUNDRY OPERATION
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE CASTING OPERATIONS
Step K
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Activated Carbon Filter-provides for the removal of toxic
organic pollutants.
2. Status and Reliability
Transferred technology from other industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Maintenance required. Periodic removal and regeneration of
carbon required.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Energy consumed during carbon regeneration.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Minimal to no effect. Solids are removed at step G.
586
-------
TABLE VIII-10
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE LUBE OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Holding Tank - to provide waste holding capacity.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this and a number of other process waste treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning of tank may be required.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Oily skim collected by step B requires proper disposal.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Minimal; would be removed during infrequent cleaning.
587
-------
TABLE VII1-10
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE LUBE OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Oil Skimmer-removes the oils and greases which separte out
of process solutions.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of applications involving the
skimming of industrial wastewaters.
3. Problems and Limitations
Surface turbulence renders skimming ineffective. The
skimmer material must be properly maintained.
4. Implementation Time
3 months
5. Land Requirements
None.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the skimmed oils must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Minimal - the skimmer is used to remove tramp oils which may
accumulate.
588
-------
TABLE VIII-10
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE LUBE OPERATIONS
C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Cyclonic Separator-provides removal, by intertial
separation, of some suspended solids.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a plant with this process and in other industrial
waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Can remove only the larger suspended solids.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are removed in step D.
589
-------
TABLE VIII-10
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE LUBE OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Paper Filter-dewaters the concentrate (blow down) of the
cyclonic separator.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this and a wide variety of other waste treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Paper filter media must be continuously replaced. To permit
solids removals, new filter media must always be exposed.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 month
5. Land Requirements
15' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Solids must receive proper disposal.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
ColleThe cted material consists of debris, oils, and metal
particulates. Based on dewatering to 25% solids, 0.46 Ibs
of solids would be removed for each ton of metal poured
(61.2 Ib/day, 7.6 ton/year).
590
-------
TABLE VI11-10
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ALUMINUM FOUNDRIES
DIE LUBE OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle tank and pumps - recycle all process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this process and in a wide array of other waste
treatment operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
The recycle tank may require periodic cleaning. Pumps
require maintenance. Proper maintenance, to prevent
contamination with other wastes, is necessary to maintain
recycle quality.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are aemoved in step D.
591
-------
TABLE VII1-11
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
COPPER AND COPPER ALLOY FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling tank with a dragout mechanism - provides solids
sedimentation and removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this process and in a wide variety of other foundry
dust collection operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
An excess of solids cannot be allowed to accumulate or else
decreased settleability of wastewater results. The dragout
flights require periodic maintenance and replacement.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 25'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solid wastes consist of waste sand from the scrubber.
At a solids concentration of 25%, about 1.99 Ibs of solid
wastes is generated per ton of sand handled (731 Ibs/day,
91.4 ton/year).
592
-------
TABLE VIII-11
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
COPPER AND COPPER ALLOY FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle pumps - provide for the recycle of all process
wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this and in a wide variety of other foundry dust
collection operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance must be provided to keep recycle pumps
operating properly.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids generated in step A must be
provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are removed in Step A.
593
-------
TABLE VI11-12
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
COPPER AND COPPER ALLOY FOUNDRIES
MOLD COOLING AND CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling tank - provides primary solids removal
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and in numerous other foundry and
industrial wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning required.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are comprised of product scale and chips. This
material will be recoverd for reuse.
594
-------
TABLE VIII-12
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
COPPER AND COPPER ALLOY FOUNDRIES
MOLD COOLING AND CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Cooling Tower - provides for the cooling of process waste-
waters.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and in a wide variety of other foundry
and industrial process applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance and periodic cleaning required.
4. Implementation Time
18-20 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
The use of biocides may be necessary.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Refer to Step A.
595
-------
TABLE VIII-12
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
COPPER AND COPPER ALLOY FOUNDRIES
MOLD COOLING AND CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Tank and Pumps - to recycle all process wastewater
wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and other foundry and industrial process
waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance required as well as periodic cleaning,
especially, if a suspended solids overload occurs.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Refer to Step A.
596
-------
TABLE VI11-13
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling Tank with dragout - to provide primary solids
removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process and in a number of other foundry
and industrial solids removal applications.
Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning required. Dragout
periodic maintenance and/or replacement.
flights require
Implementation Time
15-18 months
Land Requirements
Up to 35' x 70'
Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids required.
Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids consist of casting sand and its byproducts. Assuming
25% solids in dragout, about 155 Ibs of sludge is generated
per ton of sand handled.
Solid Waste
Metal
Ductile Iron
Employee
Group
<50
50-249
>250
Tons/Day
3.6
52.9
256
Tons/Year
91 1
13,230
63,940
597
-------
Gray Iron <50 12.8 3,197
50-249 59.1 14,760
£250 332 83,120
Malleable Iron <250 48.0 12,010
£250 320 75,560
Steel <250 28.3 7,072
>250 91.8 22,940
598
-------
TABLE VI11-13
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Pumps - to recycle 100% of all process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a number of plants employing this process, as well
as in a variety of other foundries and industries.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary to insure recycle
operations.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in Step A.
599
-------
TABLE VI11-14
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Caustic Addition - for pH adjustment and control. Used in
conjunction with Step B.
Status and Reliability
Used in a number of plants within this process segment as
well as in a variety of other foundry melting furnace
scrubber operations. Also used in a wide variety of other
industrial waste treatment applications.
Problems and Limitations
pH control and caustic feed systems must receive regular
maintenance. Caustic is more expensive than lime, but it
provides more alkalinity. Extreme caution must be used in
handling. Heat must be provided, as 50% caustic "freezes"
at about 55°F.
Implementation Time
8-10 months
Land Requirements
15' x 20'
Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the solids removed in Step D must be
provided. Venting must be provided to avoid personnel
exposure to any strong caustic fumes.
Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in Step D.
600
-------
TABLE VIII-14
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarifer - to provide solids sedimentation and removal
capability.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a number of plants with this process as well as in
similar foundry operations which cast other metals. Very
widely used in foundry and industrial waste treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance must be provided. Solids cannot be
allowed to accumulate to such an extent as to affect
effluent quality or effect a mechanical overload. Periodic
cleaning may be required. Hydraulic overload would result
in poor solids removal.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 80' x 80'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See Step D.
601
-------
TABLE VIII-14
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Polymer Addition - increases solids removal by enhancing
floe formation.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process and in other similar foundry
operations. Also very widely used in other foundry and
industrial waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning and regular maintenance of the feed system
must be provided. Care must be taken in polymer solution
makeup.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See Step D.
602
-------
TABLE VIII-14
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter - Dewaters the sludge removed in Step B.
Filtrate is returned to neturalization tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and similar operations of other
foundries. Also, very widely used in foundry and industrial
waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary.
4. Implementation Time
2 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 50' x 150'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The vacuum filter is capable of dewatering the solids to 25%
solids resulting in the generation of about 135 Ibs of
filter cake per ton of metal poured. This material consists
of precipitates of treatment chemicals and process
contaminants, and dusts.
603
-------
TABLE VII1-14 (cont'd)
Filter Cake
Metal Employee Group Tons/Day Tons/Year
Ductile Iron
Smaller Operations <250 1.4 354
>250 2.3 572
Larger Operations <250 12.3 3,064
>250 12.9 32,330
Gary Iron
Smaller Operations <50 0.75 189
>50 2.6 655
Larger Operations <50 0.74 185
50-249 7.4 1,852
>250 68.7 17,170
Malleable Iron <250 8.2 2,054
>250 20.7 5,169
604
-------
TABLE VIII-14
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Tank and Pumps - Recycles all wastewaters back to
the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process as well as other foundry melting
operations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning may be required. Treatment process upset
would result in excess discharge of solids which might
accumulate in recycle tank. Regular pump maintenance is
necessary to insure recycle operations.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 20' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are removed in Step D.
605
-------
TABLE VIII-15
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SLAG QUENCHING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling Tank and Dragout - provides primary solids removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a number of plants employing this process, and in a
variety of other foundry and industrial waste treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning is required. Dragout flights require
periodic repair and/or replacement.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 40' x 70'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solid wastes consist of slag particulates. Based on a
dragout sludge with 25% solids, about 0.72 Ibs of sludge is
generated for each ton of metal poured.
606
-------
TABLE VIII-15 (cont'd)
Solid Waste
Metal Employee Group Lbs/Day Lbs/Year
Ductile Iron <250 166 20.7
>250 1,411 176
Gray Iron <250 74.2 9.3
>250 727 90.9
Malleable Iron <250 59.0 7.4
>250 281 35.1
607
-------
TABLE VII1-15
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SLAG QUENCHING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Pumps - to provide for the recycle of 100% of
process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in plants with this process and in a wide
variety of other foundry and industrial waste treatment
applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary to insure proper recycle
operation.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in Step A.
60C
-------
TABLE VIII-16
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH AND MOLD COOLING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Dragout Tank - provides primary solids removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process and in a wide variety of other
foundry and industrial waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning required. Dragout flights may require
periodic repair or replacement.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids consist of metal particulates (scale, etc.). Based
on a dragout with 25% solids, about 13.5 Ibs of dragout
solids are removed for each ton of metal poured.
609
-------
TABLE VII1-16 (Cont'd)
Solid Waste
Employee Group ton/day ton/year
<250 1.9 479
>250 5.4 1,354
Gray <250 4.7 1,168
>250 5.3 1,335
Malleable £250 1.5 376
Steel <250 0.91 228
>250 1.4 350
610
-------
TABLE VIII-16
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH AND MOLD COOLING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Cooling Tower - to provide heat removal capability.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a number of applications in this process as well as
a wide variety of other foundry and industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning and maintenance required.
4. Implementation Time
18-20 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 30'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of solids generated in step A must be
provided. A biological growth control agent may be
required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible.
611
-------
TABLE VIII-16
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
MOLD COOLING AND CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Pumps - to recycle 100% of all wastewaters back to
process.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a number of applications in this and other foundry
and industrial processes.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary to assure proper recycle
operations.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in step A.
612
-------
TABLE VIII-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Dragout Tank - provides primary solids removal for entire
waste flow.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of similar foundry and other
industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning and maintenance is required. Dragout
flights may require periodic repair or replacement.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 60' x 80'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids can be returned to sand washing and reclamation
operation. In this step, at least 95% of the solids load
(i.e., the casting sand) is reclaimed.
613
-------
TABLE VII1-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle Pumps - recycle 90% of the wastewater flow back to
the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this and a number of other foundry processes.
3. Problems and Limitations
Maintenance required on a regular basis to maintain recycle
and to prevent treatment system overload.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solids are removed in step A.
614
-------
TABLE VIII-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition - to provide pH adjustment and control.
2. Status and Reliability
Lime addition for pH control is a very common practice in
foundry and other industrial waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Maintenance is required to assure pH control and lime feed
systems are functioning property. Control of pH is
necessary to maintain the desired level of phenol
destruction.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Dust collection while unloading lime must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included in step G.
615
-------
TABLE VI11-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Potassium Permanganate Addition - provides phenol
destruction capabilities.
2. Status and Reliability
Capabilities have been demonstrated in other industrial
waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
As this chemical is a strong oxidizing agent, caution must
be exercized in storage and handling. The reaction is pH
and time dependent. Feed system requires routine
maintenance.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Any dust produced while unloading the chemical must be
collected.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in step G.
616
-------
TABLE VII1-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarifer - provides sedimentation and solids removal
capabilities.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this process and in a very wide variety of
other foundry and industrial waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning required. Hydraulic overload would result
in poor solids removal. Excess sludge accumulation results
in a reduced degree of treatment and mechanical overload.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
Up to 25' x 25'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Refer to step G.
617
-------
TABLE VII1-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step F
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Polymer Addition - to provide a greater degree of suspended
solids removal by enhancing floe formation.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and other foundry and industrial waste
treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Feed system requires regular cleaning and maintenance. Care
must be used in making up solution. Proper feed rate must
be maintained.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of the solids removed in step G is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step G.
618
-------
TABLE VIII-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step G
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter - to dewater the sludge removed in step E.
The filtrate is returned to the reaction tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this and a number of other foundry and
industrial waste treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance and media replacement are necessary.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
25' x 25'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based on sludge dewatering to obtain a filter cake with 25%
solids, about 1.97 Ibs of filter cake are generated for each
ton of sand handled. This would yield 0.4 tons of filter
cake per day (293 ton/year) for the steel foundry model and
1.2 tons per day (103 ton/year) for the gray iron model.
619
-------
TABLE VIII-17
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
FERROUS FOUNDRIES
SAND WASHING OPERATIONS
Step H
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - to recycle all wastewaters back to the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a variety of foundry and industrial wastewater
applications. Also demonstrated within this process
segment.
3. Problems and Limitations
Treatment process upset might deposit solids in tank.
Periodic cleaning and maintenance are required.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
620
-------
TABLE VIII-18
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition - used to remove toxic metal pollutants by
forming hydroxide precipitates.
2. Status and Reliability
Very widely used in industrial wastewater treatment
applications for metals removal.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper maintenance is required to keep the lime feed system
functioning properly.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Provisions for dust collection must be made to control
particulates while the lime is being unloaded.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
621
-------
TABLE VIII-18
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarification - provides for the removal, by sedimentation,
of suspended particulate matter (particularly the metal
hydroxide precipitates).
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated widely in this process segment, subcategory,
and category.
3. Problems and Limitations
The mechanical equipment must receive routine maintenance to
function properly.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
622
-------
TABLE VII1-18
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING OPERATIONS
Step C (Alternative No. 1)
1. Treatment and Control Method Employed
Filter - provides the capacity for additional suspended
particulate matter removal. This particulate matter would
be comprised primarily of metal hydroxide precipitates.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated in this process segment, subcategory, and
category.
3. Problems and Limitations
Hydraulic and particulate matter overloads must be
controlled.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
623
-------
TABLE VII1-18
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING OPERATIONS
Step D (Alternative No. 2)
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - recycle all process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated by one plant in this process segment,
3. Problems and Limitations
Routine cleaning and maintenance are required.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
624
-------
TABLE VIII-19
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
GRID CASTING OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition - used to remove toxic metal pollutants by
forming hydroxide precipitates.
2. Status and Reliability
Very widely used in industrial wastewater treatment
applications for metals removal.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper maintenance is required to keep the lime feed system
functioning properly.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Provisions for dust collection must be made to control
particulates while the lime is being unloaded.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
625
-------
TABLE VIII-19
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
CONTINUSTING OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarification - provides for the removal, by sedimentation,
of suspended particulate matter (particularly the metal
hydroxide precipitates).
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated widely in this process segment, subcategory,
and category.
3. Problems and Limitations
The mechanical equipment must receive routine maintenance to
function properly.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
626
-------
TABLE VIII-19
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
LEAD FOUNDRIES
GRID CASTING OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Method Employed
Recycle-recycle all process wastewaters.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated in other lead subcategory process segments with
similar waste streams.
3. Problems and Limitations
Routine cleaning and maintenance required.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Negligible
627
-------
TABLE VI11-20
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
MAGNESIUM FOUNDRIES
GRINDING SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling - to provide primary solids removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of foundry and industrial wastewater
treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic cleaning is required.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solids which may accumulate, are periodically recovered
and reused.
G28
-------
TABLE VII1-20
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
MAGNESIUM FOUNDRIES
GRINDING SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle pumps - to recycle all process wastewaters
2. Status and Reliability
Used in other process segments in which wastewaters are
generated by scrubbers.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is necessary.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
5' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed at step A.
629
-------
TABLE VII1-21
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
MAGNESIUM FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Dragout Tank - to provide primary solids removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide variety of foundry dust collection systems.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is required. Dragout flights require
periodic repair and replacement. Periodic cleaning may be
necessary.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solids disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Minimal. Only infrequent removal is called for since the
model treatment system would generate less than 0.01 Ibs of
sludge per ton of sand handled.
630
-------
TABLE VI11-21
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
MAGNESIUM FOUNDRIES
DUST COLLECTION OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - to recycle all process wastewaters back to
process.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated in other process segments with similar
wastewaters.
3. Problems and Limitations
Regular maintenance is required.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
5' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids are removed in step A.
631
-------
TABLE VII1-22
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Stet!) A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Settling Tank - provides for primary sedimentation.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used by casting quench operations, either as an
independent step or integral with the quench tank.
3. Problems and Limitations
Periodic removal of solid required.
4. Implementation Time
6-8 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Solids disposal. However, if BMP is followed, solids may be
only particles of zinc which could be reclaimed to be melted
with manufacturing scrap.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
The solids, which consist primarily of particulate zinc,
would be removed (as a sludge containing 25% solids) at the
rate of 12.5 Ib per ton of metal poured.
Solid Waste
Employee Group Ibs/day ton/year
<50 150 18.8
50-249 915 114
>250 464 58.0
632
-------
TABLE VII1-22
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Surface Skimming - removes tramp oils and greases from
surface of wastewater.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in the foundry and other industries.
3. Problems and Limitations
Surface turbulence renders the skimmer ineffective. Can
take a long time to remove surface oils which may result
from dumps or spills.
4. Implementation Time
3 months
5. Land Requirements
None - Unit is mounted over the settling tank.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of oils and greases must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Tramp oils would be collected at the rate of 0.005 gal per
ton of metal poured.
Waste Oils & Grease
oyee Group
<50
50-249
>250
gal/day
0.06
0.36
0.18
gal/year
15.0
91.2
46.2
633
-------
TABLE VII1-22
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
CASTING QUENCH OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - recycle all waters back to the process.
2. Status and Reliability
Practiced by several plants in this process segment.
3. Problems and Limitations
Carelessness in cross-contamination of wastes or debris
accumulation would degrade quality of quench waters.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
5' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
634
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step A
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Alum addition - used in conjunction with steps B and C for
oil and grease removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used by several of these operations in addition to a wide
array of applications in other industries.
3. Problems and Limitations
Adds a significant amount of dissolved solids. Care must be
used in handling.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Oil must be disposed of properly.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See step C.
635
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step B
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Sulfuric Acid Addition - used in conjunction with steps A
and C for oil and grease removal.
2. Status and Reliability
Used by several of these operations in addition to being
widely practiced in similar oil removal applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Extreme care must be used in the storage and handling of the
acid.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal must be provided for oils.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
See step C
636
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step C
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Emulsion Break Separator - provides quiescent period to
allow oils and greases to separate and rise to surface where
they are skimmed. Used in conjunction with steps A and B.
2. Status and Reliability
Used by several of these operations in addition to being
demonstrated in similar oil removal applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Hydraulic overload can adversely affect oils separation. If
an excess of skim is allowed to accumulate, unit may require
draining and cleaning.
4. Implementation Time
10-12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of skimmed wastes must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Based on a skim with a density 85% that of water, 0.58 gal
of skim is collected per ton of metal poured (51.5 gal/day,
12,870 gal/year).
637
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step D
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Lime Addition - for pH adjustment.
2. Status and Reliability
Lime addition for pH adjustment is a widely accepted
practice in industrial wastewater treatment applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Proper maintenance is required to keep the pH control of
lime feed functioning properly.
4. Implementation Time
12 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Dust collection while unloading lime must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step H solids removal.
638
-------
TABLE VIII-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step E
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Potassium Permanganate Addition - for phenol destruction.
Used in conjunction with step D.
2. Status and Reliability
Industrial applications have demonstrated the capabilities
of this treatment method.
3. Problems and Limitations
Caution must be exercised in storage and handling as this
chemical is a strong oxidizing agent. Reaction is pH
dependent and the wastewater pH must be maintained between
pH 8 and 9.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Any dust while loading must be contained.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step H solids removal.
639
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step F
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Polymer Addition - polymer is added to waste stream as it
enters the clarifier center well. Polymer addition enhances
floe formation.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely used in this, as well as in many other industries.
3. Problems and Limitations
Care must be taken to maintain proper feed rate.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
10' x 10'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper solid waste disposal practices must be observed.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with sludge in step H.
640
-------
TABLE VIII-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step G
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Clarification - provides sedimentation capabilities.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely practiced in this segment and in many other
industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Hydraulic overload results in poor solids removal. Sludge
cannot be allowed to accumulate to an excessive amount.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper sludge disposal must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Included with step H.
641
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step H
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Vacuum Filter-dewaters the sludge removed in step G. The
filtrate is returned to the neutralization tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Widely practiced in this and in a variety of other
industries. Dewatering to achieve 25% dry solids in filter
cake can reasonably be expected.
3. Problems and Limitations
Requires regular maintenance to perform properly. Periodic
media replacement is required.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
15' x 15'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper sludge disposal is required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
At 25% solids concentrations, the vacuum filter would
dewater the treatment process sludges to about 39.0 Ibs of
cake per ton of metal poured or 1.7 tons (429 ton/year) of
filter cake per day.
642
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step I
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Recycle - to return all of the treated effluent to the
melting furnace scrubber system.
2. Status and Reliability
Demonstrated by one plant in this process segment and by
other melting furnace scrubber operations in this category.
3. Problems and Limitations
Recycle tank would need to be cleaned periodically and more
frequently in the event of process upsets.
4. Implementation Time
12-14 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
None.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None.
643
-------
TABLE VIII-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step J
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Sulfide Addition - added in conjunction with neutralization
to enhance metals precipitation (esp. zinc).
2. Status and Reliability
Practiced in similar industrial wastewater treatment
applications for metals precipitation.
3. Problems and Limitations
Caution must be exercized in the handing and the feeding of
this product.
4. Implementation Time
6 months
5. Land Requirements
No additional land required.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper sludge disposal is required. Proper pH control to
eliminate odor problems is also required.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Solids removed in step K.
644
-------
TABLE VIII-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step K
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Filter - provides additional suspended solids removal prior
to activated carbon filtration. The backwash is returned to
the neutralization tank.
2. Status and Reliability
Used in a wide range of similar industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Surges must be controlled and plant upsets must be avoided
to prevent fouling and plugging.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Proper disposal of filter backwash solids must be provided.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Generates about 0.50 Ibs of 25% sludge per ton of metal
poured (44 Ib/day, 5.5 ton/year). These solids would be
removed from the system via Step H.
645
-------
TABLE VII1-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step L
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Activated carbon filter - provides for toxic organic
pollutant removal by adsorption on carbon.
2. Status and Reliability
Transferred technology from other industrial applications.
3. Problems and Limitations
Maintenance procedures must be carefully observed. Periodic
removal and regeneration of carbon is needed.
4. Implementation Time
15-18 months
5. Land Requirements
20' x 20'
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Energy is consumed during carbon regeneration.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
None
646
-------
TABLE VIII-23
FOUNDRY OPERATIONS
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
ZINC FOUNDRIES
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
Step M
1. Treatment and Control Methods Employed
Tighten scrubber system internal recycle rate to achieve
complete recycle (zero discharge).
2. Status and Reliability
Used in this process segment and in a number of other
similar installations.
3. Problems and Limitations
Rough pH control needed, however, this is currently
practiced.
4. Implementation Time
8-10 months
5. Land Requirements
None - equipment in use.
6. Environmental Impact Other Than Water
Minimal to none - if current practices are followed.
7. Solid Waste Generation and Primary Constituents
Refer to current practices.
647
-------
TABLE VIII-24
BPT MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Investment Casting
C&TT Step A
Investment $ x 10~ 42
..3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital 1.79
Deprec iat ion 4.15
Operation & Maintenance 1.45
Energy & Power 0.06
Chemical Cost 0.10
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL 7.55
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/ton 6450
Concentrat ions , mg / 1
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.080
087 Trichloroethylene 0.400
120 Copper 0.36
128 Zinc 0.40
Oil and Grease 20
TSS 720
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
Model: Size-TPD: 2
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns /Day : 1
B C Total
81 40 163
3.48 1.70 6.97
8.10 3.95 16.20
2.84 1.38 5.67
0.08 0.05 0.19
0.10
0.18 0.04
14.50 7.26 29.31
BPT
Effluent
Level
6450
0.080
0.400
0.36
0.40
10
12
7.5-10
A: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Vacuum Filter
64G
-------
TABLE VIII-25
BAT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Investment Casting
Model: Size-TPD: 2
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 1
No. 1
No. 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
BPT
Effluent
Level
6450
085
087
120
128
Tetrachloroethylene
Tr i ch 1 or oe thy 1 ene
Copper
Zinc
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
0.080
0.400
0.36
0.40
10
12
7.5-10
D
33
1.42
3.29
1.15
0.08
—
5.94
Total
33
1.42
3.29
1.15
0.08
-
5.94
Alt. No.
Effluent
Level
E
84
3.60
8.37
2.93
0.17
0.02
15.09
1
D
33
1.42
3.29
1.15
0.08
-
5.94
Total
117
5.02
11.66
4.08
0.25
0.02
21.03
Alt. No. 2
Effluent
Level
NOTE: EPA is not proposing BAT limitations in this process segment under provisions
of paragraph 8 of the Revised Settlement Agreement.
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
D: Recycle 100Z
E: Filtration
KEY TO TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
NSPS-1/PSES-l/PSNS-l - BPT
NSPS-2/PSES-2/PSNS-2 « BPT + BAT-1
NSPS-3/PSES-3/PSNS-3 - BPT + BAT-2
649
-------
TABLE VIII-26
BPT MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Melting Furnace
Scrubbers
Model: Size-TPD: 108
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day . : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
n-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations,
1940
g/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
039 Fluoranthene
073 Benzo (a) pyrene
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Sulfide
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
A
46
1.96
4.57
1.60
8.13
0.105
0.012
0.010
3.50
0.15
2.2
0.62
10
40
6-8
B
9
0.37
0.87
0.30
0.06
-
C
46
1.97
4.58
1.60
0.56
-
D
31
1.34
3.11
1.09
0.17
0.07
1.60
8.71
5.78
E F
32 38
1.38 1.62
3.20 3.78
1.12 1.32
0.11 0.11
0.09
-
5.90 6.83
G Total
42 244
1.80 10.44
4.19 24.30
1.45 8.48
0.19 1.20
0.16
0.03 0.03
7.66 44.61
BPT
Effluent
Level
97
0.105
0.012
0.010
0.30
0.15
2.2
0.62
10
12
7.5-10
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 95%
D: Lime Addition
E: Coagulant Aid Addition
F: Clarifier
G: Vacuum Filter
650
-------
iABLE VIII-27
BAT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Melting Furnace
Scrubbers
Model: Size-TPD: 108
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
BPT
Effluent
Level
97
021
039
073
128
2,4, 6-trichlorophenol
Fluoranthene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Sulfide
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
0.105
0.012
0.010
0.30
0.15
2.2
0.62
10
12
7.5-10
Alternative No
H
56
2.40
5.56
1.96
0.15
I
16
0.69
1.61
0.56
0.11
Alternative
. 1 No. 2
Total
72
3.09
7.17
2.52
0.26
J
0
_
-
-
-
10.07 2.97 13.04 0
Alt. Alt.
No. 1 No. 2
Effluent Effluent
Level Level
NOTE: EPA is not proposing BAT limitations in this process segment under provisions
of paragraph 8 of the Revised Settlement Agreement.
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
H: Filter
I: Recycle 100%
J: Increase recycle rate of Step C to 100%.
KEY TO TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
NSPS-1/PSES-l/PSNS-l - BPT
NSPS-2/PSES-2/PSNS-2 - BPT + BAT-1
NSPS-3/PSES-3/PSNS-3 - BPT + BAT-2
651
-------
TABLE VIII-28
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Casting Quench
<50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 6
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
~
~
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
039 Fluoranthene
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
120 Copper
128 Zinc
130 Xylene
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
292
1.025
0.100
0.040
0.820
0.006
0.950
0.14
4.55
0.003
1.9
730
310
5.5-8.5
Av '
8
0.35
0.81
0.28
-
-
B
4
0.19
0.44
0.15
0.06
0.02
C
14
0.59
1.38
0.48
0.06
-
Total
26
1.13
2.63
0.91
0.12
0.02
1.44
0.86
2.51
4.81
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
(2) Solids are recovered for reuse, hence, no solids
disposal costs are included.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 100%
652
-------
TABLE VIII-29
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry Model: Size-TPD: 63
: Casting Quench Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
>50 employees Turns /Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10~
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
039 Fluoranthene
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
120 Copper
128 Zinc
130 Xylene
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
A(2) B C
21 5 19
0.89 0.19 0.82
2.08 0.45 1.91
0.73 0.16 0.67
0.06 0.11
0.01
0.26
3.71 1.12 3.51
Raw
Waste
Level
292
1.025
0.100
0.040
0.820
0.006
0.950
0.14
4.55
0.003
1.9
730
310
5.5-8.5
Total
45
1.90
4.44
1.56
0.17
0.01
0.26
8.34
Effluent
Level
0
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
(2) Solids are recovered for reuse, hence, no solids
disposal costs are included.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 100Z
653
-------
TABLE VIII-30
BPT MODEL COST DATA: 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Aluminum Foundry
Die Casting
Model: Size-TPD: 120
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Oil Disposal
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometa cresol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propyl-
amine
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
122 Lead
128 Zinc
130 Xylene
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
(1) Costs are all power unless
ABC
45 49 52
1.92 2.09 2.22
4.47 4.86 5.16
1.56 1.70 1.81
0.17 0.11 0.06
4.06 0.77
1.80
_
12.18 9.53 11.05
Raw
Waste
Level
1160
0.115
0.340
0.080
0.155
0.250
0.00
0.890
0.390
3.30
3.76
0.053
0.051
0.28
2.60
0.025
1.76
670
420
6.5-8.0
otherwise noted.
DBF G H I Total
47 31 113 102 105 46 590
2.04 1.32 4.86 4.37 4.52 1.98 25.32
4.74 3.07 11.30 10.17 10.50 4.60 58.87
1.66 1.08' 3.96 3.56 3.68 1.61 20.62
0.28 0.11 0.22 1.04 0.22 0.22 2.43
1.02 1.04 - 6.89
- - - - 1.80
- 2.43 0.06 - 2.49
9.74 6.62 20.34 21.57 18.98 8.41 118.42
BPT
Effluent
Level
174
0.010
0.340
0.080
0.155
0.010
0.00
0.500
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.08
0.23
0.025
0.65
5
3
7.5-10.0
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Alum Addition
B: Sulfuric Acid Addition
C: Inclined Plate Separator
D: Lime Addition
E: Coagulant Aid Addition
F: Clarifier
G: Vacuum Filter
H: Filter
I: Recycle 85Z
654
-------
TABLE VIII-31
BAT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Aluminum Foundry
: Die Casting
Model: Size-TPD: 120
Oper. Days/Yr. : 557
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Carbon Regeneration
TOTAL
Hastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
BPT
Effluent
Level
174
0.010
0.340
0.080
023 Chlorofrom 0.155
039 Fluoranthene 0.010
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine 0.00
065 Phenol 0.500
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 0.010
072 Benzo (a) anthracene 0.010
076 Chrysene 0.010
084 Pyrene 0.010
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.050
122 Lead 0.08
128 Zinc 0.23
130 Xylene 0.025
Phenols (4AAP) 0.65
Oil and Grease 5
TSS 3
pH (units) 7.5-10.0
Alternative No.l Alternative
J
10
0.45
1.05
0.37
0.11
1.98
Total K
10 143
0.45 6.14
1.05 14.27
0.37 5.00
0.11 0.11
105.70
1.98 131.22
Alt. No.l
Effluent
Level
58
0.010
0.340
0.080
0.155
0.010
0.00
0.500
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.09
0.42
0.025
0.65
5
10
7.5-10.0
No. 2 Alternative
Total K J
143 143 10
6.14 6.14 0.45
14.27 14.27 1.05
5.00 5.00 0.37
0.11 0.11 0.11
105.70 105.70
131.22 131.22 1.98
Alt. No. 2
Effluent
Level
174
0.010
0.025
0.050
0.150
0.010
0.00
0.050
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.09
0.42
0.025
0.05
5
10
7.5-10.0
No. 3
Total
153
6.59
15.32
5.37
0.22
105.70
133.20
Alt. No. 3
Effluent
Level
58
0.010
0.025
0.050
0.150
0.010
0.00
0.050
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.09
0.42
0.025
0.05
5
10
7.5-10.0
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
J: Increase recycle rate of Step I to 95Z
K: Activated Carbon Adsorption
KEY TO TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
NSPS-1/PSES-l/PSNS-l - BPT
NSPS-2/PSES-2/PSNS-2 » BPT + BAT-1
NSPS-3/PSES-3/PSNS-3 - BPT + BAT-2
NSPS-4/PSES-4/PSNS-4 - BPT + BAT-3
655
-------
TABLE VIII-32
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSHS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcateogory: Aluminum Foundry
: Die Lube
Model: Size-TPD: 133
Oper. Day/Yr. : 230~
Turns/Day :
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Mastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/t .
Concentrations, mg/1
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon Tetracbloride
007 Chlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1-trichloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
044 Methylene Chloride
055 Naphthalene
058 4-nitrophenol
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 bis-(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
080 Fluorene
081 • Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
087 Trichloroethylene
091 Chlordane
120 Copper
122 Lead
130 Xylene
A
25
1.08
2.52
0.88
-
-
B
9
0.38
0.88
0.31
0.02
-
C
50
2.15
5.00
1.75
0.09
-
P
32
1.37
3.18
1.11
0.01
0.04
E
45
1.95
4.53
1.59
0.15
-
Total
161
6.93
16.11
5.64
0.27
0.04
4.48
Raw
Waste
Level
23
1.39
0.31
0.29
0.16
17.47
0.05
0.23
0.53
2.92
3.09
1.44
0.082
1.02
21.86
382
0.27
11.30
0.82
0.68
3.66
0.68
0.35
0.13
0.28
0.068
0.65
2.0
33.12
1.59 8.99
5.71
8.22
28.99
Effluent
Level ,
656
-------
TABLE VIII-32
BFT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Effluent
Concentrations, mg/1 Level Level
Amnonia (N)
Sulfide
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease 8500
TSS 1700
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Holding Tank D: Flat Bed Filter (Paper Media)
B: Skinnier E: Recycle 100Z
C: Cyclone
657
-------
TABLE VIII-33
BPT/HSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Aluminum Foundry
Casting Quench and Die
Caicing Co-Treatment
<50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 5.1
Oper. Days/Yr. : 278"
Tumi/Day : 3
"
Investment S z 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, ag/1
001 Acenaphthene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
063 N-nitroaodi-n-propylamina
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
120 Copper
122 Lead
128 Zinc
130 Xylene
Sulfide
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
A
2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
Raw
Waste
Level
1450
0.092
0.48
0.064
0.12
0.21
0.00
0.71
0.48
2.64
3.01
0.044
0.23
0.028
0.22
3.00
0.021
0.38
1.41
680
400
6-9
B C D E F G H I__ J Total
13 39 48 38 25 104 33 32 16 350
0.6 1.7 2.1 1.6 1.1 4.5 1.4 1.4 0.7 15.2
1.3 3.9 4.8 3.8 2.5 10.4 3.3 3.2 1.6 35.0
0.5 1.4 1.7 1.3 0.9 3.6 1.1 1.1 0.6 12.3
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 O.I - 1.9
0.04 0.2 0.05 0.04 .... 0.33
0.1 - - 0.1
------- --0.1
2.4 7.14 8.9 6.85 4.64 19.7 6.0 5.8 2.9 64.93
Effluent
Level
174
0.010
0.48
0.064
0.12
0.010
0.00
0.500
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.03
0.08
0.23
0.021
0.35
0.65
5
3
7.5-10
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Skinner
B: Recycle 20Z
C: Sulfuric Acid Addition
D: Alum Addition
E: Lime Addition
F: Coagulant Aid Addition
G: Batch Treatment Tanks
H: Vacuum Filter
I: Filter
J: Recycle
658
-------
TABLE VIII-34
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Aluminum Foundry
Casting Quench and Die
Calling Co-Treatment
>50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 128
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turn« /Day : 3
-3
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
06S Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
084 Pyrene
08S Tetrachloroethylene
120 Copper
122 Lead
128 Zinc
130 Xylene
Sulfide
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
A
8
0.3
0.8
0.3
0.1
1.2
2.7
Saw
Waste
Level
1450
0.092
0.48
0.064
0.12
0.21
0.00
0.71
0.48
2.64
3.01
0.044
0.23
0.028
0.22
3.00
0.021
0.38
1.41
680
400
6-9
B C D E F C H I J Total
24 73 170 SO 34 1060 104 136 35 169.4
1.0 3.1 7.3 2.2 1.5 45.5 4.5 5,8 1.5 72.8
2.4 7.3 17.0 5.0 3.4 106.0 10.4 13.6 3.5 169.4
0.8 2.5 6.0 1.7 1.2 37.2 3.6 4.8 1.2 59.4
0.2 0.6 0.6 0.1 22.4 2.4 0.6 - 27.0
0.9 4.3 1.2 1.1 7.5
2.9 - - 2.9
---------1.2
4.2 14.1 35.2 10.7 7.3 211.2 23.8 24.8 6.2 340.2
Effluent
Level
174
0.010
0.48
0.064
0.12
0.010
0.00
0.500
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.050
0.03
0.08
0.23
0.021
0.35
0.65
5
3
7.5-10
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Skimmer
B: Recycle 20Z
C: Sulfuric Acid Addition
D: Alum Addition
E: Lime Addition
F: Coagulant Aid Addition
G: Batch Treatment Tanks
H: Vacuum Filter
I: Filter
J: Recycle
659
-------
TABLE VIII-35
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Copper & Copper
Alloy Foundry
: Dust Collection
Model: Size-TPD: 367
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
074 3,4-benzofluoranthene
075 Benzo (k) fluoranthene
084 Pyrene
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
206
1.22
0.007
0.007
0.015
69
17
4.
83
8
0.60
1.34
10
390
6-9
A
47
2.03
4.72
1.65
0.56
0.46
B
32
1.36
3.17
1.11
0.22
-
Total
79
3.39
7.89
2.76
0.78
0.46
9.42
5.86
15.28
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tanks
B: Recycle 100%
660
-------
TABLE VIII-36
BPT MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Copper & Copper Alloy Model: Size-TPD: ^9
Foundry Oper.Days/Yr. : 250
: Mold Cooling and Turns/Day : 3
Casting Quench Operations
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
120 Copper
128 Zinc
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
1130
0.15
0.90
10
25
6-9
A
A3
1.86
4.34
1.52
-
B
23
0.97
2.25
0.79
0.67
C
23
1.00
2.33
0.82
0.11
Total
89
3.83
8.92
3.13
0.78
7.72
4.68
4.26
16.66
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100%
661
-------
TABLE VIII-37
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Dust Collection
<50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 47
Oper. Days/Yr. : 230"
Turns/Day : 1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
24
1.02
2.36
0.83
0.11
4.55
8.87
B
19
0.81
1.88
0.66
0.04
3.39
Total
43
1.83
4.24
1.49
0.15
4.55
12.26
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, eg/I
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphchylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
Effluent
Level
662
-------
TABLE VIII-37
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
IUv
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
120 Copper 2.7
122 Lead 3.3
124 Nickel 1.5
128 Zinc 9.6
Amonia (N) 75
Sulfide 18
Manganese 170
Iron 1280
Phenols (4AAP) 27
Oil and Grease 130
TSS 33600
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
663
-------
TABLE VIII-38
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Dust Collection
50-249 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 683
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C4TT Step
Investment $ z 10
-3
Annual Cost $ z 10"
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power"'
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/toa 140
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene 0.125
031 2,4-dichlorophenol 0.410
034 2,4-di»ethylphenol 4.710
039 Fluoranthene 0.100
062 N-nitrosodiphenylaoine 0.070
064 Pentachloropheno1 0.045
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Aeaonia (N) 75
Sulfide 18
Manganese 170
Iron 1280
Phenols (4AAP) 27
Oil and Grease 130
TSS 33600
pH (Units) 6-9
22
3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
57
2.44
5.67
1.99
0.56
66.17
76.83
29
26
94
03
0.22
5.45
Total
86
3.70
8.61
3.02
0.78
66.17
82.28
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO CtTT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
664
-------
TABLE VIII-39
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Dust Collection
•>250 employee!
Model: Size-TPD: 3300
Oper. Days/Yr. : "251)
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal /ton
Raw
Waste
Level
140
Concentrations, og/1
001
031
034
039
062
064
065
067
072
076
077
080
081
084
085
120
122
124
128
(1)
KEY
A:
B:
Acenaphthene
2 ,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
Fluoranthene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Acenaphthylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Te tr ach loroe thy lene
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Annonia (N)
Sulfide
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Costs are all power unless
TO C&TT STEPS
Dragout Tank
Recycle 100Z
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
75
18
170
1280
27
130
33600
6-9
otherwise noted
665
A
220
9.44
21.96
7.68
3.36
319.69
362.13
55
.38
.54
.94
.12
10.98
Total
275
11.82
27.50
9.62
4.48
319.69
373.11
Effluent
Level
-------
TABLE VIII-40
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Dust Collection
10 to 49 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 165
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
31
1.35
3.14
1.10
0.22
15.98
21.79
B
^^^H
22
0.95
2.20
0.77
0.08
4.00
2
5.
1.
0.
15.
.30
.34
.87
30
98
25.79
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
Effluent
Level
666
-------
TABLE VIII-40
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Waatewater
Parameters
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Amnonia (N)
Sulfide
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
Effluent
Level
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
75
18
170
1280
27
130
33600
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
667
-------
TABLE VIII-41
BPT/HSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory :
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Dust Collection
SO to 249 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns /Day :
762
Bo
2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
^^^•H
83
55
26
89
75
73.82
89.27
B
VMHMI
36
1.54
3.57
1.25
0.37
6.73
5.09
11.83
4.14
1.12
73.82
96.00
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
.580
,105
Effluent
Level
0.250
668
-------
TABLE VIII-41
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater
Parameters
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Sulfide
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
Effluent
Level
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
75
18
170
1280
27
130
33600
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 1002
669
-------
TABLE VIII-42
BPT/N8PS/P8E8/PSHS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry Modal: Sice-TTO: 4290
: Grey Iron Oper. Deys/Yr. : 250
: Du»t Collection Turns/Day : 3
: XZ50 employees
C&TT Step A B
Investment $ z 10~3 270 71
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital 11.60 3.07 14.67
Depreciation 26.98 7.13 34.11
Operation & Maintenance 9.44 2.50 11.94
Energy & Power 5.03 1.68 6.71
Sludge Disposal 415.59 - 415.59
TOTAL 468.64 14.38 483.02
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
Flow, gal/ton 140
Concentrations, ag/1
001 Acenaphtbene 0.125
031 2,4-dichlorophenol 0.410
034 2,4-dimethylphenol 4.710
039 Fluorantbene 0.100
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamina 0.070
064 Pentachlorophenol 0.045
065 Phenol 22.3
067 Butyl bensyl pbthalate 0.140
072 Benco (a) anthracene 0.007
076 Chrysene 0.065
077 Acenaphthylene 0.055
080 Fluorene 0.160
081 Phenanthrene 0.580
084 Pyrene 0.105
085 Tetrachloroetbylene 0.250
670
-------
TABLE VIII-42
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
120 Copper 2.7
122 Lead 3.3
124 Nickel 1.5
128 Zinc 9.6
Amonia (N) 75
Sulfide 18
Manganese 170
Iron 1280
Phenols (4AAP) 27
Oil and Grease 130
TSS 33600
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
671
-------
TABLE VIII-43
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSN8 MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Dust Collection
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 620
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
•*•••
76
3.27
7.60
2.66
0.75
60.06
74.34
35
1.51
3.52
1.23
0.22
6.48
4.
11,
3.
78
12
89
0.97
60.06
80.82
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
Effluent
Level
672
-------
TABLE VIII-43
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PACE 2
Wastewater
Parameters
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Sulfide
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
Effluent
Level
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
75
18
170
1280
27
130
33600
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
673
-------
TABLE VIII-44
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Dust Collection
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 3900
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns /Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power^ '
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
257
11.06
25.73
01
03
9
5
377.81
428.64
B
71
3.04
7.07
2.48
1.68
14.27
14.10
32.80
11.49
6.71
377.81
442.91
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
Effluent
Level
674
-------
TABLE VIII-44
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
120 Copper 2.7
122 Lead 3.3
124 Nickel 1.5
128 Zinc 9.6
Ammonia (N) 75
Sulfide 18
Manganese 170
Iron 1280
Phenols (4AAP) 27
Oil and Grease 130
TSS 33600
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 1002
675
-------
TABLE VIII-45
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory
Ferrous Foundry
Steel
Dust Collection
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 365
Oper. Days/Yr. : 150
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
••••••
40
1.70
3.95
1.38
0.56
35.36
42.95
B
«MHM
23
1.00
2.32
0.81
0.22
4.35
2.70
6.27
2.19
0.78
35.36
47.30
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
22.3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
Effluent
Level
676
-------
TABLE VIII-45
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waatewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
120 Copper 2.7
122 Lead 3.3
124 Nickel 1.5
128 Zinc 9.6
Ammonia (N) 75
Sulfide 18
Manganese 170
Iron 1280
Phenols (4AAP) 27
Oil and Grease 130
TSS 33600
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
677
-------
TABLE VIII-46
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory :
Ferrous Foundry
Steel
Dust Collection
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns /Day :
1184
Tso"
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
86
3.68
8.55
99
12
114.70
131.04
B
•MMM
36
1.54
3.57
1.25
0.56
6.92
5.22
12.12
4.24
1.68
114.70
137.96
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
Raw
Waste
Level
140
0.125
0.410
4.710
0.100
0.070
0.045
Effluent
Level
22
3
0.140
0.007
0.065
0.055
0.160
0.580
0.105
0.250
678
-------
TABLE VIII-46
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wa'stewater
Parameters
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Amnonia (N)
Sulfide
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
Effluent
Level
2.7
3.3
1.5
9.6
75
18
170
1280
27
130
33600
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
679
-------
TABLE VIII-47
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 182
Oper. Days/Yr. : J50
Turns/Day : 1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
101
4.33
10.07
3.52
0.13
2.19
20.24
290
C
•••*•
42
D
212
E
MMH
84
1.80
52.14 9.37
12.46
28.98
10.14
0.56
-
1.81
4.21
1.47
0.08
-
9.17
21.20
7.42
1.44
15.32
3.60
8.36
2.93
0.56
-
31.37
72.82
25.48
2.77
15.32
3.99
54.55 15.45 151.75
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 M-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
Effluent
Level
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
0.045
0.130
0.075
600
-------
TABLE VIII-47
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100Z
681
-------
TABLE VIII-48
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns/Day :
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
188
8.09
18.82
6.59
1.17
22.75
57.42
B
498
C
54
D
373
E
185
21.43
49.84
17.44
2.24
-
-
2.31
5.38
1.88
0.28
-
18.90
16.04
37.31
13.06
8.03
161.64
-
7.93
18.45
6.46
5.59
-
-
55.80
129.80
45.43
17.31
161.64
41.65
90.95 28.75 236.08
38.43 451.63
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethyIphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
1300
018
020
050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
,035
,018
0.017
0.045
0.130
0.075
Effluent
Level
682
-------
TABLE VIII-48
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater
Parameters
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
0.240
0.039
0.99
0.11
0.77
0.25
4.3
111
1.6
2200
11
59
230
113
1.8
3.9
19
3100
4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100Z
683
-------
TABLE VIII-49
BPT/HSP8/P8ES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory :
•
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
10 to 49 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Tr. :
Turns /Day :
11
155
1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
_
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
^•MM
43
1.86
4.33
1.52
0.04
0.13
7.88
B
••MM
75
3.24
7.54
2.64
0.19
13.61
C
^^^mm
25
1.09
2.53
0.89
0.04
0.11
D
^•••B
90
3.
9.
3.
.83
.02
.16
0.54
0.93
E
24
1.03
2.39
0.84
0.04
-
-
Total
257
11.10
25.81
9.05
0.85
0.93
0.24
4.66 17.53
4.30
47.98
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
684
-------
TABLE VIII-49
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
i Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level—
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100Z
685
-------
TABLE VIII-50
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
50 to 249 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 110
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
•^•••i
66
3.04
6.64
2.32
0.11
1.31
13.42
B
162
6.95
16.15
5.65
0.75
-
-
29.50
C
30
1.29
3.01
1.05
0.11
-
1.08
6.54
D
146
6.27
14.58
5.10
1.83
9.26
-
37.04
E
54
2.33
5.41
1.89
0.37
-
-
10.00
Total
458
19.88
45.79
16.01
3.17
9.26
2.39
96.50
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
686
-------
TABLE VII1-50
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2 _____^_
Raw
Uaafa Effluent
Wastewater Waste Level
Parameters Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130 ~
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039 ~
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4-3
122 Lead HI
124 Nickel 1-6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11 ~
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100%
687
-------
TABLE VIII-51
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
_> 250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 1020
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
,-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
135
5.81
13.50
4.73
0.62
12.03
36.69
B
WWI^
424
18
42
14
2
77
.24
.42
.85
.24
-
-
.75
C
«^MB
41
1
4
1
0
9
17
•»
.77
.12
.44
.22
-
.90
.45
D
333
14.
33.
11.
6.
85.
-
151.
32
31
66
75
87
86
E
146
6
14
5
3
29
.26
.55
.09
.36
-
-
.26
Total
1079
46.
107.
37.
13.
85.
21.
313.
40
90
77
19
87
93
06
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
688
-------
TABLE VIII-51
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100Z
689
-------
TABLE VIII-52
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 122
Oper. Days/Yr. : 23?
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
^^^•H
69
2.96
6.89
2.41
0.11
3.63
16.00
B
169
7.25
16.86
5.90
0.75
-
-
30.76
C
30
1.29
3.00
1.05
0.11
-
1.17
6.62
D
146
6.28
14.60
5.11
1.83
10.27
-
38.09
E
62
2.68
6.24
2.18
0.37
-
-
11.47
Total
476
20.46
47.59
16.65
3.17
10.27
4.80
102.94
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
690
-------
TABLE VIII-52
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater
Parameters
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
0.045
0.130
0.075
0.240
0.039
0.99
0.11
0.77
0.25
4.3
111
1.6
2200
11
59
230
113
1.8
3.9
19
3100
4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100%
691
-------
TABLE VIII-53
BPT/NSPS/PSE3/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Melting Furnace Scrubber
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 307
Oper. Daya/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Coat $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Coat
TOTAL
A
100
4.29
9.97
3.49
0.22
3.63
21.60
B
268
11.54
26.84
9.39
1.12
-
-
48.89
C
42
1.81
4.21
1.47
0.15
-
3.02
10.66
D
212
9.12
21.20
7.42
2.87
25.85
-
66.46
E
82
3.51
8.15
2.85
1.12
-
-
15.63
Total
704
30.27
70.37
24.62
5.48
25.85
6.65
163.24
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
692
-------
TABLE VIII-53
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste ' Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77 ~
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead HI
124 Nickel 1-6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Caustic Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Coagulant Aid Addition
D: Vacuum Filter
E: Recycle 100Z
693
-------
TABLE VIII-54
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Smaller Melting Furnace
Scrubber Operations
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 21^
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 0.4
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
^•MM
76
13.60
B
«^^H
34
6.19
C
^«HB
39
7.45
D
^••^
57
10.14
3.25
7.56
2.65
0.14
-
1.44
3.35
1.17
0.01
0.22
1.68
3.90
1.36
0.01
0.50
2.43
5.66
1.98
0.07
-
8.80
20.47
7.16
0.23
0.72
37.38
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
1300
024 2-chlorophenol 0.018
031 2,4-dichlorophenol 0.020
034 2,4-dimethylphenol 0.050
039 Fluoranthene 0.025
059 2,4-dinitrophenol 0.017
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol 0.025
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine 0.035
064 Pentachlorophenol 0.100
065 Phenol 1.00
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 0.035
072 Benzo (a) anthracene 0.018
076 Chrysene 0.017
Effluent
Level
694
-------
TABLE VIII-54
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater
Parameters
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
0.045
0.130
0.075
0.240
0.039
0.99
0.11
0.77
0.25
4.3
111
1.6
2200
11
59
230
113
1.8
3.9
19
3100
4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Decant and Recirculation Tank
B: Coagulant Aid Addition
C: Caustic Addition
D: Recycle 100Z
695
-------
TABLE VIII-55
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Smaller Melting Furnace
Scrubber Operations
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 34
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 0.4
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
95
17.10
34
40
59
6.42
7.99
10.57
4.08
9.49
3.32
0.21
-
1.47
3.42
1.20
0.01
0.32
1.73
4.03
1.41
0.01
0.81
2.53
5.88
2.06
0.10
-
9.81
22.82
7.99
0.33
1.13
42.09
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018-
0.017
Effluent
Level
696
-------
TABLE VIII-55
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Decant and Recirculation Tank
B: Coagulant Aid Addition
C: Caustic Addition
D: Recycle 100%
697
-------
TABLE VIII-56
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Smaller Melting Furnace
Scrubber Operations
<50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 11.2
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 0.4
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
46
8.33
31
36
47
5.70
6.77
8.33
2.00
4.64
1.62
0.07
-
1.35
3.13
1.10
0.01
0.11
1.57
3.65
1.28
0.01
0.26
2.00
4.66
1.63
0.04
-
6.92
16.08
5.63
0.13
0.37
29.13
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
1300
024 2-chlorophenol 0.018
031 2,4-dichlorophenol 0.020
034 2,4-dimethylphenol 0.050
039 Fluoranthene 0.025
059 2,4-dinitrophenol 0.017
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol 0.025
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine 0.035
064 Pentachlorophenol 0.100
065 Phenol 1.00
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 0.035
072 Benzo (a) anthracene 0.018
076 Chrysene 0.017
Effluent
Level
0
698
-------
TABLE VIII-56
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11 -
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Decant and Recirculation Tank
B: Coagulant Aid Addition
C: Caustic Addition
D: Recycle 100%
699
-------
TABLE VIII-57
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Gray Iron
: Smaller Melting Furnace
Scrubber Operations
: >50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 38.9
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 0.4
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
75
13.65
34
40
59
6.46
8.10 10.71
3.23
7.51
2.63
0.28
-
1.47
3.42
1.20
0.01
0.36
1.73
4.03
1.41
0.01
0.92
2.55
5.94
2.08
0.14
-
8.98
20.90
7.32
0.44
1.28
38.92
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
076 Chrysene
1300
0.018
0.020
0.050
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.035
0.100
1.00
0.035
0.018
0.017
Effluent
Level
700
-------
TABLE VIII-57
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.045
080 Fluorene 0.130
081 Phenanthrene 0.075
084 Pyrene 0.240
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.039
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.77
119 Chromium 0.25
120 Copper 4.3
122 Lead 111
124 Nickel 1.6
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 11
Fluoride 59
Iron 230
Manganese 113
Phenols (4AAP) 1.8
Sulfide 3.9
Oil and Grease 19
TSS 3100
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Decant and Recirculation Tank
B: Coagulant Aid Addition
C: Caustic Addition
D: Recycle 100%
701
-------
TABLE VIII-58
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory :
:
:
•
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10~
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Slag Quench
<250 Employees
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
Raw
Waste
Level
360
0.050
Model: Size-TPD: 2_
Oper. Days/Yr. : 2
Turns /Day : ~
A B
130 41
5.58 1.74
12.98 4.05
4.54 1.42
0.75 0.28
0.10
23.95 7.49
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine 0.275
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
(1) Costs are all power
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.08
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.1
15
80
6-9
unless otherwise noted.
Total
171
7.32
17.03
5.96
1.03
0.10
31.44
Effluent
Level
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
702
-------
TABLE VIII-59
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Slag Quench
^250 Employees
Model: Size-TPD: 1960
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
300
12.88
29.95
10.48
6.71
0.88
60.90
B
77
3.29
7.65
2.68
1.68
15.30
16.17
37.60
13.16
8.39
0.88
76.20
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
360
0.050
0.275
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.08
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.1
15
80
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
703
-------
TABLE VIII-60
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Slag Quench
<250 Employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns /Day :
103
250
2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
42
1.82
4.24
1.48
0.37
0.05
7.96
B
23
1.00
2.32
0.81
0.15
4.28
2.82
6.56
2.29
0.52
0.05
12.24
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
360
0.050
0.275
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.0«
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.1
15
80
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
704
-------
TABLE VIII-61
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Slag Quench
>250 Employees
Model: Size-TPD: 1010
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day :
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
170
7.31
17.01
95
36
0.45
34.08
B
^•^^
48
2.05
4.77
1.67
1.12
9.61
9
21
7,
4,
36
78
62
48
0.45
43.69
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
360
0.050
0.275
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.08
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.1
15
80
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100% 705
-------
TABLE VIII-62
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Slag Quench
<250 Employees
Model: Size-TPD: 82
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
^M^H
24
1.04
2.41
0.84
0.37
0.04
4.70
8
«•••»
16
0.68
1.57
0.55
0.08
2.88
72
98
39
0.45
0.04
7.58
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
360
0.050
0.275
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.08
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.
.1
15
80
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
706
-------
TABLE VIII-63
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS - 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Slag Quench
^250 Employees
Model: Size-TPD: 390
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
97
4.15
9.65
3.38
1.12
0.18
B
37
1.59
3.70
1.30
0.37
-
Total
134
5.74
13.35
4.68
1.49
0.18
18.48
6.96
25.44
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
065 Phenol
085 Tetrachloroethylene
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil & Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Effluent
Level
360
0.050
0.275
0.030
0.080
0.02
0.16
0.08
1.3
0.08
3.4
6.4
54
5.0
196
0.39
5.1
15
80
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
707
-------
TABLE VIII-64
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry Model: Size-TPD: 283
: Ductile Iron Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
: Casting Quench Turns/Day
and Mold Cooling
: <250 employees
C&TT Step A B
Investment $ x 10~3 89 51
_3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital 3.81 2.20
Depreciation 8.86 5.11
Operation & Maintenance 3.10 1.79
Energy & Power u; 0.56 0.49
Sludge Disposal 2.39
TOTAL 18.72 9.59
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/ton 220
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron 8.4
Oil and Grease 115
TSS 1800
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
: ~T
C Total
43 183
1.87 7.88
4.34 18.31
1.52 6.41
0.19 1.24
2.39
7.92 36.23
Effluent
Level
0
_
-
-
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100Z
703
-------
TABLE VIII-65
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Casting Quench
and Mold Cooling
XZ50 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 800
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
•^•MB
87
3.75
8.71
3.05
1.68
6.77
23.96
B
^•MH
50
2.14
4.98
1.74
1.45
10.31
C
43
1.87
4.34
1.52
0.56
8.29
7.76
18.03
6.31
3.69
77
42.56
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
220
8.4
115
1800
6-9
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100Z
709
-------
TABLE VIII-66
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry Model: Size-TPD: 690
: Gray Iron Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
: Casting Quench Turns /Day : 3
and Mold Cooling
: <250 employees
C&TT Step A B
Investment $ x 10~ 83 48
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital 3.55 2.06
Depreciation 8.25 4.78
Operation & Maintenance 2.89 1.67
Energy & PowerU; 1.12 1.45
Sludge Disposal 5.84
TOTAL 21.65 9.96
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/ton 220
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron 8.4
Oil and Grease 115
TSS 1800
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
C Total
41 172
1.78 7.39
4.13 17.16
1.45 6.01
0.56 3.13
5.84
7.92 39.53
Effluent
Level
0
-
-
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100%
710
-------
TABLE VIII-67
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory : Ferrous Foundry Model: Size-TPD: 789
: Gray Iron Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
: Casting Quench Turns/Day : 3
and Mold Cooling
: £250 employees
C&TT Step A B
Investment $ x 10 86 50
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital 3.71 2.15
Depreciation 8.62 5.01
Operation & Maintenance 3.02 1.75
Energy & Power U' 1.68 1.45
Sludge Disposal 6.68
TOTAL 23.71 10.36
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/ton 220
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron 8.4
Oil and Grease 115
TSS 1800
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
C Total
43 179
1.85 7.71
4.30 17.93
1.51 6.28
0.56 3.69
6.68
8.22 42.29
Effluent
Level
0
-
-
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 1002
711
-------
TABLE VIII-68
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Casting Quench
and Mold Cooling
_>250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 222
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
52
2.25
5.22
1.83
0.37
1.88
B
37
1.58
3.67
1.29
0.63
-
C
32
1.39
3.23
1.13
0.15
-
Total
121
5.22
12.12
4.25
1.15
1.88
11.55
7.17
5.90
24.62
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
220
8.4
115
1800
6-9
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100%
712
-------
TABLE VIII-69
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Steel
Casting Quench
and Mold Cooling
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 135
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
^^••H
26
1.13
2.63
0.92
0.34
1.14
6.16
B
«BMM
30
1.27
2.95
1.03
0.67
5.92
C
28
1.19
2.76
0.97
0.11
5.03
Total
84
3.59
8.34
2.92
1.12
1.14
17.11
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
220
8.4
115
1800
6-9
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100Z
713
-------
TABLE VIII-70
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Steel
: Casting Quench
and Mold Cooling
: £250 employees
C&TT Step A
_3
Investment $ x 10 36
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital 1.54
Depreciation 3.57
Operation & Maintenance 1.25
Energy & Power 0.56
Sludge Disposal 1.75
TOTAL 8.67
Raw
Wastewater Waste
Parameters Level
Flow, gal/ton 220
Concentrations, mg/1
Iron 8.4
Oil and Grease 115
TSS 1800
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
Model: Size-TPD: :
Oper. Days/Yr. : ':
Turns /Day : '
B C
34 30
1.43 1.29
3.32 2.99
1.16 1.05
0.67 0.11
— —
6.58 5.44
A: Dragout Tank
B: Cooling Tower
C: Recycle 100Z
207
250
—3
Total
100
4.26
88
46
34
75
20.69
Effluent
Level
714
-------
TABLE VIII-71
BPT/HSPS/PSES/PSBS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Sand Washing
£250 employees
Model: Sire-TPD: 1190
Oper. Daya/Yr. :
Turns/Day :
(2)
-3
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power '
Sludge Diapoaal
Chemical Coat
TOTAL
A
651
28.00
65.12
22.79
11.19
127.10
B
103
4.44
10.32
3.61
2.98
21.35
C
98
4.22
9.82
3.44
0.86
92
3.94
9.17
3.21
0.82
0.25 9.63
18.59 26.77
E
136
5.86
13.63
4.77
0.75
25.01
F_
39
1.67
3.89
1.36
0.08
0.99
7.99
111
4.79
11.13
3.90
1.76
1.47
23.05
H
41
1.74
4.05
1.42
0.37
7.58
54.66
127.13
44.50
18.81
1.47
10.87
257.44
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations. TO/1
001 Acenaphthene
065 Phenol
077 Acenaphthylene
084 Pyrene
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
nia
-------
TABLE VIII-72
BPT/HSPS/PSES/PSHS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Steel
: Sand Washing
: £250 employees
Model: SUe-TPD
Oper. Days/Yr.
Turns /Day
418
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power"'
Sludge Disposal
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
^^_
251
10.78
25.07
8.78
3.36
-
-
47.99
B
56
2.41
5.60
1.96
1.12
-
-
11.09
C
60
2.58
6.00
2.10
0.34
-
0.08
11.10
D
53
2.27
5.28
1.85
0.39
-
3.15
12.94
E
70
3.00
6.98
2.44
0.56
-
-
12.98
F
31
1.35
3.13
1.10
0.11
-
0.36
6.05
G
80
3.45
8.03
2.81
1.62
0.52
-
16.43
H
25
1.05
2.45
0.86
0.11
-
-
4.47
Total
626
26.89
62.54
21.90
7.61
0.52
3.59
123.05
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton 1120
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene 0.050
065 Phenol 0.660
077 Acenaphthylene 0.013
084 Pyrene 0.014
119 Chromium 0.16
120 Copper 0.39
122 Lead 0.78
124 Nickel 0.19
128 Zinc 0.20
Ammonia (N) 4.3
Iron 155
Manganese 3.3
Phenols (4AAP) 27.0
Sulfide 0.68
Oil and Grease 20
TSS 8700
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
(2) Casting sand reclaimed in this step is returned to the mold making process.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 90Z
C: Lime Addition
D: Potassium Permanganate Addition
E: Clarifier
F: Coagulant Aid Addition
C: Vacuum Filter
H: Recycle 100Z of Treated Effluent
716
-------
TABLE VIII-73
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Ductile Iron
: Dust Collection and Slag
Quench Co-Treatment
: <250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns/Day :
(Sand) 205
(Metal) 150
250
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10"
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
130
5.58
12.98
4.54
0.75
3.83
27.68
40
1.74
4.05
1.42
0.28
7.49
Total
170
7.32
17.03
96
03
83
35.17
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/day
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
Raw
Waste
Level
82,700
0.043
0.14
1.63
0.035
0.20
0.016
7.76
0.049
0.002
Effluent
Level
717
-------
TABLE VIII-73
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waatewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
076 Chrysene 0.022
077 Acenaphthylene 0.019
080 Fluorene 0.056
081 Phenanthrene 0.20
084 Pyrene 0.036
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.14
118 Cadmium 0.013
119 Chromium 0.10
120 Copper 0.99
122 Lead 1.99
124 Nickel 0.57
128 Zinc 5.55
Ammonia (N) 30
Fluoride 35
Iron 450
Manganese 190
Phenols (4AAP) 9.62
Sulfide 9.58
Oil and Grease 55
TSS 11,700
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
718
-------
TABLE VIII-74
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Ductile Iron
Dust Collection and Slag
Quench Co-Treatment
£250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns/Day :
(Sand) 3306
(Metal) 2560
250
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
529
22.76
52.92
18.52
11.19
64.09
169.48
100
4.29
9.97
3.49
3.36
21.11
Total
629
27.05
62.89
22.01
14.55
64.09
190.59
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/day
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
Raw
Waste
Level
1,383,600
0.042
0.14
1.61
0.033
0.015
7.47
0.047
0.0023
0.022
Effluent
Level
719
-------
TABLE VIII-74
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
077 Acenaphthylene 0.018
080 Fluorene 0.054
081 Phenanthrene 0.19
084 Pyrene 0.035
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.14
118 Cadmium 0.013
119 Chromium 0.11
120 Copper 0.96
122 Lead 1.97
124 Nickel 0.55
128 Zinc 5.47
Ammonia (N) 29
Fluoride 36
Iron 430
Manganese 190
Phenols (4AAP) 9.28
Sulfide 9.41
Oil and Grease 53
TSS 11,300
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
720
-------
TABLE VIII-75
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Dust Collection and Slag
Quench Co-Treatment
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns/Day :
(Sand) 720
(Metal) 9?
250
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
118
5.08
11.81
4.13
1.12
12.70
34.84
39
1.69
3.93
1.38
0.37
7.37
Total
157
6.77
15.74
5.51
1.49
12.70
42.21
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/day
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
Raw
Waste
Level
134,280
0.094
0.31
3.55
0.075
0.12
0.034
17
0.10
0.0053
Effluent
Level
721
-------
TABLE VIII-75
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
076 Chrysene 0.049
077 Acenaphthylene 0.041
080 Fluorene 0.12
081 Phenanthrene 0.44
084 Pyrene 0.079
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.21
118 Cadmium 0.0050
119 Chromium 0.040
120 Copper 2.05
122 Lead 2.80
124 Nickel 1.15
128 Zinc 8.06
Ammonia (N) 58
Fluoride 13
Iron 960
Manganese 180
Phenols (4AAP) 20
Sulfide 15
Oil and Grease 100
TSS 25,300
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
722
-------
TABLE VIII-76
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
J
:
:
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10~
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Ferrous Foundry
Gray Iron
Dust Collection and Slag
Quench Co-Treatment
>250 employees
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Model: Size-TPD:
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns /Day :
A B
258 76
11.08 3.27
25.76 7.61
9.02 2.66
3.36 1.68
50.45
(Sand) 2420
(Metal) 540
250
3
Total
334
14.35
33.37
11.68
5.04
50.45
TOTAL
99.67
15.22
114.89
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/day
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
Raw
Waste
Level
533,200
0.079
0.26
3.01
0.064
0.15
0.029
14
0.089
0.0044
Effluent
Level
723
-------
TABLE VIII-76
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
076 Chrysene 0.041
077 Acenaphthylene 0.035
080 Fluorene 0.10
t)81 Phenanthrene 0.37
084 Pyrene 0.067
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.19
118 Cadmium 0.0073
119 Chromium 0.058
120 Copper 1.74
122 Lead 2.57
124 Nickel 0.98
128 Zinc 7.34
Ammonia (N) 50
Fluoride 20
Iron 820
Manganese 180
Phenols (4AAP) 17
Sulfide 13
Oil and Grease 83
TSS 21,400
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
724
-------
TABLE VIII-77
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Ferrous Foundry
Malleable Iron
Dust Collection and Slag
Quench Co-Treatment
<250 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
Model: Size-TPD:
Oper. Days/Yr. :
Turns/Day
(Sand) 960
(Metal) 115
250
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
133
5.71
13.27
4.64
1.49
17.38
42.49
47
2.04
4.74
1.66
0.56
9.00
Total
180
7.75
18.01
6.30
2.05
17.38
51.49
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/day
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 BenzoCa)anthracene
Raw
Waste
Level
175,800
0.096
0.31
3.61
0.076
0.12
0.034
17
0.11
0.0054
Effluent
Level
725
-------
TABLE VIII-77
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
076 Chrysene 0.050
077 Acenaphthylene 0.042
080 Fluorene 0.12
081 Phenanthrene 0.44
084 Pyrene 0.080
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.21
118 Cadmium 0.0047
119 Chromium 0.038
120 Copper 2.08
122 Lead 2.83
124 Nickel 1.17
128 Zinc 8.14
Ammonia (N) 59
Fluoride 13
Iron 980
Manganese 180
Phenols (4AAP) 21
Sulfide 15
Oil and Grease 100
TSS 25,700
pH (Units) 6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
726
-------
TABLE VIII-78
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Gray Iron and Steel
: Dust Collection and Sand
Washing Co-Treatment
: ^250 employees
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation i Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
001 Acenaphthene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 BenzoU) anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Iron
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Model: Size-TPD: 1800
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
Raw
Waste
Level
1260
0.058
0.046
0.52
0.011
0.0078
0.0050
3.06
0.089
0.00078
0.0072
0.018
0.018
0.064
0.024
0.028
0.14
0.65
1.06
0.34
1.24
12
280
22
27
2.6
32
45.17
105.05
36.77
17.90
103.86
308.75
171
7.34
17.08
33.54
31.52
D
30
1.28
2.98
1.04
0.08
1.53
6.91
104
4.46
10.37
3.63
0.84
1.51
20.81
55
35
46
91
0.56
10.28
67.35
156.64
54.83
26.09
1.53
105.37
411.81
11,500
6-9
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 91Z
C: Clarifier
D: Coagulant Aid Addition
E: Vacuum Filter
F: Recycle 1001
727
-------
TABLE VIII-79
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
-3
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Uastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Ductile Iron
: Melting Furnace Scrubber
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: <250 employees
A B
436
18.
43.
:e 15.
3.
5.
.76
.63
.27
.36
-
.92
95
It.
9
3,
0
7.
and
.10
.54
.34
.41
.39
-
C
370
15.
36.
12.
0.
Model: Size-TPD: 312
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 1
D E
.89
,95
.93
.56
-
-
33
1.42
3.30
1.16
0.06
3.06
-
189
8
18
6
1
2
.14
.94
.63
.25
-
.82
F
92
3.
9
3.
0
.94
.17
.21
.93
-
-
Total
1215
52.25
121.53
42.54
6.57
10.45
8.74
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
86.94
24.78
66.33
9.00
37.78
17.25
242.08
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrogodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzota)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
0.10
1.01
035
018
0.017
0.045
0.13
0.075
0.24
0.061
0.99
728
-------
TABLE VIII-79
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
!Uw
Wastewater Waste Effluent
Parameters Level Level
Concentrations, mg/1
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAP) 1.91
Sulfide 5.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C4TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier F: Recycle 1001
729
-------
TABLE VIII-80
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Ductile Iron
: Melting Furnace Scrubber and
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: ^250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 2610
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
Investment $ x 10~
Annual'Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
0.10
1.01
0.035
0.018
0.017
0.045
0.13
0.075
0.24
0.061
0.99
A
1103
47.44
110.33
38.62
26.84
-
49.55
272.78
B
173
7.44
17.31
6.06
2.91
61.93
-
95.65
C
682
29.33
68.20
23.87
2.24
-
-
123.64
D
52
2.25
5.24
1.83
0.45
25.20
-
34.97
9.31
21.66
7.58
3.58
23.60
65.73
152
6.55
15.23
5.33
8.39
35.50
Total
2379
102.32
237.97
83.29
44.41
87.13
73.15
628.27
730
-------
TABLE VIII-80
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waste
Concentrations, mg/1 Level
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAF) 1.91
Sulfide S.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier F: Recycle 100Z
731
-------
TABLE VIII-81
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Gray Iron
: Melting Furnace Scrubber and
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: <250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 91
Oper. Days/Yr. : T56"
Turns/Day : 2
-3
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
A
84
3.62
8.42
2.95
1.12
-
1.73
B
50
2.16
5.03
1.76
0.15
2.17
-
C
139
5.98
13.91
4.87
0.56
-
-
D
27
1.15
2.68
0.94
0.08
0.90
-
E
100
4.31
10.02
3.51
0.41
-
0.82
F
40
1.70
3.96
1.39
0.37
-
-
Total
440
18.92
44.02
15.42
2.69
3.07
2.55
17.84
11.27
25.32
5.75
19.07
7.42
86.67
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranchene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
0.10
1.01
0.035
0.018
0.017
0.045
0.13
0.075
732
-------
TABLE VIII-81
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Haste
Concentrations, mg/1 L«v«l
084 Pyrene 0.24
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.061
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAP) 1.91
Sulfide 5.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier Ft Recycle 100Z
733
-------
TABLE VIII-82
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Gray Iron
: Helcing Furnace Scrubber and
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: ^250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 480
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Step
Investment 5 x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10~
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
11.57
26.91
9.42
5.03
9.11
62.04
B
80
3.46
8.04
2.82
0.62
11.40
C
258
11.12
25.85
9.05
1.12
-
D
34
1.44
3.35
1.17
0.17
4.68
26.34
47.14
10.81
130
5.61
130.5
4.57
2.05
4.34
29.62
64
13.01
Total
835
35.94
83.56
29.26
10.67
16.08
13.45
188.96
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
0.10
1.01
0.035
0.018
0.017
0.045
0.13
0.075
734
-------
TABLE VIII-82
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waste
Concentrations, mg/1 Level
084 Pyrene 0.24
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.061
114 Antimony 0.99
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAF) 1.91
Sulfide 5.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier F: Recycle 100X
735
-------
TABLE VIII-83
HSOEL G0ST SAT A: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Mai 1Mble Iron
: Melting Furnace Scrubber and
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: <250 employee!
Moctel: Size-TPD: 95
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
•Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
86
50
139
27
3.72
8.64
3.02
1.12
-
1.80
2.16
5.03
1.76
0.15
2.25
-
5.98
13.91
4.87
0.56
-
-
1.15
2.68
0.94
0.08
0.94
-
4.31
10.02
3.51
0.41
-
0.86
1.70
3.96
1.39
0.37
-
-
19.02
44.24
15.49
2.69
3.19
2.66
18.30
11.35
25.32
5.79
19.11
7.42
87.29
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylaaine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
o.ie
1.01
0.035
8.&-S
c.ei,
8.645
6.13
0.075
0.24
0.961
0.99
736
-------
TABLE VIII-83
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waste
Concentrations, mg/1 Level
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAP) 1.91
Sulfide 5.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier F: Recycle 100Z
737
-------
TABLE VIII-84
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Ferrous Foundry
: Malleable Iron
: Melting Furnace Scrubber and
Slag Quench Co-Treatment
: £250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 195
Oper. Days/Yr. : HIT
Turns /Day : 2
-3
Investment S x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
157
60
202
27
130
48
6.74
15.68
5.49
2.24
-
3.70
2.60
6.05
2.12
0.26
4.64
-
8.67
20.16
7.06
0.75
-
-
1.18
2.74
0.96
0.11
1.89
-
5.61
13.05
4.57
1.00
-
1.76
2.08
4.83
1.69
0.75
-
-
26.88
62.51
21.89
5.11
6.53
5.46
33.85
15.67
36.64
6.88
25.99
9.35
128.38
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo(a)anthracene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
114 Antimony
Raw
Waste
Level
1300
0.018
0.020
0.064
0.025
0.017
0.025
0.11
0.10
1.01
0.035
0.018
0.017
0.045
0.13
0.075
0.24
0.061
0.99
738
-------
TABLE VI11-84
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA
PAGE 2
Raw
Waste Effluent
Concentrations, ng/1 Level Level
115 Arsenic 0.11
118 Cadmium 0.78
119 Chromium 0.29
120 Copper 4.32
122 Lead 110
124 Nickel 1.62
128 Zinc 2200
Ammonia (N) 13
Fluoride 74
Iron 230
Manganese 170
Phenols (4AAP) 1.91
Sulfide 5.31
Oil and Grease 23
TSS 3120
pH (Units) 4-8
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank D: Coagulant Aid Addition
B: Caustic Addition E: Vacuum Filter
C: Clarifier F: Recycle 100Z
739
-------
TABLE VIII-85
BPT MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Lead Foundry
: Continuous Strip Casting
Model: Size-TPD: 20
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
16
0.68
1.58
0.55
0.22
0.01
3.04
38
1.62
3.78
1.32
0.11
6.83
Total
54
2.30
5.36
1.87
0.33
0.01
9.87
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
120 Copper
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
54.4
0.05
0.85
0.015
<5
5
6-9
BPT
Effluent
Level
54.4
0.05
0.12
0.015
<5
5
7.5-10
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Lime Addition
B: Clarifier
740
-------
TABLE VIII-86
BAT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Lead Foundry
: Continuous Strip Casting
Model: Size-TPD: 20
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 2
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
TOTAL
Alternative No. 1
Alternative No. 2
c
56
2.40
5.56
1.96
0.15
Total
56
2.40
5.56
1.96
0.15
D
16
0.69
1.61
0.56
0.11
C
56
2.40
5.56
1.96
0.15
Total
72
3.09
7.17
2.52
0.26
10.07
10.07
2.97
10.07
13.04
Wastewater
Parameters
120 Copper
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
BPT
Effluent
Level
Flow, gal/ton 54.4
Concentrations, mg/1
0.05
0.12
0.015
<5
5
7.5-10
Alt. No.
Effluent
Level
54.4
0.05
0.08
0.015
<5
3
7.5-1.0
Alt. No.2
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
C: Filter
D: Recycle 100%
KEY TO TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
PSES-1 - BPT
PSES-2 = BPT + BAT-1
PSES-3/NSPS/PSNS = BPT + BAT-2
741
-------
TABLE VIII-87
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcatsgory: Lead Foundry
: Grid Casting
Model: Size-TPD: _2£
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
TOTAL
A
16
0.68
1.58
0.55
0.22
0.01
B
38
1.62
3.78
1.32
0.11
-
C
16
0.69
1.61
0.56
0.11
-
Total
70
2.99
6.97
2.43
0.44
0.01
3.04
6.83
2.97
12.84
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
120 Copper
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
54.4
0.05
0.85
0.015
<5
5
6-9
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Lime Addition
B: Clarifier
C: Recycle 100Z
742
-------
TABLE VIII-88
BPT/NSPS/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Magnesium Foundry
: Grinding Scrubbers
Model: Size-TPD: 0.5
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
(2)
-3
,-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
TOTAL
0.38
0.89
0.31
1.58
B
15
0.65
1.50
0.53
0.04
2.72
Total
24
1.03
2.39
0.84
0.04
4.30
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
128 Zinc
Manganese
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
1600
1.20
0.30
5
38
6-10
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
(2) Any solids which may accumulate are recovered and reused.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Recycle 100Z
743
-------
TABLE VIII-89
BPT/NSPS/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Magnesium Foundry
: Dust Collection
Model: Size-TPD: 100
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 1
C&TT Step
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
TOTAL
A
17
0.72
1.67
0.59
0.08
3.06
B
16
0.71
1.64
0.57
0.02
2.94
Total
33
1.43
3.31
1.16
0.10
6.00
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
128 Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
22
0.36
1.12
12
11
25
6-9
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Dragout Tank
B: Recycle 100%
744
-------
TABLE VIII-90
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Zinc Foundry
Die Casting and
Casting Quench
Operations
<50 employees
Model: Size-TPD:
12
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Steps
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operations & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
A
4
0.18
0.41
0.14
-
0.09
0.82
B
4
0.18
0.41
0.14
0.06
:
0.79
C
12
0.50
1.15
0.40
0.06
:
2.11
Total
20
0.86
1.97
0.68
0.12
0.09
3.72
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
40
0.375
1.88
0.065
0.780
3.9
132
1.8
2.15
5.2
24000
9800
6-8
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 100Z
745
-------
TABLE VIII-91
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
•
•
*
•
C&TT Steps
_3
Investment $ x 10
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operations & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
(1) Costs are all power unless
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
Zinc Foundry Model: Size-TPD: 73
Die Casting and
Casting Quench Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Operations Turns /Day : 3
50 to 249 employees
ABC
10 5 15
0.41 0.19 0.63
0.95 0.45 1.47
0.33 0.16 0.52
0.08 0.11
0.57
0.01
2.26 0.89 2.73
Raw
Waste
Level
40
0.375
1.88
0.065
0.780
3.9
132
1.8
2.15
5.2
24000
9800
6-8
otherwise noted.
Total
30
1.23
2.87
1.01
0.19
0.57
0.01
5.88
Effluent
Level
0
-
-
:
-
-
—
_
_
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 100%
746
-------
TABLE VIII-92
BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Zinc Foundry
: Die Casting and
Casting Quench
Operations
: >250 employees
Model: Size-TPD: 37
Oper. Days/Yr. : 250
Turns/Day : 3
C&TT Steps
Investment $ x 10
-3
Annual Cost $ x 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operations & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Sludge Disposal
Oil Disposal
TOTAL
A
6
0.26
0.60
0.21
-
0.29
1.36
B
4
0.18
0.41
0.14
0.06
—
0.79
C
13
0.56
1.31
0.46
0.06
—
2.39
Total
23
1.00
2.32
0.81
0.12
0.29
4.54
Wastewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Manganese
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Oil and Grease
TSS
pH (Units)
Raw
Waste
Level
40
0.375
1.88
0.065
0.780
3.9
132
1.8
2.15
5.2
24000
9800
6-8
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Settling Tank
B: Skimmer
C: Recycle 100Z
747
-------
TABLE VIII-93
BPT MODEL COSTS DATA; BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory:
Zinc Foundry
Malting Furnace
Scrubber Operation*
Model: Size-TPD: 88
Oper. D«ys/Yr. : 253"
Turn*/Day : 3
C4TT Step*
Investment $ x 10~
Annual Coat $ z 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Coat
Oil Disposal
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Raw
Waatewater Waste
Parameter* Level
Flow, gal/ton 755
Concentration*, «g/l
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 1.28
022 Parachlorometacreiol 0.08S
031 2,4-dichlorophenol 1.19
034 2,4-dioechylphenol 4.03
055 Naphthalene 1.51
065 Phenol 14.6
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 0.075
128 Zinc 17.2
Phenol* (4AAP) 84
Oil and Grease 700
TSS 400
pH (Unit*) 4.5-6.0
A B C D E _F_ G
16 42 43 43 46 27 86
1.55 1.79 1.83 1.87 1.96 1.17 3.71
3.61 4.16 4.26 4.34 4.56 2.71 8.63
1.26 1.46 1.49 1.52 1.60 0.95 3.02
0.22 0.11 0.11 0.45 0.45 0.11 0.22
1.93 0.36 - 0.48 70.00 0.50
0.90 -
8.57 7.88 8.59 8.66 78.57 5.44 15.58
H Total
121 444
5.18 19.06
12.05 44.32
4.22 15.52
0.78 2.45
73.27
0.90
2.14 2.14
24.37 157.66
BPT
Effluent
Level
755
0.100
0.050
0.050
4.03
0.050
0.100
0.075
0.30
5.0
10
12
7.5-10
(1) Coit* are all power unless otherwise noted.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
A: Alum Addition
B: Sulfuric Acid Addition
C: Inclined Plate Separator
D: Lime Addition
E: Potaaaium Permanganate Addition
F: Coagulant Aid Addition
G: Clarifier
H: Vacuum Filter
748
-------
- TABLE VIII-94
BAT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS MODEL COST DATA: BASIS 7/1/78 DOLLARS
Subcategory: Zinc Foundry
: Melting Furnace
Scrubber Operations
Model: Size-TPD: 88
Oper. Days/Yr. : TSo"
Turns/Day : 3
Investment $ x 10
-3
-3
Annual Cost $ z 10
Capital
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Energy & Power
Chemical Cost
Carbon Regeneration
Sludge Disposal
TOTAL
Credit-BPT Potassium
Permanganate
Waatewater
Parameters
Flow, gal/ton
Concentrations, mg/1
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachloromecacresol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
055 Naphthalene
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
128 Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
Oil and Grease
TSS
PH (Units)
0.100
0.050
0.050
4.03
0.050
0.100
0.075
0.30
5.0
10
12
7.5-10
Alternative No. 1
I
37
1.57
3.66
1.28
0.22
-
-
-
6.73
Total
37
1.57
3.66
1.28
0.22
-
-
-
6.73
J
22
0.94
2.18
0.76
0.17
6.53
-
-
10.58
Alternative No. 2
K
137
5.89
13.70
4.80
0.34
-
-
0.03
24.76
L
261
11.24
26.13
9.15
0.11
-
216.00
-
262.63
Total
420
18.07
42.01
14.71
0.62
6.53
216.00
0.03
297.97
Alternative No. 3
M
0
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0.025
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.010
0.23
0.05
5
3
7.5-10
Alt. No. 3
Effluent
Level
(1) Costs are all power unless otherwise noted.
(2) Addition of potassium permanganate utilized in BPT/NSPS/PSES/PSNS no longer required with addition of steps J, K, and L.
KEY TO C&TT STEPS
I: Recycle 100Z of Treated Effluent
J: Sulfide Addition
K: Filter
KEY TO TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
NSPS-1/PSES-l/PSNS-l • BPT
NSPS-2/PSES-2/PSNS-2 • BPT + BAT-1
NSPS-3/PSES-3/PSNS-3 • BPT + BAT-2
NSPS-4/PSES-4/PSNS-4 • BPT + BAT-3
L: Activated Carbon Adsorption
M: Tighten Scrubber Internal Recycle Rate to 100Z
749
-------
TABLE VIII-95
PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING INDUSTRY WIDE
TREATMENT COSTS FOR EACH PROCESS
Number of wet foundries, Percentage of plants
in the employee group/s, \/with or requiring
employing the particular /^ the model treatment
process or process com- component
bination
The cost of
the model
treatment •
component
Cost of the
particular
treatment
step to the
foundry
industry
The cost of the various treatment stages are then added together for each model.
750
-------
n B
O I
« 31
u cro
a u -
•^ TI X
•0 41
B h ««•
Q) •* N^
0. 3
M cr
w w
a
\
U
a
I
n
V
M
F-M (*1 ^ ^ oO ^ O ON ON O O ON ON OO O
r-- ~H CM ON r- CM .3- r- --H \OO-tfoo e
O CM r- o
-» CM
3 I
U 4J O
• H 6 S
•» O O- O CM
CM in m 1*1 -H o O
I O •* •
00 I
in x in in
co O o O co oo o cs cs
o»
S8
fisg
a o\ S to
* B "• u "
T M x S
« iJ S
SBlg
>p-g
iMir
H3eii
41 a
,|g
: B ••*
O O O O O O
z z z z z z
>H H H f H «- (-
PP PQ
3 »
f V
" g
r
o o
in m
V AI
1.
I
D «
^ kl
3 «
O
M
a.
« M
4) 4)
U 9
*
a. u
x a
• s
S §•
eo a
B «
a 00
« B
> a
B £
751
-------
CM tn r*»
O. 3
x a-
U V
0>
fc* u
O 0)
b. i-f*
n l*»^
01 6 •—'
U, MO
3 1
4J 4J O
•0 01
CSX
S..5V
X 3 — '
u er
u
•3
3
C
c
O
iX O O
-*
c
I
oa
01
B
M
o o o
00
o o o
-a-
-------
<0
3
C
01
•O 0)
C v« <
0) -H s^
O. 3
"
01
a
H U
*fi~
n im
01 Cl
M M O
3 —i
4J U
•nex
•o o>
C 6 o>
oi a>
O.--J
u cr
u
•4
0 H .
t ta i
T3 j:
3°
g sH
aol
1
753
-------
V 91
n ero
3 u -i
4J
•H "O X
•9 0>
B M <
«l -rf v
O. 3
£ IT
«
14 U
o a
n 1^
u wi^
3 1
U U 0
•ri B — i
1 gx
« a
O.-H V>
X 3 — '
u a-
u
•3
3
I
\0
PI
o
B
i
B
c
M
p*^
IT)
m
fn
cs
ao
CO
«N
s
o
00
•o
s>§
. g'i
-------
01 31
u 0 O
c •*
B -u
4 i
^
1
rJ D.
a i
I B
• H
-5
B u
T)
e
a
•O C
B O
U -ri
ai
u a
B o
755
-------
U
n u
0 a
lu —
BD in
V El
b M O
3 -<
••< C X
•O 11
O B «•
tl 0.-^
X 3
W 0-
U
p-4
a
5
4J
C
I
GO
(U
>
C
M
_ a i
u OJ
X 31
5 2
756
-------
O. 3
X er
b] 0)
§
00
41 ei
HMO
3 —"
•-< C Xi
•e o>
B B 4
01 CX-
H
a,
ce
&§
•ZLS
CO
e
00
C
00
e
•o
B
CO Ji
C V
•H 3
~* O*
o
S B3
•H
•O 4->
f-1 CO
o a
X u
B .C
O U
•p4 B
U 01
O 3
r-l
M 00
o a
U r4
CO
a >o
- h
B V
0 .0
u 3
O U £
0) U U
-H CO B
"* 01
O 01 3
O 0 Cf
ca
u e oo
a) u co
3 3 r-4
Q b« CO
CO •> O CO CO -l-l
•O -14T3C 00 -O"
BE C 11 ^ 01 01 C CUBCO
o a j= ojoos o -H j: uaa
•H o -Hjaxo1 HMO E o
UOOC U3 COB OOO hOO) b.Ct3
01 -rt 5 OIUBE 3U3 3UB
^p-tO* (-4COCQ.H tb O* [bBQ
f-4 o «-* *^ "O O)
OObO OV»BQ 00>~IOO 00300
O O C O U -C to BOB BO'Bf
•p4 (0 O O >H X *^ *H - >H U
Wt)4-> 4JEE U -U 4-IOO^C
ajf-tta ttbV'O ^•aco' i-icooo)
DOW 333E OIBCO OIMO3
OXU OlbO'a Z <0 O XCQUQ-
757
-------
4J 31
U CT-
3 U ~-t
C I* •
0> —I
Q. 3
£ &•
a-* <
X 3 v
u cr
u
CO CO CO
M [d Ed
CO CO to
a. (X, DJ
u
CO
O.
|
o o«~
fr§
!•«
Cd
a.-.
• t-4
3 •
01 01
h b
3 a
2 -o
u e
CO
•O C
C O
01 -rt
a. u
g -2
V
a
o
a oc
01 c
> a
c .c
758
-------
K S
O 0)
&• a
3
I
O O O O O O
£ g-'o
3 U —
4J
•H -O X
T5 01
B u •
01 -H <
O. 3
O O O O O O
01
S
^
M
M
>
bl
>«
H
O
M
8
M
S
u
CO
u
Z
><
CO
CO
^
2
CO
r«.
0>
>•
5
S
8
i
<:
u
g
5
B
en
$
V
b u
o eg
01 c
U HP
3
•ri B
•si
i*
K 9
u o-
u
>
S
€
00
SM
^ M
C u
i!
(DUCTILE ]
ZERO DISC
co
u
H
tt.
Plants
*M
o
^
01
1
z
CO
~*
(0
3
B
CM CM -* ^
O C4 O O * <•"! >A
00 r-. CT* ^^
PI <->
^
•i
0
-H 4J
B
x 01
4J
*^ a
0)
B
M
O >O O O 1- O f>
00 r~ -T CO
fl 00 CM
4J
*w B
O 01
01 «
iJ H
S£S S £ £ E
oa eo m pa eo oa pa
or Changed
Operation
O O O O O *-' O
01
>
•s
2
** «H r-t 00 -^ CM «H
ON
•-H
en
**
r*
en
o\
•M
K
oa
o
^
-» •*
SiS i
v i/t A i »n
h
«
.0
A
3
.2
4J
i
S? 5
U 3
O U
0) U
u B
B h
33
Ob*
- o
**
A "O
•o c
1 B 01
•'*
- W IS
V ^ B
X ca 4J
JJ* rt
• o) b
41
u Qi
B O
n oo B 01
01 B O >
> a B
B £ u O
M U •< O
M o
B h
•H 4J
4j B
— O
8s-
-1 M
759
-------
01 91
K cr o
3 U -*
e n «•
a 3
d?
PC
in r-
ON m
00
01
O ON CM r-
—i in co
O r- m
. 1
fifU 5
Sen r-» o oo o CM
00 00 O -»
in
0) I*-'
2&T
3 1
u u o
•H B — t *•»
•0 V S
B • X 01
S..SVB
K 3 •— «
u cr oi
M >
><
5>
CO
5 **
80
g
S 00 <
CO r*. u
If. S3 ON PQ CO
2 i"1 to g
7 M 3~i
S SB '-I O O
5E-22
"Sco1*0
^"855
JS co u S
H cd co S
SS§
si
eg
u
S
iS
H
B
M
moo ON co in
_ _ CM in IA — '
• H
£
m O oj i
B u x :
0) CO .
4 00-4
J OJ j; oo
•1 -H O) OJ TJ
•O ' >b -hia «00
B BOIBOJ BOIB6 BB
* f o u Owe o^oj o o -H
0 .M OJ -H J3 .H J CO -H .-1 -1
OOB UB U3 U3 4J JJO
B 01
U M U h X <
01 3 01 0 0 (
-< to p-1 CO B -
-4 1-4 0) *•
J K T! U £ U O
U U B 01 0 01 U
•4 CA OJ ^M B *-<
•4 |>H 0) ^H t9
JOO OOO OOJ3 OOJ» O3 O1^1
c o e uuo* o o j: uc> uo
•rf -M oj oj o X
•Q4J UAJ JJCOO 4JCB *JOO w
— a
O OJ
X U
OJ *-* OJ U OJ (
<§£ ££» e
1 )rf OJ 0) OJ OJ -O
£
U
B
01
00
e
4J
a
00
OJ
en
o
u
0)
o
u
0)
9
O
• »4
a
OJ
*
E
a
CO
11
0)
3
U
V £
O U
§ S
£ °"
M OJ
B — '
•* CO
i 1
M
B
• O
u o
01 U
! 3
CO
.2
U OJ
H £
£ C
03
00 S
6 0-
AJ OC
t-l OJ
u
e
01
£
00
B
.H
JJ
to
a
u
•a
•o
si
•0
C
aj
B
O
.H
U
01
f-l
*-l
o
u
OJ
3
a
g.
o>
h
O
a
O 9
B *J
01 -H
§ 1
01
oo a
B
•H
4J
OJ
OJ
u
B
aj
9
o
o
u
X
V
I
w
ft)
>
M
3
760
-------
01 91
u cro
9 U -i
u
•rf -o x
•o 0)
B P cO-
OI •*
CL. 9
x cr
u 01
co o co
d -
s
(A
°§
T* M
i
,E VIII
ASTING
S °
sl
s
>i
i
CO
3 **
83
b3
CO •<
K S
o> « cn
-. 3 U
CO CJ
>. g
s z 5
•not?
-• S co
M M
gx°
gSS
M CO
s§
U OB
oc u
P Cu
K
S
<
H
CO
•<
s
b
o
[»
01
9
4J
•H
•g
0)
a
X
hi
0)
u
B
0)
«-4
PM
o
,J
•c
I3
B
M
U
e
g
jj
«
a)
£
B
O
• r4
W
OJ
U
0)
a"
S!
.-J
W
^
coooo ^^ O cMr».m
%O — 4 •d' f» *A «H
so S oo
^HOOs CM O sOOiA
eo o 00 r1* cO r-»
CM ^ r* "* lA
^>
COCOCO CO CO COCOCO
CdUH M U Ed H U
COCOCO CO CO COCOCO
CMpuOu OM CM CMPupM
O O O O O O O O
•
^^Hfn r^ -H ooaocM
%O 00 CM
%O 00 -41
r*. -JT
m
Or* f^i
CM r-. ov
sp ^H »o
r-4 m >-l
CO CO CO
U td U
CO CO CO
o- cu a-
oo — o
-* CM
•» CM
•H «
00 ^
00
O
O
O
en
u
CO
BH
CO CO CO
U H U
CO CO CO
CM a. a.
Q>
CL
O
•o
01
DO
B
00 -i
5
O I "1 O »A
lA O CM lA CM
V U-l A | V V
•
(NO
O I m
>/> O CM
CS O
I "1
O CM
Ifi Al
U.
01
A
A
9
U
£
0)
S
£
£
00
e
•H
4J
i— «
£
•o
B
« £
U
25
3*
Joe
B
•O "
^H (0
£c5
U
01
A
A
3
•olu
sU
§s
•H OJ
u B
U h
S"2
O M
u e
•H
4J U
(D i-H
<§£
S
"« -31
~* s
J|*l
•>
» ti
§«
-S
u 9
0 U f
01 0 y
^H CO B
*-H 0)
o oi i.
o o &
a
4J g M)
0 b «T
99"
Q Pu CO
If S3
•H y-ri
u iTf
U Cfl J
> h •«
§11
u 9
0 U TO
0) u B
— en «
**
0 01 -
W U JS
V U
u B B
CO U ft)
IS.I
•o
s
c
0
•H
4J
Iu
0>
0^
t-4
o
u
4J
to
2
JS
B
01
&
00
to
•-I
CO
n
0)
ja
j)
9
hi
U
CO
V £
u u
C8 C
e a
5*
EM
00
22
• -. CO
JJ
i-l -9
£S
M 0
„„
J, «
9 ^
b e
u * j=
CO U
T3 B
01 B 01
i " *
U £ 00
£=.5
« u
00 9 a
B O- «
•H U
u 00
-.10-0
4) — B
Z ca a
1
e
o
• f4
JJ
U
0)
>— I
•— 1
O
u
4J
0}
3
Q
u
•H
t>
c
ID
00
e
• i-4
£
«
m
3
T3
C
09
CO
a
X
u
JJ
c
0)
s
u
(0
c
M
C?
761
-------
0
In
ooo oo o oo oo
01
I "O X •
I 111
! h V>
ooo oo o oo oo
01
01
M U
o a
a> c ^v
fc i-m
3 I
u u o
•rt C -H
1 I'x
0> O.
X 3 *~'
bi cr
t-t
3
e
c
c
to
V
c
M
ososos car*. r*- r*»oo O — t
r^roso *j »n en r^o w9O
CM CM -, -,* sf A
O CM
in A I
So
I m
o CM
m A|
o o
m m
CM CM.
V A|
A|
a.
X
V
162
-------
01 91
V4 O* O
3 Id -H
u
•H -o X
•g s«
s.-s^
CM -4 —I
01 B -^
b *-m
3 I
B 6
01 O.
O.-H «•
5 3-~
fl ^H 00
00 r*. CM
^* 00 •*
I 00 •*
i in \o
-------
3
C
01 31
u cr o
3 U —
a s
x cr
u ai
I
v ci
fc M O
X 3
u e*
u
a
X 3
O O
~H u
0.0
u
§01
o
O 00 01
u e .o
Q CO
764
-------
o o!
o ol
—I CM
c»> CM
»* ml
V Bl ,
h M O
3 —i
-9 00
m CM
CM 00
o
l~t
« <0|
> «
01 b
•J H!
•8 B
B 00 O
5 c 'H
S a u
•a .c a
u S n,
Is-SJ
oo m -<
o o
f-4 U
ao
CM O O
I irt m
SCM CM
Al Al
K.
B e
o « £
•rf O
4J 00 B
U B «
« ^ 5
** ** Of
r* O
O O 00
u u e
b
J
B U
o|co
B «
o o
•H 18
u B
f-
O 60
U B
3 -SI
* "J
•> b
B 01
O A
•H J9
U 3
U h
O 41 3
O U O1
U 3 3 i-H
X Q tt. «
765
-------
4J
H E
0 g
O»*"^
01 *3I
K ero
3U-H
•H -0 X
•O 01
B M «•
4) >rt >_-
a s
K 0-
-fl
«
3
e
e
^ m
7 M >•
M
g M~
M < M
I«8
SB
§
S
p
s
s
s
s
01 B
k. M
3
•rt B
v a
Oi*H
M 3
u o-
£
3 CO
W M
H U
gs
PQ 3C
9 U
CO CQ
M
d°
U H
H U
M H
CO M
1°
PM
H
a
u
8
si
M4
O
\4
41
J
g
•O
CO
0
^H
X u
e
2S
to
01
o •» so o -a-
M M "H -*
4J
tM B
°I
oi a
H H H H H
C44 Cb Ch Cu eu
S « ca at n
,a
B •*
a u
€ 2
u 2
0 0
00 00 0
«
^
•H
3
•^ M %O sO CM
— . CM
I in i i
o CM o
in A| m
A|
jf^
V
n
«
w
s
£
§
•H
4J
U
Of
^4
cS
0)
£
« JC
u
ffg
3*
1?
• H
*O 4J
r4 n
o a
I u
B
01
"0 O"
B
a «
(0 B
•O 'H
« ^M 4J
BOO
o X a
4J -O
u B •a
0) « C
*H a
0 M CO
U B B
•H *H
a a O
3
-------
01 31
U (TO
3 U -i
a 3
x tr
u ai
tt
OD -a-
r- m
CM -a
01 Bl
3-M2
4J 4J
•* B X
•o
B
W
!
Cb>
M 3
U V
O <*!
*O 00
O
-------
V 31
n ->
<*
so 8 w
t*> W M
cy* E^ u
" g |
J 3 U
a co co
1 M
*•* iJ Q
H U O
co t- a:
O CO U
U N
il
c u
a to
P*
H
05
S
s
c
H
U
4j
8
a.
M-l
O
Kl
0)
•g
J
=
•O
3
J=
CO
/.^
•>
o
X
-------
V 31
u cro
3 U -<
o a
fas-
a im
v ci
U M O
•n w *
•O tl
C S <
ti a>
X 3
u
CO CA CO
U U U
to cn co
a< CL a-
o a "
•o f «
4J O b
x M a
en O O
c
o
u
769
-------
3 W —
•*•' T3 X
e u
0) 'H ^
a 3
x cr
u D
>H
e
en
=s
1 M
B£
>s
w 2
^5
si
u
£
>•
CO
/-^
CO
J
8
CO
T^
o\
>H
J
a
1
Ei
CO
8
H
Z
U
E
<
u
e
&
u
H
<
1
«s
3
>•
ce.
E-4
<;
^
3
CO
§
M
CO
U
^
o
J
9
C
s.
X
u
CO
u
o
s
M
Q
s
u
M
Q
3
1
Qti
M
Q
Plants
(M
O
w
V
i
3
2
«l
u
«
Cl
M O
U
JU
a>--
•rt
9
CT
U
'o
i-l
01
>
2
•o
0)
1-4
CO
3
e
5
4J
C
s
to
0)
>
e
M
U
e
u
cfl
V
|a
H
-
Shutdown
or Chang
Operatlo
V
>
•M
4J
3
-a-
CO
v a
>, 3
O O
o
h
a.
B J3
O -D
-H 3
••* 00
OS
CJ -H
770
-------
O 0)
fe E
~H O ON O
sD n
^ m
•H T3 X
•O W
C *••
r-l ^H O ^
•" W 0
•O 01
c e «
0) b^.
0.-H
X 3
mo en -4- o o
H H
a. a.
ca a
I -o i
u o
? u 6J
o o
|
—i « O
au
u
e
01
*
u a
c c
01 h
771
-------
o
I O CO O
• o
I o O
'•o'S*
B H «
4) >H N.
a s
x cr
u _u
g
CO
" ^ 2
V w
TABLE VIII
TALS CASTING
g
>•
CO
CO
3
J
S
CO
r^
o\
>4
H
CO
O
CJ
H
Z
u
B
£
e
£
H
<
S
H
CO
<•
3
>*
Dd
f-J
W
ZINC SUBCAT
CO
u
u
%
M
O
£
Jj
o
fc
5
M
3
,H
•a
B
a
u
Plants
14-t
O
h
V
M
§
Z
u
S
B
)-<
E
g
•5*
3
U
Shutdown
^
i
o
X
0}
J
•o
1
6
0
cd
g
B
<
4j
i
D
JJ
CD
0)
>
e
M
4J
i
4J
<9
«
^
Operation
4)
.u
* o r^* so «* o
— 1 CN C*l -* ^ ^H —I
-
zzzz sczzz zzzz
CO W W COCOCOCO CO W W CO COCOCOCO
WWW COCOCOCO COCOCOCO COCOCOCO
fefecu &- &4 a* eu eu cu a, P- a, cu c^ a,
o o o o o
r«. ON —1 ^H csj
fO -H
s-g
Is
o i m
m o es
v m A i
772
-------
0) -r*n
II 31 .
n
o o|
^-t
«
OJ 3
M O C
£5-5
Or*
01 |v^
HI C ^
M i-m
3 1
*J *J O
•H e — •"->
•O OJ C
c S x a;
ai a e
X 3 ^ »
u cr v
u >
><
en
»
§
_1
*2
Sco
« r~ KH
« §2 s g
— * go
V w >• u R3
« u a e- 2
5ggsll
«SK«Q
2U8g§
2 CO ~ (d
H^ss-
H U
Sl
e
Od
u
H
<
g
H
cn
«(
a
e
M
JJ
U-l C
o „
i-l 4J
ti a
> 0)
S£
•0
01 C
C 00 O
5 C "^
0) O tn *J
4J T3 ^ cd
e u u u
as oi
-H f n a
a. co o o
u
o
M
0)
1
3 0)
Z >
jj
O
<
. 3
o o
^ t4
a o
a
o
O m
u-l CN
V A I
01
0) U
u eg
n .-i
f-H a.
c5
i c
Ou -i-l
3
M ft
O U
773
-------
^^
n
5
i
H
•O
01
C
• H
g
V
4J
01
p
^
w
a
o
M
H
2
W
PL,
0
&H
Pi
S
o w
fa ta
t-t
fa OS
°g
w p
as
£
H >_J
H 5
W l-l
W £
33
U
M
H
W
H
•o
01
00
C
CO
U
^4
o
•o
01
00
C
CO
U
^,1
o
•o
01
00
C
CO
U
0
C
0
•l-l
4J
CO
M
0)
a
o
0)
•l-l
4-1
U
^
oooo oooo oooo
oooo oooo o-^oo
ff)
C
0
4-1
CO
),4
a>
a
o
OOOO O-HCMO OONOO
01
^
4-1
U
OOOO OOOO O-HvO-d"
-^ -H
C
o
4J
(0
0)
a.
o
OOOO OOOO OOOCM
01
•r-l
4J
U
<
OOCMO OOOO OCM-3-CM
1— 1
000
•-H OI — i OI —i CD
l-l M M
C ONO C ON O C ONO
COON
-------
CO
§
H
9
H
CM
O
§
Z
1
fa
O
co
H
«C CO
3G M
M M
H B4
0\ CO Q
-4 H Z
2^2
M O
M M £
> H
co
U M
n
H co
•o
•» 4J
i-l 4)
cd
U M-l
•i-l O
co vi
•r-l 0)
4J ,0
cd g
4J §
co Z
0)
60
Vi
(0
.c
u
CO
• H
o
o
Vl
0)
N
CO C
C 60 O
5 G -H
o cd 4J
•u u vi
3 CO
jr i-i &
CO O O
•*
.e
Vi
O
S
VI
0
TO 4-1 4-1
eo o
V O O Vl
o o o
CO 4-1 4J
CO O
co o o m
t-^ ^H in CM
OOOO
C
td
(U
Vi
§
4J H
O O O
CO 4J *J
CO O
co o o m
,j ~< m CM
CO
u
cd
G
3
60
C
•l-l
4J
i— 1
CO
*T3
e
tO
Vl
tu
^£
f\
3
Vi
u
CO
60
C
•I-l
4-1
CO
cd
03
CO
p
(P
u
tfl
c
Vi
3
fa
60
e
• H
4J
rH
(U
•o
C
cd
Vl
^Q
Jjj
3
Vl
u
CO
42
U
C
CO
3
O*
60
G
•i-i
4J
CO
cd
CJ
*«
n
U
C
CO
o>*
60
C
• H
4-1
0>
cd.
u
T3
C
cd
*.
60
e
u
to
cd
CJ
co
o
(U
J2
3
^j
CO
•H
P
775
-------
TJ
0) CO
a a*
• H -H
g ^
o) c
4>J 3
0) O
a F*
>•* 4J
i-l 0)
U M-l
•H O
CO t-l
•i-l 01
4J JQ
4J §
CO Z
01
60
^
CO
,£3
U
CO
• H
O
o
0)
N
•o
0) C
C 60 O
5 C -r4
O CO 4J
•0 J3 *
•u u m
3 0>
je h a
woo
01
•I-l
JJ
u
oooo oooo
oaooo oooo
CM
01
60
CO
^r*
O
CO
•I-l
0
B
2
0)
60
(0
.e
u
•i-i
O
4J
0
0)
•H
0
•o
01 C
§00 O
c -^
O CO 4J
jj y t-i
3 01
,c n a.
woo
oooo oooo
01
•I-l
u
•o
o) c
C 60 O
5 C -H
o a
U 3
o o
c
o
u
V
CO
a3
u
60 C
0 0)
•H 9
^i O-
O
O 60
•O 4-1
t-l CO
O CO
u
- 60 C
c e oi
O -H 3
•H i-l O-
4J O
o o eo
0) U C
fH -rl
i-i -a 4J
O i-l CO
oo«
08 T3 73
sec
a co ca
776
-------
»-H
CM
f-H
M
i
CO
SB
0
e
<2 co
M W
(X, M
O Pd
SH §
£ 9
|S
fa 35
O
fa 06!
O M
CO U
TIMATE
DUCTIL
CO *-*
M
CO
J p
^C cj
O oej
W«3
Pw
H W
CO {*,
h^
H
5
H
CO
•o
0) co
•i-l -H
g£
2 §
0) O
Ct G^
*-* V
r-i 5
CO
U M-l
CO (-1
.H O)
CO 2
01 C
60 O
C -H
_ CO 4J
T3 JS CO
O M
0)
^ n a
CO O O
0)
O O O O OOOO
OOOO OOOO
OOOO
2
01 e
60 O
C -H
CO 4J
•O JS «0
4-1 U M
2 . 2
.c M a.
co o o
V
"S e
60 O
C •"-!
4J U
3
CO
M (X
OO
-H -* ^H O O CO O
O O O
OOOO
O O O CN
OOOO
o o -* o
OOOO OOOO
OOOO
O O CO -H
OOOO
OOOO OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO OOOO
OOOO
OOOO OOOO
OOOO OOO'H
OOOO
rH 3
o. o
C
«8
0)
M
01 -H
«M
O O O
(O 4J 4J
CO O
o o m
CM
a> o
,j -H
C ON O
a) ON -* S
JS -* CM
O O O
09 4J 4J
co O
4i o o m
J -H in CN|
C
to
0)
ON O
-* S
c ^
43
0\ O
O O O
co 4J 4J
CO O
0) O O u"i
j -H m cs
M
o o o
CO 4J 4J
CO O
4i o o m
,j -H m CN
eo
CO
ai a
U 3
o o
h M
P* U
U
4)
O
U
0)
U
V4
60 0)
c .a
•H A
4J 3
<-> h
V U
S w
U
C
60
CO
CO
T3
CO .C
u
60 (3
C 0>
•* 3
r-l O-
O 60
U C
•I-l
•O 4J
c a>
O U
•H CO
•U C
U M
4) 3
i-i Fx
i-l M
o 60 at
o c ja
•H .0
4J 4J 3
CO r* M
3 a> u
O S co
777
-------
TJ
01 00
B V
•H 'rl
(U B
ij ^
0) O
O PH
i-l CU
CO
U M-I
•rl O
00 t-l
• H CU
CO Z
CO
§
en
o
>4 CO
ga
eg
9
£
CO Z
w o
H PA
t—J td
H 3
^ CO H
CM U H
s^§
M CJ >-/
M HI
> H CO
CO D CM
M M O
eg O M
3 oi
j: i-i a
CO O O
V
•o
at e
60 O
fi -H
a) 4J
U M
woo
•o
cu fi
60 O
C -H
_ CO 4J
•O 43 CO
4-1 y i-i
3 0)
js M aj
CO O O
oooo oooo oooo oooo
o o o o
oooo oooo oooo
oooo
oooo
oooo oooo oooo oooo
oooo
O O -H O
oooo oooo
oooo
O O
oooo oooo oooo oooo
oooo
OOOCN OOOfO
O O O j to o
-------
^
CM
i— 1
,i|
M
HH
>
W
1
H
•O
0)
B
• H
g
0)
4-1
o>
p
>>
I-l
CO
U
• H
CO
• i-l
«
4J
W
CO
o
M
PL,
0
U-l CO
06 W
P M
o p
o z
o
o ta
W 2
BS
W M
W H
CJ
O
i-H
O.
W
CO
CO
cu
u
o
I-l
CO
cu
• rl
M
•o
B
O
fa
4J
CU
**
MH
O
Vi
0)
*
D.
3
0
CU
00
^4
(0
0
CO
• H
p
0
CU
N
B
[J
Q
•o
4-1
3
J3
w
01
00
CO
fl
0
CO
• fH
p
B5
2
cu
00
CO
u
CO
• H
P
4-1
U
0)
•I-l
p
g
0
•o
4J
3
JS
w
o
T)
3
A
CO
Cu
3
O
I-l
c
0)
00
B
CO
.£
0
(^
o
*o
J
o
1—1
•o
p-l
0
2
•o
B
CO
•s
t-l
0)
J3
3
M
u
w
CM
o
4J
0
ITI
00
B
• H
4J
CO
CO
o
T3
B
CO
00
B
• H
l_4
o
0
o
cu
I-l
o
o
CM
f
u
B
0)
3
o-
o
rH
<0
4J
CO
CO
0)
1-3
cu
u
CO
B
3
00
B
• H
4J
t-H
0)
ON
0
4J
O
1—1
u
B
cu
3
O*
00
CO
i-H
w
•I
I-l
(U
.0
»o
3
t-i
O
w
ON
O
u
0
>n
•o
s
(0
00
B
• iH
i-l
O
o
CJ
73
i-l
O
JB
*^j
B
CO
more
M
O
O
in
CM
A
u
B
cu
3
-------
CN
CS
*-l
"
>
i
CO
o
M
H
K
W
PM
0
S
s
!=>
£
fa
O
CO
1
CO
Cd
,1
0 O
C -H
CO 4J
X CO
U M
OI
»J ft
o o
0>
.^
4J
u
<
OOO-H OOOO
oocnr**- OvocTxo
I-H en en en
•o
oi c
60 0
C -H
Cd 4J
Si CO
O h
01
M ft
o o
OOOO OOOO
OI
•iH
4J
o—i^Hen or^oo
i— i i— i
•a
01 C
60 O
S'*J
£
h ft
0 Ol
OOOO OOOO
01
^
•l-l
4J
u
^
oenocN oox^o
•-H i-H CN
o o
^ 01 ^H 0)
V4 ^
C Ox O B Ox O
cd Ox «4* S CO Ox *3* S
J3 Vt OOu"i OlOOiTi OJO
J^U-ICN fj-Hines i-l-H
t>
Cl)
•0
C Ci 01
CO pC O O
U -H CO
60 C 4J C
,C CO> 0 H
u -1-13 a> s
C ,-4 O* ^H (14
oi o t-<
3 O 60 O 60
o* o c o c
•H -i-l
60 -O 4J 4.1 4J
CO i-H CO CO i-H
I-H o cd 3 01
co S o o S!
o
00
-H
o
00
i-H
o
oo
Ox
^^
CN
o
4-1
o
in
l-l
OI
J3
M
u
CO
ON
CN
i-H
o
CM
o
o
OJ
^4
0
a
^
o
o
CN
780
-------
"O
4) co
C 4)
•H -i-l
Vi *O
D d
jj a
4) O
Cl PM
>», jj
1-4 4)
U M-l
•H O
JJ
CO U
•H 4)
s -a
JJ 3
CO 2
CO
SB
O
M
H
2
w
o
^
orf
w
O fxj
gM
DC!
fa §
o o
o
CO to
s~
31
M SA
H HI
4
vds§
M < U
M O N_/
M M
> H W
W O CN
W M O
h-3 EH CM b3
CQ "rf W C5
«J H W «!
H w to CM
4)
00
i-i
CO
f*
o
ca
•H
Q
o
U
3 d
•n 4)
0 3
W O1
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
O O O -H
OOOO
0 O O ^H
o
— i 4)
p^
d ON o
efl ON «d- B
JZ •* CN
•U I-l
o o o
CO JJ JJ
CO O
4) o o m
_3 ^H m cs
•k
r*
u
4)
O* 00
d a) d
o o eo-ri
•rH CO CO J2
JJ d r-l CO
O VJ W CO
4) 3 3:
r-l M T3
O 60 CU d
o d ja co
•H J3 W
JJ JJ 3
to r-l |-i 13
3 4) U d
Q S W cfl
0 0
0 0
o o
o o
o o
o o
o
1— 1
d
cfl ON
J3 «^
JJ
o
CO JJ
CO
4) o
T3
d
CO
d
o
JJ
U J2
4) U
i-l 4)
O 3
o o-
JJ 00
co co
3 r-l
P w
0 O
ON ^H
0 0
ON O
0 0
OO -H
4)
)^
ON O
^t e
CN
M
O O
JJ
O
o m
m CN
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
OOOO
o o o fo
o
^H a)
M
d ON O
efl ON -J- S
JC! «* CN
•U I-l
O O O
CO JJ JJ
ca O
cu o o m
rJ rH in CN
00
(0
r-l 00
w d
• H
~ TJ JJ
d r-i co
O O CO
jj
O T3 T3
4) d d
r-l CO CO
i-l
O - 00
O J3. d J3
O -r( O
j-> d i-i d
co 4) O 0)
3303
P O-CJ O*
0 0
o o
0 0
o o
o o
o o
o
rH
d
CO ON
pd "^
JJ
o
ca JJ
to
4) O
h-3 «"H
00
CO
I-l
w
cT d
O CO
•H W
JJ
o *^
cu d
r-l CO
I-l
o -
U J2
u
JJ q;
CO 4)
3 3
p o-
o o
o o
o o
o o
O 0
O CN
4)
I-l
ON O
•* e
CN
I-l
0 O
JJ
o
o m
in CN
00
d
•H
f*
ca
CO
t5
731
-------
T3
01
B
•r4
B
i-i
0)
4J
01
n
>>
iH
^^
cd
u
.1-1
^
CO
•r-l
4J
cd
4J
CO
CO
2
o
M
H
3
u
0,
o
fW
£
§ co
a w
gs
fa S
0 P
o
CO fa
u
H ^
S 5=
s! o
HI PS
H H
CM CO
CM W SH
1 hj CC
M «3 O
r-l CJ v~-
M M
> H CO
CO O CO
W M O
,J H 0! W
« <; os o
«j< H w «:
H CO fa Pu
0)
0)
>,
o
r-4
ex
A
CO
CO
01
CJ
o
n
ftj
0)
01
• H
M
•a
B
3
O
fa
4J
S
*S
U-l
O
P
CU
J2
3
z
01
00
lJ
cfl
,E
CJ
CO
• I-l
O
O
U
0)
N
•a
01 B
B 00 O
S B —i
O CO 4J
-0 A «
4-J O VJ
3 (U
4= P a
co o o
01
^
•r-l
4J
U
• H
4-1
u
O CO 4J
•O J3 cd
4-1 U M
3 0)
j= u a
co o O
01
>
•I-l
4J
u
<
o o o\ ^
oooo
O O O CM
a
§
3
o
— 1 0)
M
B ON O
ft V4
O O O
CO 4J 4J
CO O
o) o o m
j ^ m CM
a
3
O
P
O
00
id
0) r-l
U CO
CO
B -O
I-i B
3 <0
fa
M
00 01
c j3 x:
•r4 J3 O
4J 3 c
r-l r-l 0)
01 U 3
S co o-
000
o o o
o o o
o o o
o o o
O O -H
o
^
B ON
Cd ON <•
J= -* CM
4-1
o o
CO 4-1 4J
to
01 O O
iJ -H m
00
•0 B
I-l •!-!
O 4J
oi S co
U CO
CO Ti CJ
B B
I-i CO *O
3 B
fa - cd
M
00 0) 00
B A B
•i-l JQ -i-l
4J 3 r-l
r-4 rJ O
0) U O
S co cj
0
o
1 — 1
o
o
o
01
M
o
S
M
o
o
in
CM
JS
o
B
01
o-
oooo
O O -I O
oooo
oooo
oooo
O O —i O
o
-H 0)
M
6 ON O
cd ON ^t a
JS -* CM
*-" M
O 0 O
CO 4J 4J
CO O
oi o o m
rj •— 1 in CM
T>
B
cd
•o
B B
o cd ,c
.1-4 O
4-1 oo e
U B 01
O) -H 3
r-4 r-l Of
r-l O
O O 00
CJ CJ B
•rl
4J T3 4J
CO r-l CO
3 O cd
P S cj
O 0
o o
o o
o o
o o
0 0
o
1— (
B
cd ON
.B >fr
4-1
o
CO 4J
CO
o> o
hJ -H
TJ
B
cd
B
o
•I-l
4J 00
U B
01 -H
r-l JC
r-l CO
O CO
CJ 12
4J "O
co C
3 efl
P co
o o
0 0
o o
O -H
O 0
O CM
O)
M
ON O
•* S
CM
I-l
o o
4-1
o
o m
in CM
oooo
O O 0 -H
oooo
oooo
oooo
oooo
o
-H 0)
M
B ON O
CO ON vf- S
A -3 CM
4-1 ,J
o o o
CO 4J 4J
CO O
oi o o m
j ^H m CM
•«
B 0)
O 0
•H Cd -O
4-i B B 00
U M cd B
0) 3 -H
r-l fa - .B
i-H VJ CO
o oo o) cd
CJ B ,n *
•l-l ,fl
4J 4J 3 •«
co i-i h B
3 0) 0 cd
P S w co
782
-------
•o
4) CO
e 4>
13
4) C
4-1 3
41 O
O &•<
>-. 4J
CO i-l 4)
Z r-l IS
O (0
1— 1 0*4-1
H -i-i O
o o oo in
4) CJ r-l
N <;
T3
4) 4) C
60 B 60 O
n 5 e -H
CO O CO 4J
js -a x ««
O 44 O 1-1
09 3 41 OOOO
•H x: i_i a.
o w o o
4)
3 *rl
H 4J O O CN O
2 <;
•«
4> 4) e
60 p 60 O
n 5 c •*
CO o « 4J
J3 Tl J3 CO
0 4J y M
m 3 4) OOOO
•H .C M O.
O CO O O
4J 4)
U >
4) •!-)
H 4J O O O CM
•rl O "H
Q •
-------
CO
§
U
P-
O co
H
>* M
OS 04
a a
££
fa ^N
°§
CO pj
eM
33
S3
CO CO W
CM U J
TuS
> H co
co a CM
U M O
J H Oi W
« > 4J
rH «
•3*
O <4-t
•i-l O
^J
CO U
•H v
4J XI
co E
4J g
CO Z
TJ
C -H
•1 4J
> U
< •<
•o
) o o
CO
CO
0) Oj
O 3
O O
CM
C 0)
O U
•H eg -o
4J C C
o h eg je
0) 3 U
fH fa - C
•-I h 0>
O W 0) 9
u c A 6*
•* A
4J 4J 3 60
a 1-4 M <9
9
-------
»4J
W
z
o
M
S
06
W
04
O W
U
c2 M
g£
pt4 ^^»
^D hJ
u
TIMATES
US (STE
w o
. gj
^ (*4
U
H
W
H
H
W
f-t 4)
CO
U *W
•d 0
CO l-l
•d 4)
4J JS
co §
W 2
4)
60
CO
U
CO
0
O
4)
N
rt
J
Q
*O
4J
3
,c
w
Q)
60
h
CO
?•*
U
CO
•d
Q
8
2
g
Q
•^
4J
3
€
4)
60
CO
U
CO
O
u
u
4)
M
io
§
0
T3
4J
3
W
CO
4)
o a
r-i 3
a, o
V
60
e
V
u
Jj
o
•e
60
CO
o
u
o
•e
4)
60
e
CO
JS
u
0
c
o
»f4
u
CO
t^
4)
a
0
4)
•d
4J
U
**
oooo o o o
O ^3 ^^ *O ^3 ^^ ^^
CN
c
o
4J
CO
4)
s
OOOO O O O
4)
4J
4£
o o m co o o co
CM -*
e
0
4J
CO
4)
£
oooo o o o
4)
^
>r^
4J
O
§
o
o
CN
0) O.
U 3
o o
M l-l
On U
§
o
u
CO
o
e
ct) X
U
60 C
G cu
O 60
U C
•1-f
•O 4J
l-l «
O CO
X u
c e
O « .C
•d O
4J 60 C
U C 4>
4) -d 3
i-l r-< O*
rd O
O O 60
u u e
CO l-l CO
3 O CO
Q X O
•o
c
CO
^•O
c n -
o « js
•H O
AJ 60 C M
yx B tj) C
CU -H 3-d
^ ^ o* x:
t-i O co
O O 60 CO
o o c ts
co 1-1 co c
3 O CO CO
Q S O CO
785
-------
^H
l-l
o
4J
CO
3
a
CO
J.4
(U
f)
3
o
CO
60
d
d
• H
^1
o
786
-------
vO
CN
s
w
z
o
td
PL,
O
O
CO
O
W
Od
H M
W N)
CJ
H
t-4
H
H
w
•o
CU CO
c
gn
•0
cu e
4J 3
0) O
O h
t**» w
r-l (U
fH 13
CO
U M-l
•H O
TO V4
•rH Q)
U ,£>
co e
4J 3
W 2
(1)
00
M
CO
j2
U
CO
• rl
O
O
V4
cu
N
r*
5
O
•a
4J
3
W
(I)
00
1-1
CO
X!
0
co
• r4
Q
B
2
0)
00
CO
c^
U
CO
•H
O
4J
U
u
<;
O O O
O O O O
o oo o
O O O O
o o o o
o o o o
4-> O
-H O O ^H
o o o o
o o o o
O O
o a.
•-i 3
a. o
C
CO
-------
oo
O
ooooooo
OCMOOOCOCMO
>
lOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
> O O O OOO vOOO OO-d-
i M? CM \O O O \O Ol vD -^ O T\ O O tA I
irilACMCMCMU-iincMCMCMCMCMCMCMrMCSCM
V A|V A|V A|V A)A|V A|V V A|A
SO O O O O
in in in in in
CM CM CM CM CM CM,
V A|V A|V A I
I
1
u 3 3
c a. o-
B ad u
SS e e
a «4 -H
Z « u u
M > ^ «
§C V «
1-1 S O
01
o
11
Q
oa « -o
u a r<
cu 3 o
a. o s
o
u
e
o e
•H O
o —
o <->
CO U
3 u 3
u e
a o
c u
a
o
788
-------
ooooooooo
00 00 00 in oo r-
CM 00 CO <""» CM CM
to •-< o m
ooooooooooooooooo
o .? o o o o
00 r- CM O O to
e*> e*l ^ O «^ O"
in en m en in oo
-I 00 O
o o
o
-a
So o o o
o o
I 00 tO 00 CM 00 00
O O O O O O O I
O O O to O O O '
oooo
ooo
oo*^
r^»?tor-t
~-tcncMCM
O —'
Z P.
en t-< o ••*
oocMOOOoocrtootmmooo-
' O O
to to CM to O CJO tO
ejt r1- in ^ to -31 en
•3* -3- CM ^f -^ •* m
^H o «* o O
o o
o -»
-I to
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 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
1
2
O
»H
H
I
> O O O O O o
§00 o o
tO CM O CM
§O I
O I
00 CM (
> O
' O
i 00
IOOOOOOOOI
» CM O O O CM O I
> en oo \o o * m *
' O O O O O '
I O —I O I
i *o en oo >
o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o
CM ^ 00 VC O vO 00
O ^H >O 91 CM ^f
r-. en CM -« to -H
—i en -H CM -»
o "
e
• a
o ^
z ft.
§:
00 <
> o o o >
i O O O <
I CS tO O <
:§§§
) CM 00 00
co r-vo-cr
en r» CM ^
§000000000000001
O O tO O O O O tO O O O O O «•* (
N u-l O en so P- OO
N OO O CM •>* CO vO
co m \o u-t r«-
—» o —*
CM CM -* -*
O O
«n trv o O o <_
CMCMintnmtrtCMCMCMCMCM
V A|V A|V AlV A (V A|
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
V A|V A|V A |V A|v A|V A|V A|v V A|
O O O O O O O
"
CM CM CM CM CM CM CM
V A|V A|A|V A|
CM CM
A |A (
I
i
£
I
00
c
§5
r- S o
CM t£ Z
»4 H-l M
I 3 H
•o
B
«
>,
U
o
01
01
>. tn CM
u -l
O M rt
ir
u
00 S
a Q
!•*
CO
eg
X
Is
01 H B
3 O
CO
U
a *«
r-4
-------
M
O *J
C
O >-^
Z 0,
o .»
o
o
OO
CM" — <
in z S
o o
o o
CM *0
~ f ^
c*> r~ Z
~H _f
•tf ^1
^g
o o o o o o
o o o o
r* CM -fl" o
r~ in CM
O O O O O O
o o o o o o
-H •* •* r~ -a- vo
o
^
o o r~ o ^ en
CO CM
o
00
en
c*
00
m
O
O
I 00
* * —I * *
g
O n
Pi
t!
U
§
:•*«
- z z
O O
O O
o o
<= o
O O O O O
O O O O O
*» *O -3- O VO
O O
~~> O
I O
s:
00 <*> ^ OO «H
fn eo ^H os CM
vO
O O O O
O O O O
00 vO OO O
O CM —( —«
O CM -I
oo — •" S
V u o> u
*J B) >s 0)
n X n V
X CO kl
BO U 4J
u C I
u e o o
c oi B u
o> g «j
I S « j-
C « w o
-w C
« o o ^
3 (U D 3
A to a> i-4
« 3 3 4>
U Q O Z
Id M
r^ u O
CM a: z
7 S H
M O* W
M Cd
J3 C
XI O
3 — I
U 4J
U U
CO OJ
p-l
00 rH
e o
•H CJ
•D
C u
•H 9)
^ 3
o a
f
u
c
aj
3
Cf
CO
c
• H
4-1
0}
u a
z u
t-»
CM
co e c c c
o o o o
A) U U CJ U
U
a
C
14
3
tx
00
B
• r4
4J CO
f^( iJ
a) <
S f-
o
•o -o t) -o
a) a; o) o;
c c e c
o o o o
••4 *^ •** *p4
U 4J U U
14 It U 14
O O 0 O
a* o. ex o.
a. a. a. a
^-> ^-s X-* — *
^^ CM <*1 -3"
to 11 <
a> CD o
ex^ ey
o a. u
u, o. a
a]
.com
H z o
^
* z z"
790
-------
—* O O CN CM \O
C*l ON ~H
-H
«n, -a- CM o o o o
r*» CM sO OOO
00 O iA 00 -tf in
-^ •* m sO ON ON
OOOOOOOO^OOCM^-
CM u"v c^* vO d r-«
(*•» O r*. ao ^D ^^
in CN ^j- r*s o> r*
_< -H •& -* SO SO
m m r*+ ~>< o i**
ao
•H
-a- 'eo
ia
z
o "^ so •"•* oo r~<
O *J
a
• a
O -H
Z CM
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 I I I
z
8
z
o
HI
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
*****************
*************
— ' -* -* O o
-*
oo
vovecMesoooaootooo-^oo
IA »o ao IA PI r^ -3- es o oo
S
S
O H
M t/1
H — 01
•o
e c
o a
•- o
o o
o o
Cu 3 O
O. Q E
O
U
C
o e
•* o
4J M
U M
01
— 0)
O •-
U •"
a.
O
ai
a.
O
i-t 00 t-t ~*
791
-------
J
H
0
Z
O
M
£
j
j
£
S
s
g
M
g
§
M
H
§
O
X
M fid
3S
*i
0 M
t-l
S&g
rt M H-l
1 J H
MO)
M 19 <
M Z U
> <
CO CM
U O J
_> M « U
£ J H 0
< q w <
H a I a.
V4
a
a>
>1
^*
a
e
o
u
*~*
V)
W
CO
•o
0)
o
o
H
o.
p
sV
>,
^
«0
e
o
JJ
»w/
H
£
•a
V
00
O
a
2
OH
^^
U
a
01
09
B
o
<—
£4
00
•O
01
to
§
o
a.
4J
e
a>
i
0)
CO
0)
•o
o
X
UJ tt
O "
B
• a)
O t-i
z a.
AJ
e
B
gj
0)
CO
•V3
T3
£
IM CO
° B
• OB
Z Ou
B
0
01
CO
"v
1
**
OC7NincnOOO>^
-H CM
till 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1
0 * 0 0 * 0 <= * „ ^ 0 m 0 «= 0 C- CO
O~H*0C4 -* -^ *^ Ot-HCMCMCS
CN »A -^
-H -H CN CSJ
^^ ^^^^, ^^.^.^ ^^^
o o o o o o o-o ooooooooooooo
tNCMCNCS eNes|CMCNC*4eN(SCNfMCN4Wn(SCS
s— V AlV A| V A|V A|V A|V A|v A|V AlV AlV V A|
3
e
B
o
U
01
.0
3
U
— CO
•OB B
0) 0> O O
301- B h
B OB M O >-<
•rf B b
tJ U U £1-1 C 01
B 3 M U O M
O Bfc .O BO) Ui A
u a oi -« 1-1 a
-_ 00 4) 3 .H V
CM cr « >s -j
CO -H -J 0 0) rt
a u 03 MS M aj
o — r «J o u> x
ct u —
cc X co
u
u.
ON O OO O O -^ O
-^ (X *O
Ov ^ 00 m VO CO 0
5 i*^ i2 pn In S In
*H O ^ O O ft 00
I I I I I i I
I 1 I I I I I
GO ^ CS IA so CN O
irt CM r*« oo rx (*i IA
CT^ ^^ *o *o c»^ e*i CN
00 -» •» -» CM
^H »4
sT» •* 00 tA so CO O
-* m ^^ m m cs fs.
*^ CM 0->
o o o o o o o
in in m u-i in in IA
-
O O M
B U.
0> M p 0)
rH M OJ
eo-H o> —
B •" ^ •* 01
•p4 u ca MOJ
4J 9 ^ CO 4J
« 0 U X CO
(0
u
O so O CM
00 r^
CO rv
-<
en m m t-n
sTs ^ O <^
CM -» — -»
O rsi o .»
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
O CM O SO
r-. oo
1— 00
^
> 01
OJ 01
•O tri ^
B C3 CO
0)
CO
792
-------
MO O •* MD O NO NO
m \o o en -4- oo ON
CO NO *O en CO "^ ^D
CM -3- ON O m
m CM en -H oo
CO 00 ~H ^O O
-- 0)
U i-t
0) JQ
I
*e rl CM -^ O r"i -
u"t n o co —' CTV
m r- (*•) i/t r- o -
O u
C
O
a
o
00
OJ
z
I I I I I I I
4J
e
"h7 00
CO V
V CO
^.
a) a> z
JO ^3
a oo oo
C -H .rf
O rt -J
u 00 00
f_4
J
8
z
o
M
g
g
OS
Ei
s
8
3
a
2
o
M
H
u
o
&&
en co
si
a M
00 S O
CN O-Z
— 1 M M
1 J H
M CO
giS
CO en
U O J
J 1-H < U
< o w <
t- S z a.
c -s
03 0
£
•0
(U 0)
z z
0)
CO
&
o
VJ vkl 01
OM 0 4J
5S
4
0) ^
5 0
ex ^*
w
1 1 I
c
I
bo
0>
en
a
O)
u
o
CL,
T3
C
o
00
4)
4J
Q
U
.£
3
CO
00 U
e «
00 3
a h
u u
CO
a
•H 0)
0) 00 C
e u
a •* s
O n
3 a oo
cue
Yl V ~4J
e ••* ^
Q O hi 0)
Sous
•0 ° S S °
OJ -H CM -* CM
CO
-* 0)
o ^
'oo
a) <^
hi ^ OO O
CO 00 •
0) 00 ^ OO C7\
00 Z -- -- i^ CN
•o -•
U -H 00 01 ~
Z b 3 CJ to o)
u u a z u £
S N
00
fn
°1
iri
o>
CO
u
H
en
a
M
S
H
O
H
' fr
en oo O O NO O O
O en ON O
oo O en o
in CM CM
CM —' \O O
OO «H en O
o o m
m m CM I
v A|
g>
z *••
M CO
^ "
0)
a
s u « E
Q) 4J CO 4J
4J 01 X <0
CO X CO 0)
X CO fc
00 *J *J
^< C I
*J C ft> O
C 0) g U
oj E u
B 4J « £
u to ft) u
u i o
-------
OJ
O
O
CO
Is?
Q O 5
log
£
-------
CM
.1.
UJ
(T
O
795
-------
T T
e
Ui
2
3
2
§
o
o
til
CO
a
<
CO
i
>««
is
cc
?
to
cj
^
Q
796
-------
797
-------
SECTION IX
EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
INTRODUCTION
Effluent limitations, required by the Act and based upon the
degree of effluent reduction attainable through application of
the best practicable control technology currently available
(BPT), have not been previously proposed nor promulgated by EPA
for the Metal Molding and Casting Category. As a result,
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits
have been issued on a plant by plant basis by states with
approved NPDES permit programs and by EPA through its regional
offices.
The BPT technology described in this section is reflective of the
technology installed and in use as of 1980. In fact, many plants
had BPT technologies installed several years prior to 1980.
The BPT technologies form the foundation for the development and
application of the best available technologies (BAT). As such,
the BPT technologies are an integral part of the BAT treatment
schemes. In addition, BPT provides a floor which may not be
exceeded by exceptions which may be granted under the provisions
of Sections 301(c) and (g) of the Act.
BPT technology is based upon the "average of the best" existing
performance by plants of various sizes, ages, and unit processes
within each subcategory. This average, however, is not based
upon a broad range of plants but, rather, upon performance levels
achieved by exemplary plants. In subcategories or processes
where present control and treatment practices are uniformly
inadequate, a higher level of control may be required, if the
technology to achieve the higher levels can be practicably
applied. BPT can not only include treatment facilities at the
end of the manufacturing process (end-of-pipe), but also
technologies within the process itself, if such in-plant control
technologies are considered to be typical practice within the
industry.
FACTORS CONSIDERED
When BPT was developed, the following factors were considered:
1. The manufacturing processes employed.
799
-------
2. The size and age of equipment and facilities involved.
3. The non-water quality environmental impacts (including
energy requirements).
4. The total cost of application of technology in relation to
the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from such
application.
5. The engineering aspects of the application of various types
of control techniques.
When the subcategorization of the metal molding and casting
category was developed, the manufacturing processes employed, and
the size and age of equipment and facilities involved were
considered. Section IV presents the details on those
subcategorization factors. The non-water quality environmental
impacts, including energy requirements, and the consideration of
the total cost of application of technology in relation to the
effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from the application
of BPT, are detailed in Section VIII. Specific engineering
aspects of the application of various types of control techniques
have also been considered, and these are discussed below.
APPROACH TO BPT DEVELOPMENT
BPT limitations for metal molding and casting operations were
developed by analyzing the best treatment systems existing in the
category, as well as the "best" achievable flows and treated
effluent concentrations. The rationale for the selection of the
BPT model treatment systems, model flows, and effluent
concentrations is discussed below.
The Agency developed and evaluated several BPT treatment options.
The technologies which form the bases of the proposed BPT
limitations are presented and discussed first. The analysis of
the BPT discharge options which the Agency considered before
proposing a regulation for this industry, follows.
Selection of Pollutants
An initial step in the development of BPT involved the selection
of pollutants to be considered for regulation at BPT. What
results is a two-fold review in which pollutants are considered
for regulation which are: (1) characteristic of the process, and
(2) amenable to treatment with BPT-type technologies. Reference
can be made to Table VI-6, which presents a summary of those
pollutants found to be characteristic of each process'
800
-------
wastewaters and which, therefore, were considered for specific
regulation.
The selection of technologies to be used as the basis for
developing BPT effluent limitations is to be based upon the
average of the best existing capabilities. These existing
capabilities may not be effective in controlling all pollutants
found in the various process wastewaters. This consideration
applies particularly to the toxic organic pollutants. Advanced
control and treatment technologies, which are addressed and
developed as BAT technologies in Section X, would be needed to
control discharges of these other pollutants.
The Agency's selection of pollutants for which BPT limitations
are being proposed is based upon the following considerations:
the ability of the BPT technologies to control a pollutant; the
relative level, discharge load, and impact of each pollutant; the
need to establish practical monitoring requirements; and the
ability of one pollutant to indicate the control of other
pollutants considered roe regulation.
Table IX-1 presents a summary, by process, of those pollutants
selected for regulation at the proposed BPT level in the Metal
Molding and Casting Category. However, limitations requiring no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants are actually providing
limitations on the discharge of all pollutants present.
Model Flow Rates
After BPT pollutants were selected, BPT model effluent flows were
determined. Again, the plants within each subcategory were
compared using the plant survey and sampling data. This
comparison of plants was used to determine average process flow
rates and the degree of recycle that can be achieved at each
process. This evaluation was then used to develop the BPT model
treatment applied, recycle and effluent flows.
Initially, the BPT model treatment system flow (the volume of
process wastewater through the treatment system) was determined.
These volumes were than converted to a flow rate in gallons/ton
using production normalizing parameters (i.e., tons of metal
poured and tons of sand processed) as discussed in Section IV.
The production normalized flow rates account for differences in
the actual production levels from plant to plant and place the
flow of all plants within any process segment on a similar basis
for comparison and analysis.
The "best" flow rates used in determining the BPT model treatment
system flows are based upon the production normalized flow rates
801
-------
of plants which have demonstrated conservative water use in the
metal molding and casting processes identified in Section IV. In
some instances, for the purpose of evaluation, the process
wastewater flow through the treatment system was equated to the
applied water flow through the manufacturing process. For those
processes where the process water is recycled prior to treatment
( i.e., internal recycle in dust collection scrubbers), the BPT
model treatment system flows for those processes are higher than
the actual process wastewater flows. In effect, for those
processes the size of the treatment system is overstated.
The BPT model treatment system flow rate for each process segment
was derived by determining the average of the best applied water
flow rates as identified in the plant survey and sampling data.
The "best" applied water flow rates were identified by ranking
all of the production normalized plant applied flow data from
lowest to highest and analyzing the resulting distribution.
For some process segments, a distinct partitioning of the flow
data occurred, with a clustering of plants with lower flow rates
as compared to the flow rates of the remaining surveyed plants.
For the purpose of determining BPT model treatment system flows,
the plants with the lower flow rates were considered to be the
"best" plants. However, the whole body of survey data from these
"best" plants was compared to the survey data from other plants
in the process segment to identify any fundamental differences
between these plants and the other plants. No fundamental
technological differences were identified in any of these process
segments. What did become apparent, after visits to several
plants and after numerous phone calls to other plants, was that
many plants had implemented water management policies. Many of
these plants reduced their water use to save money,, The flow
rates of the best plants were then averaged to determine the
average of the best plants for the sizing and, therefore, the
costing of the BPT treatment model.
For those subcategory process segments in which a distinct
partitioning of the flow rate data did not occur, the median of
the distribution of the flow rate data was identified and all
plants with production normalized flow rates lower than the
median value were defined as the "best" plants. The flow rates
for these plants were then averaged to determine the average of
the best plants for that process segment. This analysis was used
to size the BPT treatment models.
Treatment Technologies
The BPT level of treatment represents the average of the best
performance achieved by existing treatment systems at plants of
802
-------
various sizes, ages, processes, or other common characteristics.
For a proper determination of the best performance, only plants
of similar characteristics are compared. The subcategorization
factors enumerated in Section IV assure that plants grouped into
a subcategory or subcategory process segment are sufficiently
similar in various characteristics ( i.e., type of metal cast,
process employed, etc.), that a reasonable comparison of plants
and their treatment performances can be made.
Plant performances were evaluated in light of the treatment
technologies installed, process wastewater flow, and effluent
levels achieved by the technologies. The evaluation was based
upon levels achieved by the technologies. process wastewater
sampling data, and the other sources of information identified in
Sections III, V, and VII. The plants which have demonstrated
exemplary performance through reduced effluent flow and superior
pollutant removal practices provide support for the BPT levels of
treatment. Many of these plants were sampled because of their
exemplary performance.
The development of BPT involved a review of the wide variety of
technologies available for the removal of pollutants
characteristic of foundry process wastewaters. First, each
technology was evaluated in terms of the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through its application to plants within a
subcategory and process segment. The analytical data developed
from the sampling program, and analytical data from other
categories with process wastewaters similar in characteristics to
foundry process wastewaters, were used to determine the effluent
levels which can be achieved with the various technologies. By
comparing the capabilities of various technologies, plants which
demonstrated exemplary performance with existing technologies
were identified. These plants formed the basis for determining
an appropriate BPT level of treatment. In most cases, BPT
treatment is identical to the technologies installed at these
selected plants in each process segment. In some instances, BPT
technology was transferred from another process segment,
subcategory, or category. Such technology transfers are detailed
where appropriate.
Several types of treatment were given special consideration for
use as BPT treatment models. Precipitation and sedimentation
technology is in use at many foundry operations in all process
segments, and was one of the systems considered for BPT. Another
system evaluated for BPT was filtration. Filtration is not
widely demonstrated in the industry but was considered by the
Agency as an alternate means to reduce conventional and toxic
metal pollutants at BPT at a reasonable cost. And finally, the
Agency evaluated high rate, and complete recycle following
803
-------
sedimentation as potential treatment models for BPT. Recycle
technology is widely demonstrated in the industry and can be
installed at relatively low cost. The effluent quantities
achieved using these technologies are discussed below.
Precipitation - Sedimentation Technology
The effluent qualitites attainable with precipitation and
sedimentation treatment components were established on the basis
of a transfer of data from several industrial categories. The
Agency has determined that the transfer of data from the coil
coating, porcelain enameling, battery manufacturing, copper
forming, and aluminum forming categories is appropriate on the
basis of similarities in wastewater characteristics. These
similarities are related to the treatment behavior of dissolved
and particulate toxic metals, to the sedimentation and
filterability characteristics of the suspended particulate
matter, and to the treatment behavior of surface oils and
greases.
In the reference categories, precipitation involved the addition
of lime or caustic, and, in many instances, a coagulant aid.
Sedimentation occurred in a settling tank, lagoon or clarifier.
After determining the mean effluent concentration for each
pollutant, variability factors were applied to determine the 10
and 30-day averages, and one day maximum values to be used in
developing effluent limitations. Refer to Section VII for a
discussion of the development of these data. mean values.
Following is a summary of the pertinent treatment performance
data for precipitation and sedimentation operations:
One Day Ten Day Thirty Day
Pollutant Mean (mg/1) Max, (mq/1) Avq. (mq/1) Avg. (mq/1)
114 Antimony 0.05 0.21 0.09 0.08
115 Arsenic 0.51 2.09 0.86 0.83
118 Cadmium 0.079 0.32 0.15 0.13
119 Chromium 0.080 0.42 0.17 0.12
120 Copper 0.58 1.90 1.00 0.73
122 Lead 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12
124 Nickel 0.57 1.41 1.00 0.75
128 Zinc 0.30 1.33 0.56 0.41
Iron 0.41 1.23 0.63 0.51
TSS 12.0 41.0 20.0 15.5
Oil and Grease - 20.0 12.0 10.0
Filtration Technology
804
-------
Following the evaluation of precipitation and sedimentation
treatment capabilities, long-term effluent analytical data from
two plants with multi-category metal processing and finishing
operations and one nonferrous metals plant were reviewed to
determine the performance capabilities of filtration (following
precipitation and sedimentation) treatment systems. As with the
precipitation and sedimentation data, variability factors were
developed to determine the 10 and 30-day averages and one day
maximum values to be used in developing effluent limitations. A
summary of the effluent values noted for filtration systems
follows.
Pollutant
Mean (mg/1)
One Day
Max. (mg/1)
Ten Day
Avg. (mg/1)
Thirty Day
Avq. (mg/1)
0.034
0.34
0.049
0.07
0.39
0.08
0.22
0.23
0.28
2.6
—
0. 14
1 .39
0.20
0.37
1 .28
0.10
0.55
1 .02
1 .23
15.0
10.0
0.06
0.57
0.08
0.15
0.61
0.09
0.37
0.42
0.63
12.0
10.0
0.06
0.55
0.08
0. 10
0.49
0.08
0.29
0.31
0.51
10.0
10.0
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Iron
TSS
Oil and Grease -
Recycle Technology
Recycle of process wastewaters is the predominant treatment
component used in the foundry industry due to the effectiveness
of this technology at reducing effluent flows and loads at low
installation and operating costs. Of the 432 total wet
operations responding to the basic questionnaires, 66% have
installed some degree of recycle, with many of these being
high-rate or complete recycle systems. Table IX-2 presents a
summary of the use of recycle in the foundry industry.
As noted in Table IX-2, plants in all of the subcategories have
eliminated their discharges to navigable notes by completely
recycling all process wastewater. A list of the plants which
reported achieving 100% recycle is presented in Table IX-3. The
data presented in Table IX-3 demonstrate that complete recycle
achieved at all types of foundry processes including both large
and small producers, and continuous and intermittant operations.
The survey information provided by the plants achieving complete
recycle was examined and compared with the information from
plants not achieving as high a level of performance to determine
305
-------
if any fundamental technical differences existed that would
prevent other plants from achieving no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants. Many plants which have not implemented
complete recycle are similar with respect to the type of metal
cast, manufacturing process employed, air pollution control
devices used, products, and other aspects, to those plants which
have implemented complete recycle. In attempting to identify
factors which would prevent a plant from achieving no discharge
of process wastewater pollutants, the engineering aspects of the
application of various types of control and treatment
technologies, particularly recycle, were examined.
By far, the largest volume of foundry process wastewater is
generated by air pollution control equipment, i.e., scrubbers.
The recycled scrubber process wastewaters do not come into
intimate contact with the casting, therefore, the quality of the
casting surface cannot be affected by the process wastewater. In
those processes where the casting comes into intimate contact
with the process wastewater, casting quench for example, the
duration of contact with process wastewaters and the effects of
water contaminants on the surface of the castings are minimal.
Many plants repeatedly quench castings in the same quench
solutions.
When complete recycle systems were evaluated, the effects of
total dissolved solids in the recycle system on the manufacturing
processes and air pollution control equipment were considered.
The concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS) increases and
decreases repeatedly depending upon various conditions within the
recycle system. The concentration of TDS increases through; the
addition of dissolved solids in the makeup water, the addition of
chemicals to the system, and changes in pollutant solubilities
brought on by changes in pH and temperature of the process
wastewater. The concentration of TDS decreases when the
dissolved solids precipitate out of solution, form suspended
solids, or when sludge is removed from the treatment system. The
water removed with the sludge also carries dissolved solids away
from the recycle system.
The precipitates formed when the solubility limits of the
dissolved solids are exceeded, settle out and add to the volume
of sludge. While some of the precipitates may form scale within
pipes and inhibit flow, this scale is continuously eroded by the
larger particulate matter characteristicly found in foundry
process wastewaters. This particulate matter may take the form
of metallic oxides from melting furnaces, granular slag from slag
quenching, sand grains from dust collection and sand washing
processes, or other large abrasive matter such as metal chips
from the process.
806
-------
During plant visits and phone calls to many plants with high
recycle rates, inquiries were made to identify operating and
maintenance problems and the solutions implemented to overcome
the problems encountered. Information from plants operating
under conditions of high TDS or other conditions conducive to
fouling and scaling of pipes, pumps, air pollution control
equipment, etc. indicates that fouling and scaling conditions
are manageable plant operating problems which are within the
scope of routine maintenance activity. Procedures which would
facilitate the use of recycle are: conducting periodic
maintenance; maintaining a proper water balance within the
recycle system; and properly operating a well designed treatment
system (i.e., controlling pH within recommended limits, adding
biocides as needed, adding scale inhibitors as needed, etc.).
The analytical water chemistry test data indicate that many
plants operating with complete or high-rate recycle should be
experiencing severe fouling or scaling conditions. This
determination was made by calculating Langelier Saturation and
Ryzner's Stability Indices for these recycle systems. These
calculations are summarized in the table presented below. These
indices provide a means of characterizing the tendency of
wastewater streams to form scale deposits or to be corrosive.
These plants continue to operate, and have operated for many
years, with the complete recycle of process wastewater.
807
-------
Langelier Saturation and Ryzner's Stability Index Data
Plant
57775
56879
00001
00002
07170
07929
56771
15520
59212
Subcateqory
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Ferrous
Process
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Dust
Collection
Dust
Collection
Melting
Furnace
Scrubber
Melting
Furnace
Wet Cap
Recycle
Rate
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
96%
99%
99%
Langelier
Saturation
Index
Result
Strong
scaling
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
Strong
scaling
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
At or near
equilibrium
Strong
corrosion
tendency
At or near
equilibrium
Strong
scaling
tendency
Ryzner "s
Stability
Index
Result
Strong
scaling
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
Strong
scaling
tendency
Strong
corrosion
tendency
At or near
equilibrium
Strong
corrosion
tendency
At or near
equilibrium
Strong
scaling
tendency
808
-------
The transition to a complete recycle mode at foundry operations
can often cause several temporary operational problems. The
elimination of the blowdown often affects the volume of water
recirculated within the recycle system. Water usage becomes
unbalanced and steps must be taken to readjust the various flows
within the system. This is accomplished by changing valve
settings, float or level sensitive switches, and pumping
sequences. Many of these adjustments can be anticipated and
steps can be taken before closing the loop to reduce upsets in
the water balance. In some instances, a balance tank is
installed to collect water which surges in the system as pumps
are started or stopped. This water is later returned to the
recycle system.
One of the more noticeable problems encountered after the
transition to the complete recycle mode of operation is the
accumulation of excessive sludge or mud in the settling tanks.
As previously indicated, the purpose of the settling tanks,
clarifiers, or any other sedimentation units is to allow for the
removal of solids within the system. Solids removal may be
accomplished by suspended solids sedimentation or the
precipitation and sedimentation of dissolved solids. After
closing the loop, however, some plants experienced greater than
normal sludge generation rates or an above normal amount of
solids remaining in suspension within the process wastewater.
These conditions were overcome by adjusting the pH and water
balance levels, and by adding settling aids such as polymers.
After transition to complete recycle, more careful attention to
these operating conditions was usually necessary. However, this
did not require a prohibitive amount of additional labor. In
fact, any problems occurring as a result of tightening recycle
loops were successfully solved by the plants involved through the
use of sound water management practices.
After considering various engineering aspects and determining
what plants have accomplished in resolving potential problems, no
technical reasons could be identified which would prohibit plants
in most process segments from recycling all of their process
wastewater. Therefore, with no fundamental differences
identified, plants with complete recycle were naturally
considered the best performers, and the average of the best
performance of these plants resulted in the conclusion that no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants was an appropriate BPT
level of treatment for some processes.
For those subcategories and process segments where complete
recycle has not been demonstrated and could not be transferred,
the exemplary effluent flows and exemplary pollutant effluent
concentrations were examined to determine the "best" effluent
809
-------
loads. The high level of performance of the "best" plants is
generally achieved through preliminary treatment followed by
extensive recycle of process wastewaters. Extensive recycle of
process wastewater results in significant effluent flow
reductions. Therefore, a review of the degree of recycle
achieved by plants helped to quantify the "best" effluent flows.
In addition, since the effluent load is a product of flow times
the pollutant concentration (with appropriate conversion
factors), the "best" achievable pollutant effluent levels were
developed. Refer to the above discussions pertaining to effluent
quality.
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED BPT
Aluminum Casting
Plants within the Aluminum Casting Subcategory employ a variety
of manufacturing processes. Comparisons among these processes
identify enough dissimilarities with water usage, and the types
of pollutants generated, to warrant grouping the plants into five
process segments. These segments are:
Investment Casting Die Casting
Melting Furnace Scrubbers Die Lubricants
Casting Quench
No plant was found to employ all of these manufacturing
processes. At most, no more than three of these processes are
likely to exist at any plant. For some plants, only investment
casting is performed. With other plants, only casting quenching
is performed. Due to differences in the processes, water usage
and resulting pollutants, and the various process combinations
which exist within a plant, it would be impractical to develop
BPT with the intent of proposing limitations for combined waste
streams from all possible process combinations. Therefore, in
developing the BPT level of treatment, the plant data was arrayed
by process segment, so that appropriate technical comparisons
among similar processes could be made. From these comparisons,
the average of the best performances of plants was determined for
each process segment.
This approach to BPT development does not prohibit a plant with
several of these processes from cotreating the combined process
wastewaters. In fact, this approach provides the permit writer
with the appropriate building blocks to determine the discharge
requirements for a plant cotreating any combination of process
wastewaters covered under the Aluminum Casting Subcategory.
810
-------
Investment Casting Process
Only one plant was identified with any degree of treatment
installed. The treatment provided by the other two plants
performing this method of aluminum casting is uniformly
inadequate in light of the pollutants originating from this
process. Therefore the BPT treatment level is based on; (1) the
performance of plant 04704 which achieves the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of those
technologies considered in BPT, and (2) the design effluent
levels of well operated commercially available clarifiers,
together with coagulant aid addition, in the treatment of other
process wastewaters similar in character to investment casting
process wastewaters.
Comparison of the plant data indicates that plants 06389 and
04704 have the best effluent flows of the three plants in the
survey data base. In addition, plant 04704 has the largest
yearly production but uses the least amount of water. Plant 5206
was not considered an exemplary plant due to the large volume of
process wastewater generated and the minimal treatment provided.
The average effluent flow is therefore based upon the average of
the effluent flows of plants 06389 and 04704 (i.e., no recycle).
Sampling data from plant 04704 indicates the presence of the two
toxic organic pollutants, tetrachloroethylene and
trichloroethylene, in addition to copper and zinc in the raw and
treated process wastewaters. The approach taken in the
development of the BPT model treatment system for this process
segment does not provide for the removal of these toxic organic
pollutants, though incidental removal may occur. The control of
the toxic organic pollutants remaining in the BPT effluent will
be addressed in the BAT discussions, as the intent of BAT is to
provide for the control and treatment of the various toxic
pollutants.
1. Model Treatment System
Process wastewaters drain to a treatment facility in which the
wastewaters are treated in a clarifier. A coagulant aid is added
to the process wastewaters prior to clarification in order to
enhance floe formation and, in turn, suspended solids removal.
The clarifier overflow is discharged, while the underflow is
dewatered using a vacuum filter. The filter cake is disposed of
via landfilling, while the filtrate is returned to the mix tank.
Figure IX-1 depicts the BPT model treatment system.
811
-------
2. Resulting BPT Effluent Limitations
PROPOSED BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Aluminum-Investment Casting Operations
Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant or Any One Day Monthly Average
Pollutant Property (kq/kkq) (kq/kkq)
TSS 1.103 0.538
Oil and Grease 0.538 0.323
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
The treatment model effluent flow rate of 26,897 1/kkg (6450
gal/ton) is deemed to be practical, as it is the average of the
best plants. Plant 04704 achieves this effluent flow. Process
wastewater recycle is not reported in the plant survey responses
in this process segment.
Concentrations
The concentration levels use to derive the limitations listed
above are shown below;
Concentration (mq/1)
Monthly Avq. One Day Max.
TSS 20.0 41.0
Oil and Grease 12.0 20.0
pH 7.5-10
One plant in the plant survey data base has any degree of
treatment in place; this plant uses precipitation and
sedimentation. However, the treatment provided at this plant by
these technologies was judged by the Agency as inadequate.
Therefore, these concentrations, with the exception of pH, are
based upon the precipitation-sedimentation and oil skimmming
performance data presented earlier in this section. The Agency
has determined that these concentrations can be achieved using
well-designed, properly operated clarification systems.
Additionally, pH is limited to between 7.5 to 10 since this
812
-------
effluent level reflects the operating conditions observed and
expected in this particular process. Plant 04704 maintains an
effluent pH within this range, and on this basis and on the basis
of knowledge of the operating pH conditions of this process, this
range is considered practicable and resonable. No toxic metals
are limited since they were detected at below a treatable levels.
No toxic organic pollutants were selected for regulation in this
process segment.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum investment casting process segment, the Agency estimates
that 0.1 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, no toxic organic
pollutants, 857.4 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and no
nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to Table Vl-6 for
the individual pollutants.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
Scrubbers are used in aluminum melting furnaces to reduce the
levels of smoke and fumes given off during the melting process.
Data from the five surveyed plants indicate that the scrubbers at
three of these plants have internal recycle systems (internal
holding tanks). All three of these plants have achieved rates of
95 percent recycle or greater. The other two plants have central
treatment systems from which process wastewaters are recycled or
reused.
In addition to recycle and basic sedimentation, additional
treatment is required at BPT to remove the pollutants present in
scrubber effluents. Due to the variability in the quality of
scrap charged to the furnaces, fumes can contain significant
quantities of oily particles, solids and toxic metals, which are
then transferred to the scrubber waters. For this reason, the
BPT treatment model must provide the capability for effective oil
and grease and metals removal. Facilities for oil skimming (a
component demonstrated in this and other processes and
subcategories), and for lime and coagulant aid addition
(demonstrated in a variety of treatment applications in this and
other subcategories and categories), are included in the
treatment model to insure proper pH adjustment, oil, solids, and
metals removal.
The sampling data from plants 17089 and 18139 indicate the
presence of 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene,
ammonia, phenols and zinc in the raw and treated process
wastewaters. However, as the BPT model treatment system
components are not specifically designed for ammonia and organic
813
-------
pollutant removal, the control of these pollutants will be
addressed under BAT.
1. Treatment Scheme
The BPT model treatment system incorporates batch treatment of
the blowdown of a recycle loop with a 95 percent recycle rate.
This recycle loop includes a settling tank. The process
wastewater overflows from the recycle loop, undergoes emulsion
breaking, neutralization with lime, and clarification treatment.
The skimmed oil and grease is collected for contractor disposal.
The sludge is dewatered using a vacuum filter, with the filter
cake being disposed of at a landfill. prior to discharge.
Figure IX-2 presents a flow schematic of the BPT model treatment
system.
814
-------
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
PROPOSED BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Aluminum-Melting Furnace Scrubbers
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kg/kkq
Maximum for
Monthly average
(kq/kkq)
TSS
Oil and Grease
PH
0.0166
0.00809
Within the range of
0.00809
0.00486
7.5 to 10
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
The BPT model flow was established by averaging the applied flows
of the "best" plants, the three with the lowest flows, and then
applying a 95 percent recycle rate from the primary settling
tank. The settling tank provides more extensive settling (3 to 9
times increased retention time) than that typically provided in
settling tanks integrated into the scrubber equipment packages,
and more than that found at 3 of the 5 plants in this segment's
data base that have 95% recycle or greater.
The average applied flow for the three "best" plants is 8,062
1/kkg (1936 gal/ton). Applying a 95 percent recycle to this
value yields an effluent flow of 404 1/kkg (97 gal/ton). The
Agency believes that this effluent flow is reasonable,
practicable, and achievable.
Concentrations
The concentration levels used to derive the above limitations are
shown below:
Concentration (mq/1)
One Day Max. Monthly Avg.
TSS
Oil and Grease
pH
41 .0
20.0
7.5 - 10
20.0
12.0
815
-------
These concentrations, with the exception of pH, are based upon
the precipitation-sedimentation and oil skimming performance data
presented earlier in this section. The Agency has determined
that these concentrations can be achieved using well-designed,
properly operated clarification systems. The pH is limited to
between 7.5 to 10 since this effluent level reflects operating
conditions necessary for proper waste neutralization,
flocculation, and effective clarification. No toxic metal
pollutants are limited since they were detected at below
treatable levels. No toxic organic pollutants were selected for
regulation in this process segment.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum melting furnace scrubber process segment, the Agency
estimates that 101.3 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, no toxic
organic pollutants, 15,870 ky/year of conventional pollutants,
and 91.4 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed.
Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Casting Quench Process
Most plants provide little or no treatment for aluminum casting
quench process wastewaters. The pollutants and the associated
concentration levels found in these quench solutions at plants
10308, 17089, and 18139 require some form of control. Therefore,
treatment information from outside of the Aluminum Casting
Subcategory was examined to determine an appropriate transfer of
treatment technology. The zinc casting quench data provided
sufficient technical justification to apply the zinc casting
quench BPT treatment technology to the treatment of aluminum
casting quench process wastewaters. Both aluminum and zinc
casting quenches contain oils and metal particulates that result
from the die casting process and are contained in the wastewaters
from the process. Because of these similaries, the zinc casting
quench BPT technology, specifically designed to control oils and
greases and toxic metal pollutants, and to facilitate the
complete recycle of the quench water, is an appropriate
technology for transfer to this process segment.
After consideration of the engineering aspects of transferring
this technology, there is no indication that the performance of
this technology in the treatment of aluminum casting quench
wastewaters would be significantly inferior to the performance
achieved in the treatment of zinc casting quenches.
The use of complete recycle is based upon the two aluminum
casting plants, plants 04809 and 26767 which have achieved a
"zero discharge" level of operation. No fundamental differences
816
-------
have been identified which would preclude the use of complete
recycle in all plants.
1. Treatment Scheme
This is a complete recycle system. Treatment involves primary
sedimentation in a settling tank and oil removal using a skimmer.
Settled solids can be removed periodically by either manual or
mechanical methods. The solids may either be delivered to an
approved landfill, or reused in aluminum melting furnaces.
Figure IX-3 illustrates the BPT model treatment system.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
Plant survey responses from 12 plants with aluminum casting
quench operations are summarized in Section III. The recycle
rate was established on the basis of the average of the best
plants. The best plants employ complete recycle of process
wastewaters. Plants 04809 and 26767 continuously reuse their
aluminum casting quench solutions. Reference can also be made to
the transfer of technology from zinc casting quench operations.
The BPT treatment model applied flow was established by averaging
the six lowest applied flow rates.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum casting quench process segment, the Agency estimates
that 7.6 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants 1.3 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 881.2 kg/year of conventional pollutants and
2.2 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to
Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Die Casting Process
Significant amounts of oils and greases and toxic organic
pollutants were found in raw process wastewaters during sampling
at plants 17089, 12040 and 20147. -Exemplary treatment technology
at a minimum would be that which provides some form of oil and
grease removal. Therefore, the BPT treatment focuses on the
removal of the oils and greases through emulsion breaking and
skimming. Five out of the ten surveyed plants use this
technology. The additional technologies, settling and
filtration, comprising the BPT model treatment system are modeled
after the technology installed at plant 17089 and the settling
817
-------
and filtration technology discussed in Section VII. However,
even after filtration, several toxic organic pollutants would
remain in the effluent of the BPT model treatment system and must
therefore be addressed at BAT.
Three plants have demonstrated exemplary effluent flow reduction
through the use of extensive recycle of treated process
wastewaters. Plant 17089 achieves a 79 percent recycle rate
after extensive treatment, plant 14401 achieves a recycle rate of
90 percent after minimal treatment, and plant 20223 achieves a
recycle rate of 95%. An average of these recycle rates results
in an achievable recycle rate of at least 85 percent
(demonstrated by plants 14401 and 20223). Through application of
the treatment technologies installed at plants 11665, 12040,
13562, 15265, 17089, and 20223, and implementation of the 85
percent recycle rate, a high degree of effluent reduction and
toxic pollutant control (the Agency estimates a 77% reduction
from current treatment levels) is achieved.
1. Treatment Scheme
The BPT model system treats process wastewaters from various
sources which have been combined during collection. These
sources include: die surface cooling sprays, hydraulic fluid
leakage, splash over from casting quench tanks, and leakage from
non contact cooling water systems (hydraulic fluid heat
exchangers). The treatment involves several component process
wastewater treatment stages. In the first stage, oils and
greases are removed via emulsion breaking with the oil skim being
hauled away by a contractor. In the next stage the process
wastewater undergoes neutralization and clarification. Lime is
added for pH control and a coagulant is added to promote floe
formulation. The clarifier underflow is dewatered by a vacuum
filter and the filter cake is disposed of at a landfill. The
final stage of treatment involves the filtration of the clarifier
discharge. Eighty-five percent of the filtrate process
wastewater is recycled back to the process, while 15 percent is
discharged. Figure IX-4 presents a flow schematic of the BPT
treatment model.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
818
-------
PROPOSED BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Aluminum-Die Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly average
, kq/kkq)
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
TSS
Oil and Grease
PH
0.0000726
0.000740
0.000322
0.0109
0.00726
Within the range of
0.0000653
0.000305
0.000161
0.00799
0.00726
7.5 to 10
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
The BPT model applied flow rate was established by averaging the
applied flow rates of six of the eight plants in the survey data.
These flows were markedly less than the other applied flows which
were reported. The model recycle rate of 85 percent is based
upon the average of the two highest recycle rates (79 percent and
90 percent) noted in the plant survey data.
The model recycle rate (85%) and effluent flow (726 1/kkg, 174
gal/ton) are considered to be reasonable, practicable and
achievable.
Concentrations
The concentration levels used to derive
above are shown below:
the limitations listed
Concentration (mg/1)
One Day Max.
TSS
Oil and
Lead
Zinc
Phenols
pH
Grease
15
10
0
1 .
0,
7,
0
0
10
02
444
5-10
Monthly Avg.
11 .0
10.0
0.09
0.42
0.222
These concentrations, with the exception of pH and phenols, are
based upon the oil skimming, precipitation, sedimentation, and
819
-------
filtration performance data presented. The Agency has determined
that these concentrations can be achieved using well-designed,
properly operated filtration systems. Additionally, pH is
limited to between 7.5 to 10 since this effluent level reflects
operating conditions necessary for proper waste neutralization,
flocculation, and effective clarification.
The phenols effluent level is based upon the effluent levels
observed in the sampling data from Plants 17089 and 12040. Both
of these plants provide treatment for the control of oils and
greases (and associated organic pollutants) similar to that of
the BPT treatment model. In fact, the raw waste phenols
concentration at plant 17089 is more than 80 percent greater than
the model raw waste concentration. Additional details on the
treatment performance capabilities of these plants are presented
in Section X. On the basis of this demonstrated performance,
this effluent level is considered to be reasonable, practicable,
and achievable.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum die casting process segment, the Agency estimates that
169.2 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 194.6 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 30,240 kg/year of conventional pollutants,
and no nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to Table
VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Die Lube Process
The separate collection of die lubricants, for recovery or
disposal, occurs at 4 plants. These die lubricants contain
substantial amounts of toxic organic pollutants, particularly
phenolic compounds, as shown by the sampling data from plant
20147. In addition, the data indicates that the presence of
toxic pollutants in die casting process wastewaters is, in part,
due to the lubricants dripping from the die molds into a common
wastewater collection system. Plants which collect and segregate
the die lubricants substantially reduce pollutant concentrations
in die casting process wastewaters, but are confronted with the
treatment or disposal of the die lubricants collected separately.
These die lubricants are oily in nature, therefore, BPT treatment
should at least provide for oil and grease removal. Three of the
4 plants with treatment provide equipment for oil and grease
removal, however, each plant approaches this treatment
requirement differently. One plant uses ultrafiltration and
discharges the filtrate while a contractor disposes of the
concentrate. Another plant uses biological treatment, but only 7
percent of the total flow through this central treatment system
is from casting processes. The remaining plant uses skimming,
820
-------
cyclone separation, and paper media filtration technologies to
recover and reuse the die lubricants. Therefore, comparisons
between dissimilar technologies are difficult in developing an
average of the best plants. For this process segment, the
development of the BPT model treatment system requires a
different approach.
A wide variety of treatment technologies, including those
installed at the plants in the survey data, were examined. The
technology that would fulfill the requirements of BPT had to be
demonstrated, commercially available, and practicable. In
addition, the examination of technologies included consideration
of the specific factors to be evaluated in determining the model
control measures and practices for die lube operations. These
factors were detailed in Section IV.
After review of the various available technologies, it was
concluded that the most appropriate BPT model treatment system
would be similar to one of the three demonstrated systems which
treat die lubricant discharges. The total cost of application of
the BPT technology, in relation to the effluent reduction
benefits to be achieved by such application, was also considered.
A technology that would provide an economic incentive was
considered to be advantageous. As a result of this evaluation,
the model technologies selected for the treatment of die
lubricant process wastewaters are identical to the recovery
technologies demonstrated at plant 20147. Application of this
model treatment system not only eliminates the discharge of toxic
organic pollutants, but, based upon the cost data from plant
20147, considerably reduces the amount of new die lubricant
purchased.
1. Treatment Scheme
This model incorporates a complete recycle system. Die lube
process wastewaters drain to a holding tank with an oil skimmer
mounted above the tank to remove surface oils and greases. The
die lube wastes are pumped from the holding tank to a cyclone
separator in which the wastes undergo inertial solids separation
on a batch basis. The cyclone concentrate is processed through a
paper filter and the filtrate is returned to the cyclone. The
paper filter media and the solids deposited on the filter media
are removed by a contractor. The cyclone separator effluent is
delivered to a storage tank from which it is recycled. Figure
IX-5 illustrates the BPT treatment model.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
821
-------
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The information contained in the plant survey responses which
indicated the use of die lube operations is summarized in Table
III-7. The BPT model flow was established by averaging the
lowest three of the four indicated applied flows. The complete
recycle system flow is based upon the practices observed at plant
20147. charge" flow are based upon the practices observed at
plant 20147. This plant was visited as part of the sampling
program. The BPT level of treatment for this process is
reasonable, practicable, and achievable on the basis of data
obtained and practices observed during the sampling program.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum die lube process segment, the agency estimates that 10.7
kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 322.3 kg/year of toxic organic
pollutants, 38,680 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and 33.9
kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to
Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Copper Casting
Plants within the Copper Casting Subcategory employ a variety of
manufacturing processes. Comparisons among these processes
identify enough dissimilarities between water usage and types of
pollutants generated to warrant further grouping of plants into
process segments. These segments are: Dust Collection Scrubbers
and Molding Cooling and Casting Quench.
In determining the BPT level of performance, the plant data was
arrayed by process segment so that appropriate technical
comparisons among similar plants could be made. From these
comparisons, the average of the best performances of plants was
determined for each process segment.
Dust Collection Scrubber Process
Four of the six surveyed plants indicate the use of complete
recycle dust collection operations. These 4 plants exhibit
superior performance and are considered the best plants.
Although three of these four systems are internal recycle
systems, (with internal settling tanks) the design of the BPT
model treatment system provides additional settling equipment
822
-------
beyond that required at those plants achieving complete internal
recycle.
1. Treatment Scheme
Process wastewater discharges from dust collection operations
drain into a settling tank equipped with a dragout mechanism for
continuous solids removal. Recycle pumps return all settled
process wastewaters to the dust collectors. Figure IX-6 presents
a flow schematic for the BPT model treatment system.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
The BPT model flow was based on an average of the best (lowest)
applied flows.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
copper dust collection process segment, the Agency estimates that
77.6 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 0.3 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 191.9 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and
5.3 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to
Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Process
Plants engaged in mold cooling and the quenching of castings
provide minimal treatment of these process wastewaters. Settling
is provided by the majority of the plants, while recycle is
employed by one plant. A review of the process requirements and
wastewater sources, quality and flow rates indicates that copper
mold cooling and casting quench operations are similar to ferrous
mold cooling and casting quench operations. In the ferrous mold
cooling and casting quench segment, complete recycle is a
demonstrated treatment technique. Moreover, the one copper plant
practicing recycle, Plant 16446, achieves a recycle rate of 99.5
percent. These comparisons led the Agency to conclude that the
BPT technology applicable to these copper casting plants is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants. There are no
significant differences between plants in these subcategories
which would prevent achievement of that level of treatment.
823
-------
The BPT model treatment system incorporates solids removal
equipment, complete recycle of treated wastewaters, and a cooling
tower to reduce the heat load on the recycle system.
1 . Treatment Scheme
Process wastewaters drain to a settling tank. The settled waters
are pumped to a cooling tower and collect in the cold well from
which 'all of the process wastewater is recycled to the mold
cooling or casting quench operations. Figure IX-7 presents a
flow schematic for the BPT model treatment system.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The model applied flow rate used for the copper mold cooling and
casting quench process segment is the average of the four plants
which furnished information on flow. Although no copper casting
plants achieved total recycle of thier applied flow, Plant 16446
practices 99+% recycle. Moreover, the total daily flow and total
daily TSS loads for copper mold cooling and casting quench
operations are mere fractions of the flows and loads for ferrous
operations which demonstrate 100% recycle of treated wastewaters.
Therefore, a transfer of technology from the ferrous to the
copper mold cooling and casting quench segment is practicable.
On this basis, limitations based upon no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters are appropriate at BPT.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
copper mold cooling and casting quench process segment, the
Agency estimates that 115.0 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants no
toxic organic pollutants 1659 ky/year of conventional pollutants,
and no nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to Tablel
VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Ferrous Casting
Plants within the Ferrous Casting Subcategory employ a variety of
manufacturing processes. Comparisons among these processes
exhibit enough dissimilarities with water usage and types of
pollutants generated to warrant the grouping of ferrous casting
plants into five process segments.
Dust Collection Scrubbers Mold Cooling and Casting Quench
Melting Furnace Scrubbers Sand Washing
Slag Quenching
824
-------
No plant was found to employ all of these manufacturing
processes, but a few of the larger plants employ as many as four
of these processes. Combinations of two or three processes occur
most commonly. Due to the differences in the processes, water
usage, and resulting pollutants and the multitude of process
combinations which may exist, it would be impractical to develop
BPT for the treatment of combined waste streams from various
processes. Therefore, in developing BPT, the plant data was
arrayed by process segment so that appropriate technical
comparisons could be made. From these comparisons, the average
of the best performances of plants was determined for each
process segment.
This approach to BPT development does not prohibit a plant with
several of these processes from cotreating the combined
wastewaters. In fact, many plants treat combined wastewaters and
extensively recycle the treated effluent back to the processes.
As the plant summary data tables in Section III show, many plants
have implemented the complete recycle of process wastewater. For
all process segments, the average of the best performances of
plants leads to the conclusion that complete recycle of process
wastewater pollutants is demonstrated, practicable, and widely
employed.
Dust Collection Scrubber Process
Comparisons of the 147 plants using dust collection scrubbers in
the survey data base indicate that 65 of these plants settle and
completely recycle process wastewater to eliminate the discharge
of process wastewater pollutants. Plants which have eliminated
the discharge of process wastewater pollutants are similar, with
regard to products, manufacturing processes, and air pollution
control sources and equipment, to plants which have a discharge.
No fundamental differences between "zero discharge" and
discharging plants have been identified. The BPT model treatment
system incorporates an external sedimentation and recycle system,
although many plants use internal complete recycle systems with
limited settling capacity. The BPT model treatment system
incorporates additional solids removal capability beyond that
required by many plants which presently practice complete
recycle.
1. Treatment Scheme
Dust collector process wastewater discharges drain to a dragout
tank in which the solids are allowed to settle out and are
continuously removed for disposal or reuse. Recycle pumps return
all process wastewaters from the dragout tanks to the dust
825
-------
collectors. This is a complete recycle system. Figure IX-8
depicts this process BPT treatment model.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT applied model flow rate was established by averaging the
best (the lowest) of the applied flows as indicated in the
Summary Table 111-10. The best plants, with complete recycle
systems, are identified in Table 111-10.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
ferrous dust collection process segment, the Agency estimates
that 34,010 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 12,470 kg/year of
toxic organic pollutants, 1,251, 400 kg/year of conventional
pollutants, and 291,850 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are
removed. Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
The use of a complete recycle system as BPT was established on
the basis of 1) a majority (10 of 16) of the plants sampled, 2) a
majority (42 of 82) of the plant survey respondents, 3)
confirming communications with state and regional environmental
authorities, and 4) a phone survey of plants with treatment
systems designed by engineering firms which, upon request, will
design complete recycle treatment systems. Twenty-four of 32
plants contacted by phone operated melting furnace scrubbers with
complete recycle of process wastewaters.
Those sampled plants with complete recycle systems are
fundamentally the same, with respect to products, manufacturing
processes and air pollution control sources and equipment, as
those foundries which do not completely recycle process
wastewaters. No information was found to indicate that size,
age, or the engineering aspects of application of control
techniques would prevent the achievement of complete recycle by
plants which have not already done so.
1. Treatment Scheme
The melting furnace scrubber process wastewaters drain to a
treatment system which employs pH adjustment with sodium
hydroxide as the first step in treatment. The process
826
-------
wastewaters then overflow from the mix tank to a clarifier in
which coagulant aid is added to enhance the removal of suspended
particulate matter. The clarifier underflow is dewatered by
using a vacuum filter, with the resulting filter cake being
disposed of at an approved landfill. The clarifier overflow is
completely recycled to the melting furnace scrubbers. This is a
complete recycle system. Figures IX-9 and IX-10 depict the model
treatment systems.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT model applied flow rate was established by averaging the
"best" (lowest) flows as indicated in the Summary Table I11-11
Plants with complete recycle systems are identified on Table
III-l1.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
ferrous melting furnaces scrubber process segment, the Agency
estimates that 177,330 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 19,370
kg/year of toxic organic pollutants, 1,467,100 kg/year of
conventional pollutants, and 905, 870 kg/year of nonconventional
pollutants are removed. Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual
pollutants.
Slag Quench Process
Comparisons of the 62 survey respondents using the slag quenching
process indicate that 16 of these plants completely recycle their
slag quenching process wastewaters. In addition 3 of the 6
plants sampled completely recycle their process wastewaters. The
BPT model treatment system technologies are identical to those in
use at plants which have eliminated their process wastewater
discharges. The water required to quench slag and sluice it to a
drag tank for solids removal need not be of high quality.
Therefore, the complete recycle of this process wastewater is
practical, is currently practiced by many plants, and can be
implemented by other plants which have not yet done so. Based
upon observations made at the sampled plants and a review of the
survey data, no fundamental differences were ascertained between
plants which recycle all of their slag quench process wastewaters
and those which do not.
1. Treatment Scheme
827
-------
Slag quench process wastewaters drain to a dragout tank in which
the solids are allowed to settle and are continuously removed for
disposal. Recycle pumps return all process wastewaters to the
slag quench process. Figure IX-11 illustrates this treatment
model.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT model applied flow was established by averaging the
"best" (lowest) of the flows on the summary Tables 111-12.
Plants with complete recycle systems are identified on Table
111-12.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
ferrous slag quench process segment, the ^Agency estimates that
36,430 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants/ 415.0 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 910,780 kg/year of conventional pollutants,
and 650,230 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed.
Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Casting Quench & Mold Cooling Process
Eleven of forty-eight plants have indicated the practicality of
completely recycling mold cooling and casting quench process
wastewaters. One of the 2 sampled plants recycles all of its
process wastewaters. The comparisons of these plants leads to
the conclusion that the best performance of these plants is
demonstrated by those plants which have achieved no discharge of
process wastewater pollutants. All plants were compared with
each other to identify any fundamental differences, such as
products and manufacturing processes. No significant differences
were found.
The BPT model treatment system incorporates solids removal
equipment similar to that installed at plants which provide
treatment. A cooling tower is included as part of the BPT model
treatment system to reduce the heat load on the recycle system.
1. Treatment Scheme
Process wastewaters drain to a settling tank which is equipped
with a dragout mechanism to remove settled solids. The
828
-------
accumulated solids are removed for disposal. A process
wastewater sidestream is pumped from the settling tank to a
cooling tower and is returned to the settling tank. Recycle
pumps then return all process wastewaters to the mold cooling
and/or casting quench operations. Figure IX-12 illustrates the
BPT model treatment system.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT model treatment system applied flow was established by
averaging the "best" (lowest) applied flows indicated on the
Summary Table II1-13. Plants with complete recycle systems are
identified on Table 111-13.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
ferrous mold cooling and casting quench process segment, the
Agency estimates that no toxic metal pollutants, no toxic organic
pollutants, 228,720 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and
15,400 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer
to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Sand Washing Process
Comparisons of the ten foundries noted in the sampling and data
base as employing sand washing as a method to reclaim and reuse
sand, show that two plants have demonstrated superior performance
through the application of treatment technologies and the
complete recycle of treated process wastewaters. Further
examination of the sampling and plant survey data was performed
to determine the appropriateness of establishing a BPT level of
treatment based on the performance of these two plants.
Five of the six sampled plants recycle their sand washing process
wastewater following sedimentation. These 5 plants and nearly
all of the 9 plants in the survey data base have the basic BPT
model treatment system sedimentation components in place. Plant
51115, a sampled plant which achieves complete recycle, uses
technology that is essentially identical to the BPT model
treatment system. In addition, Plant 01381 achieves the proposed
BPT effluent limitations. Furthermore, many of the surveyed
plants which maintain a discharge provide treatment similar to
the BPT model system. These plants treat and extensively recycle
their treated process wastewaters prior to discharge.
829
-------
For some of those plants which practice extensive recycle, plant
15520 for example, no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
could be easily achieved through the elimination of the overflow
or blowdown from the recycle system. For other plants, increased
solids removal may be accomplished through the addition of
polymers or other treatment chemicals, as incorporated in the BPT
model treatment system. For some plants, more careful attention
to operation of the existing treatment system may be all that is
required when the discharge is eliminated. Many plants have the
equipment in place to reduce pollutant concentrations to levels
sufficient for recycle back to the sand washing processes,
providing of course, that the equipment is operated properly and
has the capacity required for the hydraulic load.
Another factor was also considered in determining the
appropriateness of this level of treatment. The total cost of
application of BPT technology in relation to the effluent
reduction benefits to be achieved by such application was
weighed. Cost data received from Plant 51115 shows that no large
expenditure in capital was required, and an operating cost
reduction after implementation of complete recycle was realized.
Therefore, a maximum benefit through the elimination of the
discharge of process wastewater pollutants was achieved at an
actual reduction in cost. An additional cost reduction is
realized since monitoring costs are reduced when process
wastewater pollutants are no longer discharged.
1. Treatment Scheme
Sand washing process wastewaters drain to a settling tank, which
is equipped with a dragout mechanism for the continuous removal
of solids, and from which 90 percent of all process wastewaters
are recycled back to the sand washing operation. The settling
tank overflow (10 percent of the applied flow) is pumped to a mix
tank, where lime is added for pH adjustment. The wastewater in
the mix tank, overflows into the clarifier, where polymer is
added to enhance floe formation. The clarifier underflow is
dewatered using a vacuum filter, with the filter cake being
landfilled. The clarifier effluent is recycled back to the sand
washing process. Figure IX-13 depicts this process1 BPT
treatment model.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
830
-------
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT treatment model applied flow was determined by averaging
the best (the lowest) flows indicated in the data summary, refer
to Table 111-14.
The application of recycle to the effluent of the primary
settling operation was based upon the plant survey data, plant
visit observations, and analytical data which indicated that the
effluent of this primary settling operation would be of adequate
partial recycle quality. The solids from this primary settling
operation could also be used again in the sand reclamation
process, as no treatment chemicals are added up to that point.
The overflow, 10 percent of the total applied flow, of the
primary settling tank undergoes further treatment prior to
recycle.
Plants 51115 and 01381 achieve the proposed BPT effluent
limitations through the complete recycle of sand washing process
wastewaters.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
ferrous sand washing process segment, the Agency estimates that
1813 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 82.5 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 473,760 kg/year of conventional pollutants,
and 14,040 kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed.
Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Lead Casting
Plants within the Lead Casting Subcategory employ three
manufacturing processes which generate process wastewaters.
Comparisons among these processes reveal enough process and
wastewater quality dissimilarities to warrant the further
subdivision of lead casting plants into the following process
segments:
Continuous Strip Casting
Grid Casting
Melting Furnace Scrubber
As no single plant employs more than one of these processes,
there is no need to develop and implement a BPT level of
treatment which provides for the co-treatment of any of the above
process wastewaters. Therefore, BPT model treatment systems and
effluent criteria were developed separately for each process.
Continuous Strip Casting Process
831
-------
The sampling survey data from Plant 10145 indicate that
wastewater treatment efforts should be directed toward the
removal of the toxic metal pollutant, lead. At this plant the
raw waste concentrations of the other toxic metals were below
those levels attainable with available treatment methods.
Referring to Table 111-15, a review of the treatment practices
employed at the five plants in the survey data base (these are
the only plants in this process segment) indicates that all of
the plants in this process segment practice equalization, pH
adjustment, and solids removal (via sedimentation or filtration).
As these technologies are capable of achieving significant
reductions in lead effluent levels and loads, and are
demonstrated at all plants in the process segment, the BPT model
treatment system incorporated these treatment technologies.
Recycle is not incorporated in the model treatment system because
it is not widely demonstrated in this process segment, and cannot
be readily transfered.
1. Treatment Scheme
The BPT model treatment system in this process segment
incorporates the pH controlled addition of lime and
sedimentation. While assuring that the discharged wastewaters
will not exert an adverse impact with regard to pH, the lime
addition's primary function is to facilitiate the precipitation
of lead. The sedimentation component provides for the removal of
lead in both the particulate and hydroxide precipitate forms.
Figure IX-14 depicts the model treatment system for this process
segment. Precipitation and sedimentation technologies are in use
at four of the five plants in this process segment.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
CONSIDERED BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Lead Continuous Strip Casting Process
Maximum for Any Maximum for
Pollutant or One Day Monthly Average
Pollutant Property (kg/kkg) (kg/kkg)
Lead 0.0000340 0.0000295
TSS 0.00932 0.00454
Oil and Grease 0.00454 0.00272
pH Within the range 7.5 to 10
032
-------
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
The model treatment system does not provide for the recycle of
any of the wastewaters generated in the continuous strip casting
process. The model treatment system raw waste and treated
effluent flow of 227 liters/kkg (54.4 gal/ton) is based upon the
average of the plant survey response flows.
Concentrations
The concentration levels used to derive the limitations listed
above are shown below:
Concentration (mq/1)
One Day Max. Monthly Avq.
TSS 41.0 20.0
Oil and Grease 20.0 12.0
Lead 0.15 0.13
pH 7.5-10
These concentrations, with the exception of pH, are based upon
the precipitation-sedimentation and oil skimming performance data
presented earlier in this section. These data reflect the
performance of the technologies (precipitation- sedimentation) in
use at four of the five plants in this segment. The Agency had
determined that these concentrations can be achieved using
well-designed, properly operated clarification systems. pH is
limited to between 7.5 to 10 since this effluent level reflects
operating conditions observed and expected in this process.
As there are presently no direct dischargers in this process
segment, BPT limitations are not appropriate. Therefore, BPT
limitations for the lead subcategory continuous strip casting
segment are not being proposed.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
Referring to summary Table 111-16, of the five plants in the
plant survey data base (representing all of the plants which
employ the melting furnace scrubber process), four operate with
no discharge of process wastewater pollutants. The performance
of these plants is, therefore, considered to be exemplary and a
demonstration of the best, currently available, practicable
technology. Based upon demonstrated capabilities, the BPT level
of treatment in this process segment achieves no discharge of
process wastewater pollutants.
833
-------
1. Treatment Scheme
The treatment model achieves no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants via the complete recycle of process wastewaters within
the manufacturer's scrubber equipment package (i.e., complete
internal recycle). Figure IX-16 refers to this mode of
treatment.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT level of treatment (complete recycle) is based upon the
treatment performance achieved by four of the five plants in this
process segment's data base. It should be noted that the data
base reflects the operations of all plants within this process
segment. Refer to Table II1-16 for a summary of pertinent
operational data for these plants.
Grid Casting Process
Data on this segment of the category was solicited and compiled
by a different study contractor. Therefore, the Agency does not
have specific process wastewater flow information for this
process segment. Wastewaters are generated in this segment by
air pollution control devices which are used to scrub the fumes
generated in the pouring and casting of lead into battery grids.
After conducting an engineering evaluations of the data and
informtion provided by air pollution control equipment vendors
and the industry, the Agency has concluded that the grid casting
and lead melting furnace scrubber process segments are similar
with respect to the generation of process wastewaters and
wastewater characteristics.
The treatment data for this segment is uniformly inadequate.
Therefore, the Agency has technologies from the lead melting
furnace scrubber segment. As noted above, the Agency believes
that these segments are related and thus justify the technology
transfer. In the lead melting furnace scrubber process segment,
four of the five operations in the indsutry achieve zero
discharge. Wastewater treatment in the melting furnace scrubber
segment is provided in the scrubber packages. The treatment
components of the grid casting model treatment system provide
treatment at least equivalent to that (settling and recycle)
provided in the scrubber packages. The scrubbers in these two
process segments are similar in design and function.
534
-------
1. Treatment Scheme
The treatment model for the grid casting process segment consists
of lime addition and sedimentation followed by complete recycle.
Figure IX-15 depicts this system. This system provides treatment
equivalent to that achieved in the scrubber equipment packages in
us the lead melting furnaces scrubber process segment.
2. Resulting Effluent Loads
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT level of treatment (complete recycle) is based upon the
treatment performance achieved by four of the five plants in the
lead melting furnace scrubber process segment. The Agency
considered this to be on appropriate technology transfer.
Magnesium Casting
Plants within the Magnesium Casting Subcategory employ two
manufacturing processes which generate process wastewaters.
Comparisons between these two processes exhibit enough
dissimilarities, relating to processes and water use, to warrant
further division of these plants into the process segments.
These segments are:
Grinding Scrubbers
Dust Collection Scrubbers
Either one or both of these processes may be operated at a plant.
If a plant performs any grinding on the casting to remove excess
metal or unwanted material from the casting surface or to impart
a desired surface characteristic, a scrubber is required to
control the magnesium dust produced from the grinding operation.
Dry type dust collectors, such as baghouses, are undesireable due
to the explosive nature of the dry magnesium dust. Dust
collection scrubbers or baghouses are used to clean dust arising
from shake out, core and mold making activities, and other sand
handling activities. Dusts from sand handling activities may be
controlled using either wet or dry air pollution control devices.
BPT was developed for each process. However, this approach does
not prohibit a plant with both of these processes from cotreating
the combined process wastewaters. This approach provides the
835
-------
permit writer (using a building block approach) with the means to
write a permit for magnesium casting plants with one or both of
these processes.
The scrubbers used for cleaning emissions from both the grinding
and dust collection operations are similar in design and
function. Both scrubbers provide internal settling of process
wastewaters prior to recycle or discharge.
Grinding Scrubber Process
The scrubbers used to clean magnesium dusts are similar in design
and function to those scrubbers used in the collection of dusts
associated with the casting of ferrous metals. As the level of
treatment indicated in the survey data summary for this segment
is considered to be uniformly inadequate, the Agency reviewed
data from other process segments to determine the appropriate
technology transfer. The industry survey data indicate that the
majority of the dust collection scrubbers at ferrous foundries
are operated with complete recycle of process wastewaters.
Consideration was therefore given to the appropriateness of
transferring ferrous casting BPT model treatment technologies to
the magnesium grinding scrubber segment.
The mechanism of dust cleaning, i.e., the removal of airborne
particulates through the use of water, is the same for both the
ferrous dust collection and magnesium grinding scrubber
processes. The sizes of the particulates in the casting sand
dusts and in the magnesium dusts are roughly similar. The
magnesium and other particulates present in the grinding scrubber
are likely to settle in a manner similar to the particulates
present in the ferrous casting dust collection scrubber process
wastewaters, given the same particle size, geometry of the
settling chamber, and flow. After consideration of the
similarities between the two processes and waste characteristics,
especially particle size, the transfer of technology is
reasonable, feasible, and practicable. Therefore, limitations
providing no discharge of process wastewater pollutants are
appropriate for BPT.
1. Treatment Scheme
Grinding dusts from magnesium castings exhibit flammable proper-
ties when dispersed in the atmosphere. Therefore, scrubbers are
used to collect the magnesium dusts and eliminate these hazards.
The process wastewaters from the scrubber drain to a settling
tank, and are completely recycled back to the scrubber. The
solids which accumulate in this tank are periodically removed.
836
-------
Figure IX-17 illustrates the BPT model treatment system for this
process.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT model applied flow is based upon the process wastewater
flow observed during the sampling program conducted at plant
08146.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
magnesium grinding scrubber process segment, the Agency estimates
that 2.1 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, no toxic organic
pollutants, 54.6 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and 0.5
kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to
Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Dust Collection Scrubber Process
Plant 08146 is the only magnesium casting plant in the data base
with a dust collection scrubber. The scrubber process wastewater
is settled and partially recycled internally. However, the
internal recycle overflow is not treated before discharge. The
opportunity for sedimentation provided within the scrubber
equipment package is inadequate to achieve a level of pollutant
removal suitable for discharge, particularly zinc, found in the
effluent from plant 08146. This level of treatment is considered
to be inadequate. The Agency developed a BPT model treatment
system for magnesium dust scrubbers based on transfer of
treatment technologies. The technology for this process segment
is identical to that approach taken in the development of a BPT
model treatment system for the magnesium grinding scrubber
process segment. The considerations and evaluations made for the
grinding scrubber technology transfer apply to this process
segment as well. The BPT model treatment technologies for
magnesium dust collection scrubbers were transferred from those
in use and demonstrated in the control of process wastewater
pollutant discharges from ferrous foundry dust collection
scrubbers.
1. Treatment Scheme
Dust collection wastewaters drain to a settling tank equipped
with a dragout conveyor to remove solids. Pumps recycle all
837
-------
process wastewaters back to the dust collectors. Figure IX-18
depicts this model treatment system.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
The BPT model applied flow is based upon the flow observed during
the sampling visit conducted at plant 08146.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
magnesium dust collection process segment, the Agency estimates
the 1.0 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, no toxic organic
pollutants, 104.0 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and 27.2
kg/year of nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to
Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Zinc Casting
Plants within the Zinc Casting Subcategory employ two
manufacturing processes which result in a process wastewater.
Comparisons between these two processes reveal enough
dissimilarities between processes and water use to warrant
further grouping of these plants into separate process segments.
These segments are:
Die Casting and Casting Quench
Melting Furnace Scrubber
Both of these processes may be operated at a plant. The BPT
limitations were developed for each process separately. However,
this approach does not prohibit a plant with both of these
processes from cotreating the combined process wastewaters. This
approach to BPT development provides the permit writer with the
means (via a building block approach) to write a permit for zinc
casting plants with either one or both of these processes.
Die Casting and Casting Quench Process
Generally, the survey data indicate that plants which provide
extensive treatment, jointly treat zinc die casting and casting
quench process wastewaters with process wastewaters from sources
not included in this category. The toxic pollutant loads and
concentrations found in the quench solutions at the sampled
838
-------
plants (10308, 18139, 04622, and 12040) require some form of
control other than dilution with other process wastewaters.
The oil and grease concentrations found at the sampled plants
justify some form of oil and grease removal. The toxic metal
pollutants found in the die casting and casting quench process
wastewaters are in the particulate form and settle rapidly. The
plants in the survey data were compared with each other, and four
plants (01334, 05947, 10308, and 10475) were found to exhibit
exemplary performance. These plants completely recycle their
zinc casting quench process wastewaters. In addition, two other
plants (06606 and 09105) do not continuously discharge. Plant
06606 only discharges casting quench process wastewaters once per
month, and plant 09105 removes its quench wastewaters only once
per year. However, neither plant provides oil removal treatment.
In a number of plants, die casting and casting quench process
wastewater discharges only occur as a result of splashing,
leakage, and carry over as the castings are removed.
The quenching process was found to be uniform from plant to
plant. The oils and greases found in the quench tank require
removal. Many plants periodically discharge in order to remove
this oil. Providing oil and grease removal equipment, as
incorporated with the BPT model treatment system, eliminates the
need to have this discharge. Therefore, based upon the average
of the best performances, and upon the design of the BPT model
treatment system, limitations providing no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants are appropriate for BPT.
1. Treatment Scheme
This system incorporates complete recycle. Treatment involves
primary solids removal in a settling tank and oil removal using a
skimmer. Settled solids can be removed periodically by either
manual or mechanical methods and then allowed to drain on-site in
a designated area. Solids may then be delivered to a sanitary
landfill or reused as scrap. Refer to Figure IX-19 for this
model treatment system's flow diagram.
2. Resulting Effluent Limitations
No discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters.
3. Supporting Basis
In order to provide a measure of prudent water management (i.e.,
care in maintenance, leak prevention, water conservation, etc.),
839
-------
the BPT model treatment system applied flow for die casting and
casting quench operations was determined by averaging the lowest
5 of the 12 plant survey responses with available flow
information. All five of the plants used for this flow average
have applied flows of less than 100 (gal/ton), while the
remaining plants have flows in excess of 500 (gal/ton). It
should be noted that the 5 plants used for the average applied
flow cover all employee groups and also include one of the
highest and also one of the lowest production operations. Refer
to Table 111-19 for a summary of plant survey data.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
zinc casting quench process segment, the agency estimates that
318.2 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, 18.2 kg/year of toxic
organic pollutants, 13,550 kg/year of conventional pollutants,
and 11.6 kg/year of nonconcentional pollutants are removed.
Refer to Table VI-6 for the individual pollutants.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
Extensive internal recycle of melting furnace scrubber process
wastewaters was found to be the norm of operation for zinc
casting plants required to use air pollution control devices on
zinc melting furnaces. The scrubber equipment package provides
sufficient settling to enable high internal recycle rates. Most
scrubber blowdown flows are uncontrolled overflows.
Plants within this process segment were compared with each other
to identify those plants with the "best" performance. General
practice for these plants involves extensive internal recycle
followed by treatment. Emulsion breaking, skimming,
sedimentation, and discharge are performed by some of these
plants.
A review of the plant data and engineering information furnished
by scrubber manufacturers led to the selection of 95 percent
internal recycle as an appropriate value. The equipment used by
plants treating this process wastewater and the effluent
concentrations achieved by this technology provide an adequate
basis for defining treatment capabilities, when potassium
permanganate is added for the destruction of phenolic compounds.
The treatment equipment installed at the surveyed plants was
found to be uniformly inadequate with respect to phenols
treatment. Phenols were present in significant amounts in the
raw and treated process wastewater from Plant 18139. Phenols
concentrations are dependent on the type of oils and the degree
of contamination of the scrap. With the level of phenols present
in process wastewaters, BPT, at a minimum, should provide some
840
-------
form of phenols removal. Therefore, after consideration of the
various phenols treatment methods available, as discussed in
Section VII, potassium permanganate addition was considered to be
the most appropriate for phenols control in this process segment.
The use of potassium permanganate for phenols destruction allows
maximum flexibility in the treatment of phenols. The amount of
potassium permanganate added to the treatment system can be
easily increased or decreased depending on the fluctuations in
phenols raw waste levels. In addition, this technology requires
only minor modification of and/or addition to existing treatment
facilities.
1. Treatment Scheme
This scheme involves treatment of the discharge of a melting
furnace scrubber system with an internal recycle rate of 95
percent. The treatment includes emulsion breaking,
neutralization in conjunction with potassium permanganate feed
for phenols destruction, and clarification. These technologies
are demonstrated at 60% of the plants in the plant survey data
base. The oils and greases are collected in a scum tank and
hauled away. The clarifier underflow (sludge) is dewatered using
a vacuum filter, and the filter cake is landfilled. The
clarifier effluent is discharged. Figure IX-20 illustrates the
treatment model for this process segment.
2. Proposed BPT Effluent Limitations
Zinc-Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
TSS
Oil and grease
pH
0.00419
0.0315
0. 129
0.0630
Within the
range of 7
0.00176
0.0157
0.0630
0.0378
5 to 10
841
-------
3. Supporting Basis
Flow
Flow information in the five plant survey responses provided
usable flow information on only two scrubber systems. The
average of these two applied flows is 62535 liters per kkg
(15,000 gallons per ton). All of the plants in the data base
indicated that the process wastewater discharge from each melting
operation was simply the blowdown or overflow from a scrubbing
equipment package as supplied by a manufacturer. This scrubber
package provides sufficient wastewater treatment and handling
capabilities to enable extensive process wastewater recycle. For
the purpose of BPT model development, the average internal
(within the scrubber equipment package) recycle rate was
determined to be 95 percent. This rate is based upon an average
of three plants with the highest recycle rates. These plants
have recycle rates of 100 percent, 98 percent, and 90 percent.
The recycle rate of at least 95 percent was obtained by
evaluating the information available in light of equipment
capabilities, engineering experience, and current industry
operational practices. With the use of an internal recycle rate
of 95 percent and a discharge rate of 5 percent, the resulting
treatment model discharge flow is 3147.6 1/kkg (755 gal/ton) of
metal poured.
Information indicates that three of the four plants with process
wastewater discharges already have effluent flows below this
level, and that the remaining plant's flow is only slightly
greater.
Concentrations
The concentration levels used to derive the limitations listed
above are shown below:
Concentration (mg/1)
One Day Max. Monthly Avg.
TSS 41.0 20.0
Oil and Grease 20.0 12.0
Zinc 1.33 0.56
Phenols 10 5.0
pH 7.5-10
These concentrations, with the exception of pH, are based upon
the precipitation-sedimentation and oil skimming performance data
presented earlier in this section. These data reflect the
performance of the treatment technologies demonstrated at 60% of
842
-------
the plants in the plant survey data base. The Agency has
determined that these concentrations can be achieved using
well-designed, properly operated clarification and permanganate
oxidation system. pH is limited to between 7.5 to 10.0 since
this effluent level reflects operating conditions necessary for
proper waste neutralization, clarification, and, in particular,
effective phenols destruction.
From the current to the proposed BPT level of treatment in the
zinc melting furnace scrubber process segment, the agency
estimates that 46.0 kg/year of toxic metal pollutants, no toxic
organic pollutants, 2604 kg/year of conventional pollutants, and
no nonconventional pollutants are removed. Refer to Table VI-6
for the individual pollutants.
ANALYSIS OF BPT DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES
Review
For the fourteen process segments (identified on Table IX-4) for
which the Agency is proposing 100 percent recycle of process
wastewater at BPT, the Agency considered two less stringent
treatment alternatives. These alternatives incorporate treatment
and and partial recycle. Both discharge alternatives are
designed to be compatible with in-place treatment technologies
and are based upon solids and metals removal technologies
currently used by foundries, i.e., lime addition followed by
sedimentation. The options differ by the extent of partial
recycle. One option is based upon 90 percent recycle and the
other is based upon 50 percent recycle. Oil skimming devices are
included as required, for both options.
In developing these alternatives the Agency examined its data
base and found that approximately 86 percent of the 287 direct
dischargers and 327 POTW dischargers place or have only simple
settling and partial recycle with a discharge. Six percent of
these dischargers (40 plants) now have lime precipitation and
sedimentation treatment in place with recycle rates of 90
percent. The remaining eight percent of these dischargers (47
plants) have lime precipitation and sedimentation technology in
place but predominantly do not recycle their treated wastewaters.
Those few plants that do recycle do so at rates of less than 40
percent. Table IX-5 summarizes this information.
Using the current practices of plants dischargeing process
wastewaters, the Agency developed model treatment systems and
engineering cost estimates for several typical subcategories and
process segments. Treatment models were developed for the
843
-------
treatment of wastewaters from a single process source and from
multiple casting wastewater sources that are co-treated in the
same treatment system. The component technologies of these
discharge models are summarized on Table IX-6 together with model
treatment system costs. This table also summarizes the
components and costs of the proposed BPT complete recycle
treatment models.
For 12 of the 14 process segments, both discharge alternatives
are based upon simple sedimentation followed by partial recycle
and treatment of the discharge. These technologies are similar
to those of the complete recycle systems but the wastewaters not
recycled are treated by lime and settle technology prior to
discharge. The model treatment systems for these 12 process
segments are identified on Figure IX-21. This model depicts the
general treatment model for simple settling, partial recycle and
lime precipitation and sedimentation treatment of the blowdown.
For process reasons, treatment is required before recycle for two
process segments; i.e., the ferrous melting furnace scrubber and
the aluminum die lube process segments. Hydroxide addition for
corrosion control and flocculation of suspended solids is
necessary before recycle in ferrous melting furnace scrubbers to
prevent severe corrosion of pipes, pumps and scrubber parts.
Dissolved furnace combustion gases in the scrubber wastewaters
lower the pH of the wastewater and hydroxide is added to raise
the pH to a non-corrosive level.
The complete recycle technology of the aluminum die lube process
reclaims used die lubricant for reuse. After application of the
die lubricant to the die face and mold, several plants collect
the used die lubricant separately from other die casting
wastewaters. These used die lubricants are either reclaimed for
further use or are treated before recycle and discharge. All
plants that recycle this wastewater provide solids removal prior
to recycle. The discharge alternatives for this process segment
reflect this industry practice. Figure IX-22 displays the
general treatment model for the ferrous melting furnace scrubber
and aluminum die lube processes.
Cost Comparison of BPT Alternatives
For the selected model treatment systems, Figure IX-23
graphically depicts the BPT costs detailed on Table IX-6.
Capital and operating costs increase as the discharge volume
increases because of the additional precipitation and
sedimentation treatment equipment treating the wastewaters after
primary settling. As the amount of recycle decreases, the size
844
-------
and cost of the precipitation and sedimentation treatment system
increases due to the larger discharge flow requiring treatment.
Figure IX-24 illustrates the model simple settling and recycle
system of a ferrous dust collection scrubber. This system
provides for the treatment of the wastewaters from the dragout
tank (simple settling). With 90 percent recycle, the flow at
point 4 is 10 percent of the flow at point 1. Ninety percent of
the flow at point 1 is recycled back to the scrubber. With 50
percent recycle the flow at point 4 is half of that at point 1
and the same as that at point 2.
At 100 percent recycle, the flow at point 4 (Figure IX-24) is
zero and the precipitation and sedimentation equipment is not
needed. As indicated by the data on Table IX-7 which
characterizes the waste water quality of several sampled plants
at sample points 2 or 4, the wastewater requires further
treatment before discharge.
Table IX-6 shows that for plants with little or no treatment in
place, it is substantially less costly to install simple settling
with complete recycle than it is to install precipitation and
sedimentation and recycle. For example, for a medium-sized
ferrous foundry with no existing technology for treating dust
collection scrubber wastewaters, simple settling with complete
recycle would require investment costs of $119,000 and annual
costs of $96,000 (primarily for sludge disposal). Treatment
would consist of a a dragout tank and recycle pumps and piping.
The comparative figures for installing and operating equipment of
the 90 percent and 50 percent recycle systems are significantly
higher. For the 90 percent recycle option, investment costs
would be $247,000 and annual costs would be $119,000. Treatment
of the 10 percent discharge would include chemical feed
equipment, a clarifier and a vacuum filter (Figure IX-23). For
the 50 percent recycle option, investment costs would be $360,000
and annual costs would be $140,000. The technologies would be
the same as for the 90 percent recycle alternative but the
chemical feed equipment, clarifier and vacuum filter would be
larger. Costs are higher for the 50 percent recycle option than
for the 90 percent recycle option because the system must treat
five times as much water.
With complete recycle of process wastewaters, no monitoring of
discharge is required therefore, no monitoring costs are
incurred. With the discharge alternatives monitoring of treated
discharged wastewaters is required. The monitoring criteria and
costs that would be incurred for the processes and process
combinations listed in Table IX-6 are detailed in Table IX-7.
845
-------
These costs are graphically depicted in the bar charts of Figure
IX-25. Monitoring costs are not included in the cost comparison
shown in Table IX-6.
A comparison of the costs appearing in Table IX-6 slows a slight
increase in annual costs for both discharge alternatives above
the proposed BPT. Increases in annual costs arise from the
increase in energy and sludge disposal costs, as illustrated on
Figure IX-26.
Comparison of Discharge Loads Among BPT Alternatives
The Agency also compared the pollutants discharged for the two
alternatives. At BPT, the precipitation and sedimentation
treatment systems of the discharge alternatives are designed for
suspended solids and toxic metal pollutant removals by lime
addition and sedimentation technologies. Precipitation and
sedimentation technologies are not designed to remove toxic
organic pollutants. Oil skimming may remove some of these
pollutants, but the removals have not been clearly quantified.
For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the toxic
organic pollutants are not removed and for the two discharge
alternatives, the BPT waste loads remain the same as the current
discharge levels.
For the processes identified on Table IX-6 the Agency has
tabulated the model treatment waste loads for toxic pollutants,
conventional and conconventional pollutants. This tabulation
appears in Table IX-9 and is presented graphically oin Figures
IX-27 and IX-28. The bar charts are labeled Alternatives 1, 2,
and 3. Alternative 1 represents the BPT proposed levels.
Alternative 2 represents the 90 percent recycle level and
alternative 3 represents the 50 percent recycle levels. All
following bar graphs are labeled in this manner.
The Agency has also estimated total industry discharge waste
loads for the proposed BPT level of treatment and for the two
discharge alternatives. The trend toward greater discharge
levels for each discharge alternative appearing in Figures IX-26
and IX-27 continues with industry wide estimates of discharge
waste loads for toxics, conventional and non-conventional
pollutants. The toxic organic polutants not controlled at the
alternative BPT levels appear in Table IX-11 . For the discharge
alternatives, these pollutants are discussed briefly in Section X
of this document. The waste loads of the discharge alternatives
are calculated from the effluent limitations that would be
established if either the 90 percent or 50 percent recycle
alternative were proposed. These alternative limitations are
846
-------
detailed in Table IX-15 for the 90 percent recycle alternatives
and in IX-16 for the 56 percent recycle alternatives.
The Agency did not sample the effectiveness of the precipitation
and sedimentation technologies in plants for which complete
recycle is proposed since so many foundries in these process
segments are achieving complete recycle. Accordingly, the data
that indicate what precipitation and sedimentation can be
expected to achieve in the category was derived from the process
segments for which some discharge would be allowed at BPT and
PSES.
The wastewaters of the process segments for which complete
recycle is proposed for BPT (and for PSES) are similar to the
wastewaters of the categories from which the precipitation and
sedimentation treatment effectiveness data were compiled (See
Section VII). The processes and technologies used in these
process segments are similar to the processes and technologies
used in the categories from which the precipitation and
sedimentation data were compiled. Where plants have installed
waste treatment technologies but have not implemented complete
recycle, precipitation-sedimentation treatment technology and
partial recycle is the most frequently selected technology.
Major Assumptions of BPT Discharge Analysis
In making its analysis, the Agency has estimated the expected
compliance strategy the industry would follow given a choice of
alternative limitations. To compute cost and discharge
comparisons, it was necessary to determine what technology would
be installed in response to the Agency's selection of a BPT
option.
Treatment in place for the industry varies widely (see Table
IX-5). OF the 965 foundries that generate process wastewaters
("wet" plants), 351 have implemented complete recycle. Five
hundred and twenty-seven of the remaining 614 plants have little
or no treatment in place. Based on treatment model systems, the
Agency concludes that for these 527 plants, complete recycle is
considerably less costly than the other options because expensive
precipitation and sedimentation equipment is unnecessary to
implement complete recycle. The Agency's analysis assumed that
these plants would implement complete recycle regardless of the
BPT alternative proposed. Table IX-12 illustrates the strategy
which the Agency expects plants with various levels of treatment
equipment in place will implement to the various alternatives.
847
-------
For 87 plants, the 90 percent and 50 percent recycle alternatives
are less costly than the proposed BPT level of treatment. This
is because these 87 plants already have precipitation and
sedimentation technology in place. The cost of additional
recycle pumps and pipes varies depending on the alternative and
the extent to which the plant has existing recycle., The cost
increases as the amount of recycle increases. However, the
Agency believes that the differences in cost are not substantial
because pumps and pipes are less expensive than precipitation and
sedimentation equipment.
The Agency estimated the total industry cost of the discharge
alternatives, in accordance with these assumptions, as follows.
The capital and annual costs of the proposed BPT for the 14
complete recycle process segments include the cost of complete
recycle. The costs of the alternatives using 90 or 50 percent
recycle systems are somewhat less than complete recycle systems
due to the smaller pumps and pipes required to carry smaller
volumes of recycled water. Using model plant recycle system
costs (Table IX-6) for each alternative, the Agency determined
the maximum cost difference between the model complete recycle
system and the model recycle systems associated with each
alternative. The Agency used the recycle costs of the gray iron
dust collection process (See Table IX-6) in determining a maximum
cost difference. The model cost differences appear in Table
IX-13. The Agency multiplied the maximum unit cost difference by
the number of plants expected to implement one or the other
alternative treatment systems. Table IX-5 details the number of
plants and Table IX-6 shows the alternative treatment a plant is
likely to use based on its existing treatment.
Under the 90 percent recycle alternative, 40 plants would have no
additional expenditures because they have the model technology in
place. Forty-seven plants would add 90 percent recycle to
existing precipitation and sedimentation components. The Agency
assumed that the 527 plants with little or no treatment in place
would recycle is less costly than precipiration-sedimentation
implement complete recycle because, for thes plants, complete
technology. The Agency also assumed that the 351 plants with
complete recycle now would not downgrade their systems.
The small difference in total cost between the complete recycle
option and the 90 percent recycle option is attributable to the
following:
1. 40 plants with existing precipitation-sedimentation
technology and 90 percent recycle would not be required
848
-------
to expend the $200,000 (total) to increase their
recycle systems from 90 percent to TOO percent.
2. 47 plants with existing precipitation-sedimentation
technology and no recycle would save about $235,000
(total). This amount is the cost difference between 90
percent recycle and 100 percent recycle.
Under the 90 percent recycle option, discharged pollutant loads
are greater than for the complete recycle option due to the
additonal discharge from 87 plants. Although this difference is
a small percentage, in absolute numbers the increase in
discharged pollutant loads is substantial because present
discharge levels for the industry are high. (The 614 wet plants
in the industry now discharge 315,000 kg annually of toxic
pollutants.)
A comparison of the 50 percent recycle option with the 90 percent
recycle option focuses on the 47 plants with
precipitation-sedimentation, but no recycle. It is assumed that
the 40 plants with precipiration and sedimentation and 90 percent
recycle and the 351 plants that have complete recycle would not
downgrade their systems. It is also assumed that the 527 plants
with little or no treatment in place would implement complete
recycle, as they would if the 90 percent recycle option were
selected. Each of the 47 plants would save about $24,000, (the
difference between implementing 50 percent and 100 percent
recycle), and would discharge more pollutants than under the
higher-recycle options. Table IX-14 compares the proposed BPT
level of treatment with the alternative levels of treatment with
respect to total industry costs and discharge loads.
849
-------
TABLE IX-1
POLLUTANTS SELECTED FOR REGULATION AT BPT
METAL MOLDING AND CASTING INDUSTRY
Pollutant
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon tetrachloride
007 Chlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1-trichloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
044 Methylene chloride
055 Naphthalene
058 4-nitrophenol
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 bis-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
087 Trichloroethylene
091 Chlordane
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium (Total)
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Xylene
TSS
Oil & Grease
pH (Units)
Aluminum Casting
Melting
Investment Furnace Casting Die
Casting Scrubber Quench Casting
_ _ - _
_ _
- -
_ _
_ _
- -
_ -
_ -
- - -
_ - - _
_ _
- -
_ _
_ _
- -
_ - -
_ _
_ _
- -
_ -
_ _
_ _
_ _
- -
— - - -
- - X -
- - - X
- -
X X
-
-
- - X
_ _
- - -
XX XX
XX XX
XX XX
Copper Casting
Die
Lube
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dust
Collection
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
-
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
-
-
X
X
X
Mold
Cooling
And
Casting
Quench
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
—
X
_
-
X
-
-
_
-
-
X
X
X
850
-------
TABLE IX-1
POLLUTANTS SELECTED FOR REGULATION AT BPT
METAL MOLDING AND CASTING INDUSTRY
PAGE 2
Ferrous
Lead
Pollutant
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon tetrachloride
007 Chlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1-trichloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
044 Methylene chloride
055 Naphthalene
058 4-nitrophenol
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 bis-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
087 Trichloroethylene
091 Chlordane
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium (Total)
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Xylene
TSS
Oil & Grease
pH (Units)
Mold
Cooling
Melting And
Dust Furnace Slag Casting
Collection Scrubber Quench Quench
Continuous Melting
Sand Strip Furnace
Washing Casting Scrubber
-
-
_
-
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
851
-------
TABLE IX-1
POLLUTANTS SELECTED FOR REGULATION AT BPT
METAL MOLDING AND CASTING INDUSTRY
PAGE 3
Magnesium
Zinc
Pollutant _
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon tetrachloride
007 Chlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1-trichloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
023 Chloroform
039 Fluoranthene
044 Methylene chloride
055 Naphthalene
058 4-nitrophenol
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 bis-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 Benzo (a) anthracene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
087 Trichloroethylene
091 Chlordane
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium (Total)
120 Copper
122 Lead
124 Nickel
128 Zinc
Ammonia (N)
Fluoride
Manganese
Iron
Phenols (4AAP)
Sulfide
Xylene
TSS
Oil & Grease
pH (Units)
Dust Grinding
Collection Scrubber
Dii
Casting Melting
And
Casting Furnace
Quench Scrubber
X: Pollutant selected tor regulation.
-: Pollutant not considered for regulation.
852
-------
TABLE IX-2
OPERATIONS WITH RECYCLE SYSTEMS INSTALLED
Subcategory
Aluminum Casting
Copper Casting
Ferrous Casting
Lead Casting
Magnesium Casting
Zinc Casting
No. of
Process
Operations '
34
12
348
10
3
25
Operations
with Listed Degree of Recycle
Some Degree
of
No.
15
5
246
7
1
11
Recycle
I™
44.1
41.7
70.7
70.0
33.3
40^0
>90Z
No.
10
5
202
6
1
8
Recycle
Z(2)
29.4
41.7
58.0
60.0
33.3
32.0
100Z
No.
3
4
98
5
1
5
Recycle
%(2)
8.8
33.3
28.2
50.0
33.3
20^0
Total
432
285
66.0
232
53.7
116
26.8
(1) Number of operations providing questionnaire responses.
See Summary Tables in Section III.
(2) This value reports the number of recycle operations as a percentage
of the number of process operations.
853
-------
« 2
•H
CO
4) 41 4)
4J 4J 4J
"O •« -O
O. O. O.
•H
CO
4) 41
0-1 4-1 U
(0 CO »TH
•O "O 09 04
Oi CU-H U
CJ 3 > Q
4)
U
co
4) 41
4J 4J
CO (0
ap 0.0 _o,o
•g^s
CU 41 4) CU 4)
4J 4J *J U 4J
CO cO co co CO
Cu CU CU Cu CuO U
•o cu
CuO
H
5
5
fjj
CO
•43
H
<
Q
2
O
M
H
cl
M
Pi
0
M
O
«q|
ffi
y
CO
M
Q
0
ea
M
N
I
e
o
• H
4J
CJ
3
•a
o
CU
•0
c
CO
CO
K-l 1-4
O CO
4J
4J 4)
•H
co o
CO
a
o
H
IT| \O
rH rH •
• • ^^
Q ("> -f
4)
•s
CJ
U
e
-------
41
U
Wl
§
CO
41 4) 41
4J 4J U
CO CO 09
u 0.0 a. 13 o
4) 4) 4)
4-1 4J U
a) CO <8
a. au a.<
4)
4J
CO
II
•rl
en
4) (U J
^H * *|
co ^ I -•
1
I CO
e 14-1 1-1
O O 9)
• »* 4J
W U 41
ss*
•O £ W
o co o
§
H
oo
OO
--HOOO »-
O O u-i
O O •
en
S«M
-<
vo m
«M vO
a
o
o -~*
v -e
^ V
<-> 3
O O
O *H
4-1
•u C
X w
M M
O CM
M
J O W
pa PS
< w .
H N a.
1-1
o
60
41
CO
09
O
855
-------
«s
3 O
CU 0) CU CU
4J 4J 4-1 0> 4J4J
caconu coca
•O"OT3T3&4T3l3aiClc&iaceLiai
a. a. a, 0.0 a. 0.0 o o o o cj
Q) 4) Cl) 4)
4J J-l JJ 4J 4J
co .H co co
OO «-~l
CO— H1O<
-^ oo
o
-------
I3
•
•H
00
•i-l
a a a
09 I
^j W ^^1
* S
-------
Is'
s:
« 0
4)
4J
CO
O.O
9 O
4) 41
CO CO
O. O. U
9 9 O
CU 11 (U
CO cfl CO
O. O. O.
939
41
CO
O.CJ O
900
4) 4)
CO CO
O. U O.U
9090
41 41 4)
co co CO
O. O. O.
999
4) 4)
CO <0
O. 0.CJ
990
• H
CO
0 9*0
41 41
CO CO
T3 ^3 £4 £^4 (
O. O.U U C,
9 9 O O e
4)
CO
L, -O
ss-
41
4J
41 CO
ao
^H ^H »-^ *^ CN
leMCNeMCMCMCMrtCMCMCMCM-H
•D
CO
c/)
C
O
•H
U
O
3
•«
o
h
On
l-i
cn o
—
CO
C
o
H
O
O
O
r~
• in
\o
• CM
CNCM
vO
•
en
m CM
OOOOOOOOO
oo m
en —i
o m
^
w
eu
o
u
o
o
B
41
o-
ao
CO
TJ
CO 4=
oo c
.2 S
o oo
u c
r-l 00
O CO
£ U
60
•H
£
m
CO
CO
CO
en a
^S
M M
O m
w
J O W
M OS O
< W <
H N CU
i-i
o
00
-------
0> 2
Oi
o
Q
J
*3 « col
3 ao
en I
en CN en en -H
CM -H en CN en
u
O
P
a.
c
CO
I CO
C >W 1-1
O O CO
U M-l
3 -H
•O JS
o co
M •»*
eu co
o
H
en
CN
•
o
\O
CN
CN
CO
O
60
e
co
CO
U
-H -H r~ CN
^ en en -*
O ^* ^^ ^"*
0000
cs
ITl
O
.3- r» ao iri r^
en -3- O P~ CT\
en o\ en »^ so
-H in o o o>
O O -* -H CN
CM
CM
vo
co
u
3
en Si
I U
X W
M M
O
w
J O W
CQ oi O
<: w :
H tsl 0-
o
00
(U
u
CO
U
.a
co
CO
o
g
e
o
ja G j:
3 CO U
l-i C
U 60 OI
co e 3
•* o-
60 U
C CO 60
•H CO C
•O CJ T4
C JJ
•H OI CO
VI -HO)
U O U
0)
u
CO
c
u
60 4)
C XI
•H XI
*J 3
<-i l-i
0) U
a M
•o
CO
01
OI
tJ
co
01
60
CO
O
NJ
U
CO
CO
•H
01 •
> co
lJ 4J
3 O
co 3
•O
CU O
a a
O) CJ
•U -H
N
0)
U >»
•H C
CO O
859
-------
TABLE IX-4
PROCESS SEGMENTS IN WHICH THE PROPOSED
BPT LIMITATIONS ARE NO DISCHARGE OF PROCESS
WASTEWATER POLLUTANTS
METALS CASTING INDUSTRY
Subcategory
Aluminum
Copper
Ferrous
Lead
Magnesium
Zinc
Process Segment
Casting Quench Operations
Die Lube Operations
Dust Collection Operations
Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Dust Collection Operations
Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Slag Quench Operations
Casting Quench and Mold Cooling Operations
Sand Washing Operations
Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Grid Casting Operations
Grinding Scrubber Operations
Dust Collection Operations
Die Casting and Casting Quench Operations
860
-------
NA: Not Applicable
TABLE IX-5
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT IN-PLACE
METALS CASTING INDUSTRY
Treatment Equipment
Number of Plants
Direct Dischargers POTW Dischargers Total
Little or no treatment
Chemical addition,
sedimentation, and
90% recycle
Chemical addition,
sedimentation, but
no recycle
Complete recycle
Total
228
21
38
NA
287
299
19
NA
327
527
40
47
351
965
861
-------
c
o
°
u
>
V
OS
J^
o
en
55
" M
2g
~ifs^
H 2 g^ 2
§0 S «J
tn o —
*° S M *O
x u . u °
I !»!p «
1* gj U 5 f~r s
g 1 3 .2 £
° •< « a
_ H H a
g a. u a TJ
« as S~ «
5 0 u
" H -
gj w "
U H
tn
««
>, 3 JJ
(J C «
CU C O
Ofi < CJ
4) ^-»
u u
O Q. 0)
0) CB o
c2 u cj
a)
C C ***•
4> 01 —
g C ^
« a.
« e
u o
00
c
^
** O
3 •-« 4J
C C m
-§ S CJ
t-- a)
01 3 4-1
"O C o)
S « u
CO
^-4 U
41 -*J u
S u u
1>
u si
oca
cS< o
o **
a o. 03
CE! cj o
0
en
r*.
- -O
H-] Bb ON
« Jft
ua o os
vO
CT»
O
CN
*
-0
^
00
"
—
00
JJ 4J
c c ^
41 41 -^
9 e~
u O
cd a
« S
u. o
H 0
00
c
r~> O
tn u
3 -^ ti
c: c a>
•S z cS
§"&
s"&?
* * cu
PQ J H
W CJ 06
ON
O
Q C 0
£ •< 0
a)
0) -rt u
•S a. «
O flj O
X u u
a
X
o a
*-• 3
1-2
U CO
en
3
CN
O
V
4) 4J
.H C
B
e
0)
g
00
1)
en
at
00
u
u
o
ko
cu
°!
(Q
J= Of
U M
e u
i) i
3 O
0*0
00 00
c c
CO CO
CJ U
o
oc
0)
aj
U
en
Q
3
C
ai ->
SJ j" H" J i-T
b* CJ O bi U
m o
CO r*»
O —
O O
ON
•* •"
•a r~
tn ^>
-* CM
o en
o r-
-* \
u - u 3
(8 U 41 *« U
o
cu
8
u
i
4J
eg
«
W
o
^
u
B
(§.
o* in c><
•^ CN CN
^22
1 CU 1 CU II CU
«J vJ O2 J W ^3
CO bu CO Ch tn Fb
coon CQ o oa aaooa
cnoNCO cooNcn COONCO
ON ON ON
CD O O
en in O
r^ r*. ^r
^ 00 SO
CN <• fl
^H cn 0*1
^ r* en
CN CN CN
CN m 4
V
ja
(9
H
O
w
b
M-l
«
U
CO J£
V C
"Sfl
i!
U ffl
iw 3
0 u
(Q •«•*
§U
0)
•* &
u
•p- -a
C C
•H ffl
at u
•o c
a
u u
O 01
c* a
.. *^
*-* CN
^ o
862
-------
s
U 1
X S u
o o a
£33
I Cu
i-T£
I O C
o -
- fa
u >
i3
S*.
B o « w i
i b
"o
*
CO
c
1
Of
0)
en
CO
01
4)
U
O
Pu
>
O
00
V
4J
CO
CJ
J3
3
en
O CO
OJ
CJ U
c *•*
13
00 00
c c
•t-l •<-)
oa to
CO CO
CJ CJ
g
c
1
u
00 C
C CU
•H 3
o
O OO
U C
--I Cfl
O co
S U
a.
o.
3
C
O
•£
u
0)
o
CO
°
c
0
eo 1-1
3
O X
M CO
V* 14
HI U
Ct, x_-
-------
TABLE IX-7
DRAGOUT TANK EFFLUENT QUALITY (mg/1)
METALS CASTING INDUSTRY
Plant Code
06956
07929
09094
20009
Sampling
Day
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Pollutants
TSS
2390
7660
3590
1370
700
1700
1000
374
446
1920
16,550
14,260
Copper
0.25
0.19
0.11
—
0.15
0.16
_
3.3
1.1
_
0.65
0.56
Lead
0.58
0.63
0.53
0.35
0.15
0.23
5.8
6.4
2.1
0.47
0.84
0.17
Zinc
1.5
1.4
1.2
0.42
0.34
0.22
38.0
38.0
7.5
0.65
0.11
0.19
Phenols (4AAP)
3.99
30.70
3.92
1.18
0.85
0.50
1.98
3.30
0.16
7.8
4.0
3.3
Note: The sample points at each of these sampled
plants correspond to sample points 2 and 4 on
Figure IX-24.
364
-------
ON OO ^ 'H
I r*^ oo ^ o> l-i
O CO ^H CO A O
4J
• H
B
o
• •
s^n.
^
>.
f
•a
CO
4-1
CO
y
•H
•o
B
•H
-^
CO
4-1
g
CO
4-)
3
i— i
r- 1
O
PL,
s^
to
^^
4-1
B
CO
1
CO
CO
CO
co
co
y
o
0-
^
^
o
00
CO
4-1
CO
y
3
CO
CO
r_4
O
B
CO
y
B
N
TJ
cO
,3
^4 1
(U 1
pi
pj
r^
4-1
CO
CO
O
y
B
• i-l
tsi
865
-------
C r-l
O ^
O O
o c
~4 flj
o ^
'
u "
'd'e
O
O
o ->
o o
m o
O c^
—» CO —I
as '
<
Is*
< S £
3 u f-
tn en
SS|
3
C
O
o o
I Ik
e
o
o
o
o ^
•
u .«
-*
tn
d
rt O
c H oo c u
-------
. H
O
O
O
S O
s£
0S
> 3
S -i
o o
I CU
C
O
z
o
o
u ;;
'x "
o
o
00
1/1
o
o .2
o
o
o
r-i
O
>• 3
f-J ®
3
J
a
a
CO
00 C
CO)
-H 3
~* cr
o
o oo
u c
367
-------
X
o
a
ai
<
u
*~ w
CJ CJ
« B?
S
D
S
L
A
IS
M
£S.
[d O
H
w
< M
3 O
I
Toxic Organic Toxic Metal Conventional Non-Conventiona
Pollutants Pollutants Pollutants Pollutants
ON
Id
CU
iJ 4J
B
U CU
B 6
cu 5
u to
VJ CU
3 VJ
U H
,—1
o
o
oo
o
0
o
M-l
o
r* -U
CU B
> CU
IM
ft* b3
(Q
u
T3 B
cu CU
§ fi
0. to
O CU
ft* H
vO
o
.—*
o
fl
i-H
-*
1— 1
tn
o
in
CN
en
r-t JJ
CU B
> CU
M-l
H U-l
Pi Id
a
JJ
CU B
0 I
>•( AJ
U CO
CU CU
H
O «-i
CTt O
00
CO
en
-H
•*
CN
tn
CO
CN
m
o
CN
-*
-^
O
en
rt 4J
CU B
> CU
M-l
Pi Id
CQ
Q) g
rH CU
u B
>. 5
U CO
CU CU
Ctf Vi
x H
O M-4
m o
868
-------
TABLE IX-11
TOXIC ORGANIC POLLUTANTS NOT TREATED BY
THE BPT DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
METALS CASTING INDUSTRY
Pollutant
001 Acenaphthene
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon Tetrachloride
007 Chlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1-trichloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
021
022
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Parachlorometa cresol
023 Chloroform
024 2-chlorophenol
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
039 Fluoranthene
044 Methylene chloride
055 Naphthalene
058 4-nitrophenol
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
072 BenzoCaianthracene
073 Benzo(a)pyrene
074 3,4-benzofluoranthene
075 Benzo(k)fluoranthane
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
087 Trichloroethylene
091 Chlordane
130 Xylene
Aluminum
Casting
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
X
X
X
X
X
Copper Ferrous
Casting Casting
Subcategory Subcategory
X
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
X
X
X
X
-
_
-
X
X
X
-
X
X
-
X X
X
-
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X X
X
_
-
-
Lead Magnesium Zinc
Casting Casting Casting
Subcategory Subcategory Subcategory
_ _ _
- - -
_
_
-
- - -
_
- - X
- - X
_
_
X
- - X
_
_
X
_
- - -
_
- - -
_
_
X
_
- - X
_
-
_
_
- - -
_
_
_
-
_
X
X
- - -
_
869
-------
CS
l~^
1
X
*""*
TABLE
^
o
td
H
2
H
co
Id
U
Z
M
COMPL
Q
Cd
H
O
Ed
CM
X
Id
ARGE OPTIONS
SB
CJ
CO
M
Q
co
CO
OS
(d
>
CO
rJ
Id
Q
o
H
Ef3
§
£_fl
<
td
OS
H
H
Cu
as
O
W
H
CJ
Id
rJ
Ed
CO
>•
OS
H
CO
J~~i
Q
2
I— t
O
Z
CAST I
C.O
,_J
B
Ol
a
•o
Ol
CO
r— 1
r-l
CO
B
r-l
B
o
• H
4J
CO
4-1
B
1
•o
01
to
r—4
r-4
to
4-1
w
B
M
0
•T-t
4J
CO
4-1
i
•H
TJ
Or-
CO
(— 1
,— 1
n3
4J
«
C
M
r**.
CM
U~\
1
XJ
CO
(U
j_i
H
O
Z
^
0
01
r-4
4J
4J
•H
r-J
01
T— 4
o
o
Ol
r4
H
Oi
03
T3
CO
T3
to
01
CJ
CJ
0)
r-l
H
0*
CQ
T3
CO
"O
CO
0)
! 1
CJ
o
01
u
H
Cu
CQ
"O
to
•o
B
to
4J
C
01
a
i
4_J
CO
01
V4
r— 1
CO
B
0
•r-l
U
• H
T3
T3
to
o
1
4J
to
01
l-l
I—I
to
B
0
• H
4-1
-a
to
0
z
01
4J
to
01
1— 1
o
X
CJ
Ol
01
to
CO
01
CJ
B
h-l
0
vs
B
0
• H
4J
• l-l
•o
T3
1— 1
to
U
• r-l
e
01
d
CJ
he BPT ment required ment required
4J
U-l
O
4J
CO
4J
O
4J
•o
B
to
*s
B
O
4J
CO
4J
01
a
•r-l
•o
01
CO
1— 1
01
'U
o
B
01
i— i
o
o
01
OS
&*5
O
o>
01
CO
01
r-4
CJ
CJ
01
01
01
CO
01
o
01
4J
tfl
01
r-4
CJ
CJ
01
01
to
cfl
01
CJ
B
r-4
01
01
1— 1
o
>,
o
01
M
01
CO
CO
01
O
C
t~*
"*
•*
B
O
• i-t
4J
•H
T)
•o
r-4
CO
CJ
•r-4
e
01
.£=
o
B-S
O
o
4J
B-?
O
o
4-1
H
03
01
J=
4J
14-1
O
4-1
CO
4J
O
4J
*U
B
CO
•s
B
O
•r-l
4-1
CO
4-1
B
01
• l-l
T3
Ol
CO
01
T)
O
S
01
1— 1
o
0
CU
OS
0
z
870
-------
TABLE IX-13
DIFFERENCES IN COST BETWEEN COMPLETE RECYCLE
AND PARTIAL RECYCLED)
METALS CASTING INDUSTRY
90% Recycle
Discharge
Alternative
Investment Annual
Cost Cost
$
71,000 $14,380
66,000 13,520
50% Recycle
Discharge
Alternative
Investment Annual
Cost Costs
$ 71,000 $14,380
47,000 9,150
Complete Recycle
Discharge
Alternative
Cost Difference $ 5,000 $ 860 $ 24,000 $ 5,230
(1): Based upon the recycle component from the ferrous subcategory dust
collected process gray iron (>250 employees) treatment model to determine
the maximum cost difference.
-------
^
1
X
M
U
1
H
en
O
Z
M
i
M
H
t/a
^
3
•a!
H
S
(X
0
Z
o
en
M
OS
O
0
Cfl
S
3
H
•**!
EC
g
•<
3
J
o
PM
H
S
^J
CO
H
I
H
z
H
Id
C
CU
B
«
cu
H
O
CO
0)
H
Cu
CO
cu
U
CJ
OS
s*
0
in
•u
0)
2*
•o
h-H
CJ
ft}
iU
D
en
z
o
H- 1
H
cu
o
u
OS
CJ
en
t-t
Q
en
a
en
OS
>
H
Z
E-i
[b
O
OT
J
W
3
H
O,
(0
0
[d
en
O
cu
s
Cu
*^
c
a
B
*•*
CO
H
0
*"^
>
J
H
Cu
CO
QJ
*""*
CJ
CJ
O
0
hi
73
M
U
0)
1^
o
*J
CO
m
CU
H
O
0)
^
•o
eu
o
o.
o
cu
W
0)
*•*
r«
M
-u
(U
W
• H
a
•— <
OS
o
r^
oo
o en cu
00 ^ O
^O ~H ^
y ,
QJ
cr!
0)
0)
ex
u
<0
X
O
.p^
a
o
eu
in r* u
• in
m • M
en oo a)
5
W
(_,
QJ
&c
V4
J3
U
W
• H
a
4J
e
V
S
eu
m ^H hi
• 00 CJ
CM • C
en r^ M
,_!
CO
O
H
in
r* in
00 v£
\D — 1
•rl
CO
M
ctj
j:
.2
a
CO
CO
M
t*
a
JC
CJ
CO
• r4
O
CU
CO
O
a.
0
Cu
r- -H o
m • u
en oo
CO
O
4J
C
i
cu
0 *f U
• CJN O
en • e
I— t
eg
£
CM
_ >0
S 2
CO
CO
00
u,
(J
•H
a
oo m
in •
en oo
CO
M
eg
a
j=
u
CO
en
en •
en r~
vO 4J
i e
o eg
CO X 1 ^
4J O «-<
co CU
C
i
4J
eg
H
IW
O
^
CO
>
5
H
Cu
CQ
u
C
CU
S
ij
eg
CO
H
o
,_*
cu
>
JS
H
Cu
pa
^
eg
CO
• — .
M
^^
CO
*o
Q
C CO ^- MO
eu B u >J
B u -i eg
4J CO CO J2
eg cu 3 cj
cu > e co
u c C 'H
H 1-1 C
u C eg
e o *j
CO U 3
> 1 ^u
C C •-"
0 0 O
U Z CU
4J
iJ O
3 -H
i— i
O CO
a oo
\4
I-H eg
eg s
u u
eu co
• S -H
CO 73
4J CJ
c •- 1 e
eg x -H
U 0
3 u cu
*•* CO
•-* 73 eg
o cu co
Cu co b
eg cj
!-< CO C
•U CJ
CU C CO
8 -H JS
•U
CJ O
• H 4J O
X J->
0 73
U CU CU
t3 eg 73
eg cu eo
hi -H
CO
cj co eu
• H ••* CO
C eg
eg CO cu
DO CO hi
hi eg cj
O cu e
u u
•H C CO
X 'H .H
0 J=
eg
ij e •
O CU CO
cu eg
CO hi O
C o -i
•H C
eg «H eu
*•* u
C eu co
O j= eg
0 H S
• • ••
s*+* /~\
*~s *~s
872
-------
TABLE IX-15
ALTERNATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
90% RECYCLE DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVE
Subpart A-Aluminum Casting Subcategory
!a) Investment Casting Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS 0.110 0.0538
Oil and Grease 0.0538 0.0323
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
[b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS 0.0332 0.0162
Oil and Grease 0.0162 0.00971
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
873
-------
(c) Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
PH
0.00499
0.00244
0.000162
Within the range of
0.00244
0.00146
0.0000682
7.5 to 10
(d) Die Casting Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
PH
0.00726
0.00484
0.0000484
0.000494
0.000215
0.00532
0.00484
0.0000436
0.000203
0.000107
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
874
-------
(e) Die Lube Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
pH
0.000144
0.0000960
0.0000123
0.0000010
0.0000098
0.0000043
Within the range of
0.000106
0.0000960
0.0000059
0.0000009
0.0000040
0.0000021
7.5 to 10
Subpart B - Copper Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and
Copper
Lead
Zinc
pH
Grease
0.00352
0.00172
0.000163
0.0000129
0.0001 14
0.00172
0.00103
0.0000859
0.00001 1 2
0.0000481
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
G75
-------
!b) Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
PH
0.0193
0.00943
0.000896
0.000627
Within the rar
0.00943
0.00566
0.000471
0.000264
ige of 7.5 to 10
876
-------
Subpart C- Ferrous Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
0.00239
0.001 17
0.0001 1 1
0.0000088
0.0000777
Within the range of
0.001 17
0.000701
0.0000584
0.0000076
0.0000327
7.5 to 10
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and
Copper
Lead
Zinc
pH
Grease
0
0
0,
0,
0,
0222
0108
00103
0000814
000721
Within the range of 7.5
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
to
0108
00651
000542
0000705
000304
10
877
-------
(c) Slag Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
0.00616
0.00300
0.000285
0.00-00225
0.000200
Within the range of
0.00300
0.00180
0.000150
0.0000195
0.0000841
7.5 to 10
!d) Casting Quench and Mold Cooling Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper *
Lead *
Zinc l
pH
0.00376
0.00184
0.000174
0.0000138
0.000122
Within the range of
0.00184
0.001 10
0.0000918
0.00001 19
0.0000514
7.5 to 10
1 These limitations would be applicable only when casting quench
and mold cooling wastewaters are treated with other ferrous
casting subcategory process wastewaters.
-------
(e) Sand Washing Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
0.0192
0.00935
0.000888
0.0000701
0.000621
Within the range of
0.00935
0.00561
0.000467
0.0000607
0.000262
7.5 to 10
Subpart D- Lead Casting Subcategory
(a) Grid Casting Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and
Lead
PH
Grease
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.000931 0.000454
0.000454 0.000272
0.0000034 0.0000030
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
879
-------
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS 0.0127 0.00617
Oil and Grease 0.00617 0.00370
Lead 0.0000462 0.0000401
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
880
-------
Subpart E- Magnesium Casting Subcategory
(a) Grinding Scrubber Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
PH
0.0274
0.0134
0.000888
Within the range of
0.0134
0.00801
0.000374
7.5 to 10
(b) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and
Zinc
pH
Grease
0.000376
0.000184
0.0000122
Within the range
of 7
0.000184
0.000110
0.0000051
5 to 10
Subpart F- Zinc Casting Subcategory
881
-------
(a)
Die Casting and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
PH
0.000684
0.000334
0.0000222
Within the range of
0.000334
0.000200
0.0000093
7.5 to 10
!b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 lib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
PH
0.0129
0.00630
0.000419
0.00315
Within the range of
0.00630
0.00378
0.000176
0.00157
7.5 to 10
882
-------
TABLE IX-16
ALTERNATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
50% RECYCLE DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVE
Subpart A - Aluminum Casting Subcategory
(a) Investment Casting Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS 0.552 0.269
Oil and Grease 0.269 0.161
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS 0.166 0.0809
Oil and Grease 0.0809 0.0485
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
883
-------
(c) Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
PH
0.0250
0.0122
0.000810
Within the
range of 7.5
0.0122
0.00731
0.000341
to 10
,'d) Die Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
PH
0.0363
0.0242
0.000242
0.00247
0.00107
0.0266
0.0242
0.000218
0.00102
0.000537
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
-------
(e) Die Lube Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
pH
0.000720
0.000480
0.0000614
0.0000048
0.0000489
0.0000213
0.000528
0.000480
0.0000293
0.0000043
0.0000202
0.0000107
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
Subpart B - Copper Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
pH
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0176
00859
000816
0000645
000572
Within the range of
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
7.5
00859
00516
000430
0000559
000241
to 10
885
-------
(b) Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
PH
0.0966
0.0471
0.00448
0.00314
Within the range of
0.0471
0.0283
0.00236
0.00132
7.5 to 10
Subpart C - Ferrous Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS
Oil and
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
Grease
0.0120
0.00584
0.000555
0.0000438
0.000388
0.00584
0.00350
0.000292
0.0000380
0.000164
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
806
-------
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
0.111
0.0542
0.00515
0.000407
0.00361
Within the range of
0.0542
0.0325
0.00271
0.000353
0.00152
7.5 to 10
(c) Slag Quench Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
TSS
Oil and Grease
Copper
Lead
Zinc
PH
Maximum for Maximum for
Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib)
0.0308
0.0150
0.00143
0.0001 13
0.000999
Within the range of
of Metal Poured
0.0150
0.00901
0.000751
0.0000976
0.000421
7.5 to 10
887
-------
(d) Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and
CopperJ
Lead*
Zinc1
pH
Grease
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.0188
0.00918
0.000872
0.0000688
0.000610
Within the range of
0.00918
0.00551
0.000459
0.0000597
0.000257
7.5 to 10
These limitations would be applicable only when casting
quench and mold cooling wastewaters are treated with other
ferrous casting subcategory process wastewaters.
,'e) Sand Washing Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and
Copper
Lead
Zinc
pH
Grease
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
0.0958
0.0467
0.00444
0.000350
0.00311
Within the rat
0.0467
0.0280
0.00234
0.000304
0.00131
ige of 7.5 to 10
888
-------
Subpart D - Lead Casting Subcategory
(a) Grid Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and Grease
Lead
PH
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.00465
0.00227
0.0000170
0.00227
0.00136
0.0000148
Within the range of 7.5 to 10
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and Grease
Lead
PH
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.0632 0.0308
0.0308 0.0185
0.000231 0.000200
Within the range of 7.5 to 10.0
839
-------
Subpart E - Magnesium Casting Subcategory
(a) Grinding Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
pH
0.137
0.0668
0.00444
Within the rar
0.0668
0.0401
0.00187
ige of 7.5 to 10.0
(b) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
TSS 0.00188 0.000918
Oil and Grease 0.000918 0.000551
Zinc 0.0000610 0.0000260
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
890
-------
Subpart F - Zinc Casting Subcategory
(a) Die Casting and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
pH
0.00342
0.00167
0.0001 1 1
Within the range of
0.00167
0.00100
0.0000467
7.5 to 10
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
TSS
Oil and Grease
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
PH
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.0646
0.0315
0.00209
0.0157
Within the range of
0.
0.
0.
0.
7.5
0315
0189
000882
00787
to 10
891
-------
392
-------
CJ
O
CM
"
uj
o:
z
o
cc
>
393
-------
>
o
z
LJ
o
<
ro
LU
cr
:D
a:
uj
-------
895
-------
I „
£00
>*5
i_ a:
Z 2
Q O
UJ K
CD Q-
3 m
LO
UJ
cr
Z5
O
896
-------
o
O
O
UJ
tr
o
P2
si
0 5
>-
-------
ID
r
C9 CJ
Z 2
> t- !±j
Q 5 o
K « O
W V Z
o z:
= 0. < H
. °- Q-
O < O
u. o
£5
^i
o s
o
LU
CC
O
898
-------
> z
Q O
1= 13 I—
Z <
cr
. • UJ
> tn a.
CO
LU
or
in ±
l« < o
c/>
Q
a
o
s
= O
O UJ
CC -I
O (O
U. 13
O
O)
r--
I
^|
i
0
o
O
o
UJ
IT
tn
CC
o
K
o
Ld
o
o
899
-------
38
O
O
111
«
o
hi
X
K
Ul
2
g <
H |5
OT O
fclBSu!
t~ I— OD a
2> CO OD O
K O " ffl
a a: <
§51
2"-£
o
LU
CC
2
il
o
-------
i
f
\^
i
-s.
)
s*
t
^
-v
h>
r
o
111
Q
NMENTAL PROTECTI
i
^
Ul
IT
g
|1
CrtO^
FOUNDRY INDUSTRY
FERROUS CASTIN
.ER MELTING FURNAC
OPERATIONS
BPT MODEL
— ^
2
OT
O
y
UJ
(T
S2
u_
fvj
in
i
c
S
a
ID-
I <
co
03
CC
O
CO
901
-------
LU
cc
r
o
Ul
K
°
902
-------
O
O
HI
o
u
111
at
J 5
O I-
u
1
z x 5
-1-0
UJ
U)
X.
a
UJ
§
n
S
z w
£§
a a:
Z UJ
3 u.
AND M
MODEL
ENCH
BPT
I""
UJ
o
CM
UJ
tr
r>
903
-------
ft
z
o
rO
i
cr
few<
""See
tr co a LU
K< °Q
CO O O
§ coi5
"i«t
>£
-------
Q
tr
UJ
o.
o
£
w
UJ
a:
3
"oo
ro I
905
-------
l
UJ
a:
£ §
o
o
s.
u
906
-------
PROTECTION AGENC
_!
^
Z
|
0£
Z
Ul
en
0
IDUSTRY STUDY
CASTING
SCRUBBER OPERATI
MODEL
-3 _
4 lij r™
> Ul (J CL
QE _l< CO
O U,
ii
0
5
Ul
•s
(O
H
UJ
CE
\L
^^
0)
f^.
§
c
^^
-" S
z2
z w oe o
r- ui ce. 2 P
H <•> Ul K
U ^ S S K
sl§zi
§2 g£ u
3 Wl «
p
-------
u
— ac.
o w
908
-------
V «
§ I
s$S
00
LU
tr
ID
t- a.
tn o
c/>
1 =
Ha
> wi
t-
909
-------
o o
2 P
W <
CO
i
tr.
ff>
LU
(X
3 CO X
§22
= U H
> o
cc z
o
-------
OZQ
i
IE
UJ
o
a.
UJ
O
O
UJ
-B 1-
* <
55 <
?!
0 ^
it!
UJ
2
-1
-0—
' — '
r*1
s
o a;
3 UJ
I- 0-
N
UJ
o
u_
1
So"
8
UJ
_l
o
>
o
-------
Bp
S|
il1
CO (9
II
o o
C\J
a
UJ
o:
o
§
>-
CO
Igl
LOJ
co
f
S
H
I S j
u
c« c 0 f e
II fllf if il
-5 ±S e ^-5 *»*
§u
r S
o
i
=<
•o
o
•
912
-------
a
P
s,
u
Q:
§
J E
^^
IIP
(O
Ul
= CO
t- UJ
UJ
CM
CM
UJ
X o u
ll|l
II'
i
913
-------
(0
tr
LL
O
0)
Q
Z
d.
(0
D
O
X
h-
0)
o
o
FIGURE IX-23
METRL HOLDING £ CflSTING
RLTERNflTIVE BPT RNRLYSIS
BPT COSTS
3000 _
2000 _
1000 _
0
Legend
flNNUflL
TOTflL CflPITflL
1
RLTERNflTIVE
914
-------
915
-------
(T
0)
h-
co
o
o
FIGURE K-25
METRL HOLDING £ CflSTING
flLTERNRTIVE BPT flNflLYSIS
nONITORING COSTS
30000 _
20000 _
10000 _
0
Legend
flNNUflL MONITORING COSTS
\
RLTERNflTIVE
916
-------
FIGURE K-26
nETRL MOLDING 8 CflSTING
flLTERNflTIVE BPT RNflLYSIS
ENERGY/SLUDGE COSTS
x 10'
60000 _
o:
>•
\
40000 _
CO
(0
S 20000
CE
D
Z
Z
o
Legend
ENERGY
SLUDGE
2
flLTERNflTIVE
917
-------
FIGURE IX-27
riETflL HOLDING £ CflSTING
flLTERNflTIVE BPT flNflLYSIS
TOXIC POLLUTflNT DISCHflRGE LOPDS
1500 _
a:
o
1000 _
0)
Q
500 _
GL
H
D
_I
_J
O
Q_
0
Legend
Z
ORGflNICS
METflLS
1
2
flLTERNflTIVE
918
-------
FIGURE IX-28
METflL MOLDING £ CflSTING
RLTERNRTIVE BPT RNRLYSIS
NONTOXIC POLLUTRNT DISCHRRGE LORDS
10000 _
«—»
o:
\
o
y.
Q
cr
o
Z
CE
h-
D
J
_J
O
0.
5000 _
0
Legend
NONCONVENTIONflL.
CONVENTIONflL
1
2
RLTERNflTIVE
919
-------
SECTION X
EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH
THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
INTRODUCTION
t
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1, 1984
are to be based upon the best available control and treatment
technology (BAT) employed by a point source within the industry
category or subcategory, or by another industry from which
technology is readily transferable. BAT may include process
changes or internal controls, even when these modifications are
not commonly practiced in the industry.
DEVELOPMENT OF BAT
For those fourteen process segments in which the proposed BPT
limitations provide for complete recycle, the BAT model treatment
systems and proposed BAT limitations are equivalent to the BPT
treatment models and proposed limitations. The use of complete
recycle in these process segments is discussed in detail in
Section IX.
In the remaining process segments, the BPT model treatment
systems did not incorporate complete recycle. In these process
segments, the BPT level of treatment effluents may contain
various toxic pollutants. The intent of the BAT model treatment
system and the proposed BAT limitations is to provide for the
control of these toxic pollutant discharges. Several BAT
treatment alternatives were developed for each process segment.
These alternatives provide options from which the Agency can make
a selection to be used in developing the proposed BAT effluent
limitations.
Given the prevalence of complete recycle at plants in this
category, the Agency evaluated a BAT model treatment system
incorporating complete recycle for each process segment. In
developing such an alternative treatment system, consideration
was given to the addition of model treatment components which
would enable a plant to achieve complete recycle. Generally, the
zero discharge alternatives are designed with only those
treatment components necessary to treat process wastewater
sufficiently to enable complete recycle. As can be seen in the
cost estimates for each alternative (see Section VIII), the
921
-------
complete recycle alternative is generally the least expensive BAT
treatment alternative.
In developing the BAT alternatives the Agency considered: the
volume and quality of the BPT level of treatment effluents; the
volume and quality of the BAT level of treatment effluents; the
environmental impacts of the toxic pollutants found in the
wastewaters; and, the cost of each alternative. Technologies
considered for BAT were those which can be used in the foundry
industry treatment systems and which are effective in reducing
toxic pollutant levels. These technologies include systems which
have demonstrated their performance capabilities and economic
viability at the pilot plant, semi-works, or full-scale level.
The factors considered in evaluating and selecting the BAT
alternatives proposed limitations included: the age of the
equipment and facilities existing in the industry, the
manufacturing process employed, the process changes required, the
non-water quality environmental impacts (including energy
requirements), and the costs of applying the technology to the
industry.
The BAT level of treatment represents, at a minimum, the best
economically achievable performance of plants of various ages,
sizes, processes or other shared characteristics. As with BPT,
where existing performance is uniformly inadequate, BAT model
technologies may be transferred from another subcategory or
category.
As with the BPT level of treatment, the Agency considered two
discharge alternatives for the BAT level of treatment in all
process segments. The development of the proposed BAT
limitations is discussed first, followed by a brief discussion of
the BAT discharge alternatives.
IDENTIFICATION OF BAT
Aluminum Casting
The proposed BPT limitations for two of the five aluminum casting
subcategory process segments provide for no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters. The effluents from
the BPT model treatment systems for the remaining three process
segments contain various toxic pollutants. Therefore, the
control of these toxic pollutants is addressed by the BAT
alternatives developed for each process segment. The BAT
alternatives considered for the three remaining segments of the
aluminum casting subcategory are discussed below.
922
-------
Investment Casting Process
In developing the BAT alternatives for this process segment
special consideration was given to the use of extensive recycle
and the water quality requirements of the process, and to the
capital and annual costs of the alternative technologies. Each
alternative is an extension of the BPT model treatment system,
(flocculation, sedimentation and solids dewatering), and provides
for the extensive reycle of treated process wastewaters. A
discussion of the two alternatives considered follows.
Alternative No. 1: Figure X-l
This alternative provides for the complete recycle of the
BPT level of treatment effluent. An examination of the
different uses of water in the investment casting process
indicates that the BPT level of treatment effluent might be
of suitable quality for complete recycle. Mold back up
washdown, which is a house cleaning operation, does not
require high quality water. Therefore, the effluent from
the BPT model treatment system could be acceptable for use
as washdown water.
Alternative No. 2: Figure X-2
This alternative incorporates filtration and complete
recycle of the BPT level of treatment effluent. If low
pressure sprays or small orifice spray nozzles are used in
the investment casting wastewater recycle system, filtration
of the wastewaters may be needed in order to minimize water
supply system maintenance and cleaning requirements. As
noted above, BAT No. 1 uses a high pressure spray system
with larger orific spray nozzles as part of its complete
recycle system.
Selection of a BAT Alternative
EPA has determined to exclude this process segment from further
regulation at BAT because toxic organic pollutants were not
detected or not present at treatable levels. Copper and zinc
{the only toxic metals considered for regulation) are present in
amounts too small to be effectively reduced by the technologies
considered.
EPA is not requiring filtration following precipitation-
sedimentation treatment because the levels of copper and zinc
found in raw wastewaters are below the treatability levels
achieved with filters. In addition, the technology to achieve
923
-------
100 percent recycle is not demonstrated in and cannot readily be
transferred to this process segment. After meeting the proposed
BPT limitations, facilities in this process segment would
discharge about 280 kg of conventional and nonconventional
pollutants and 3.4 kg per year of toxic metal pollutants.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
The two BAT alternatives discussed below for melting furnace
scrubber wastewaters build upon the treatment capabilities of the
BPT model treatment system (sedimentation, skimming, 95% recycle,
flocculation, precipitation, and vacuum filtration). Based upon
the melting furnace scrubber complete recycle evaluation
presented in Section IX, and recognizing the high recycle rates
of some plants and the attainment of complete recycle in the zinc
subcategory melting furance scrubber process segment, both of the
BAT alternatives incorporate no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants.
For those plants with extensive treatment facilities already in
place, only recycle (and in some cases, filtration) equipment
would be needed to achieve the performance levels incorporated in
the BAT alternatives. However, those plants with only
rudimentary treatment facilities in use will have a viable
alternative to the installation of extensive BPT and BAT
treatment systems. In these cases, the provision of only
increased precipitation, sedimentation, and recycle capabilities
beyond that provided by the scrubber equipment package would
facilitate the attainment of complete recycle. The latter case
can be likened to the use of complete recycle in the scrubber
equipment and wastewater handling system provided by a
manufacturer. This type of operation is termed complete internal
recycle.
Alternative No. 1: Figure X-3
This alternative achieves no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to navigable waters by providing for the
filtration and recycle of the BPT model treatment system
effluent.
Alternative No. 2: Figure X-4
This alternative treatment system is based upon the design
of internal recycle systems provided in the manufacturer's
scrubber equipment packages, and the transfer of this
technology from the zinc melting furnace scrubber process.
Scrubbers are used on aluminum and zinc melting furnaces to
control fumes generated when dirty, oily, or grease, scrap
924
-------
is remelted. When oil-free, grease-free scrap is remelted,
scrubbers may not be required. Scrubber design is based
primarily upon dust or fume loadings. These loadings are a
function of scrap cleanliness and particulate distribution.
Therefore, the function of the melting furnace scrubber is
the same for both aluminum and zinc melting operations. The
metallurgical differences between zinc and aluminum are only
a minor design consideration in relation to the parameters
mentioned above.
This BAT alternative was developed on the basis of the zinc
melting furnace scrubber operation which achieves complete
recycle (Plant 04622). Additional sedimentation and oil
skimming capabilities are included in this alternative
treatment system in order to ensure adequate solids and oil
removal. These solids and oil and grease removal
capabilities are more extensive than those commonly found in
scrubber internal recycle systems.
Selection of a BAT Alternative
EPA proposes to exclude this process segment from the BAT
limitations. The toxic pollutants present in the raw wastewaters
of aluminum melting furnace scrubbers are below the treatability
limits of well operated precipitation and sedimentation treatment
systems or other technologies considered. The toxic metal
pollutants and toxic organic pollutants are present in amounts
too small to be effectively reduced by any of the technologies
considered. Complete recycle is not a viable BAT option because
the technology to achieve complete recycle has not been
demonstrated by aluminum plants with melting furnace scrubber
processes and cannot be readily transferred. EPA did not
consider filtration following precipitation and sedimentation
treatment with a discharge because the toxic metal pollutants
found in raw wastewaters are below the treatability levels
achieved with filters. EPA estimates the discharge of pollutants
not controlled will be 61.0 kilograms per year of toxic
pollutants and 1100 kilograms per year of conventional and
nonconventional pollutants.
Die Casting Process
In this process segment, as in the previous process segments, the
BAT treatment alternatives are extensions of the BPT level of
treatment. However, the presence of significant levels (refer to
Tables V-18 and V-32) of several toxic organic and metallic
pollutants (particularly the phenolic compounds, lead, and zinc)
warrants the incorporation of the best available technology prior
925
-------
to discharge. Various technologies were examined for their toxic
pollutant removal capabilities.
In-process controls were examined to identify those changes which
could be made to reduce water usage, and those measures which
could be taken to reduce or eliminate the contamination of
process wastewaters with toxic pollutants. Procedures used to
reduce the amount of hydraulic oil leakage and die lubricant
waste at the process will lower the demands placed on the
treatment equipment for the removal of the toxic pollutants.
These procedures will also facilitate the attainment of a high
rate of recycle.
In the development of the three BAT alternatives, the engineering
aspects of extensive recycle, and the water quality requirements
of the die casting process were considered. In addition, any
cost savings, which would be realized as a result of using a
particular BAT alternative were identified. Consideration of the
water quality requirements of the process indicate that process
wastewaters would be suitable for extensive recycle provided that
certain in-process changes were instituted, or extensive
treatment was installed.
Alternative No. 1: Figure X-5
BAT alternative No. 1 is based on the increased recycle of
the BPT effluent to attain an overall recycle rate of 95%.
This alternative, provides the maximum effluent reduction
benefits for the least incremental cost over BPT. The
prudent use of die casting process liquids (die lubricants,
etc.) or the segregated collection of die lubes (as
discussed in Section IX for the the die lube process
segment) would improve the overall operation of this
alternative treatment model.
Toxic organic pollutants are contained in the die casting
process wastewaters. These organics originate in the
process liquids liberally sprayed on the exterior of the die
to cool it. These liquids drip to the floor and run into
floor drains unless specific measures are taken to collect
these wastes. This excess of die casting process liquids
significantly increases the concentrations of toxic organic
pollutants in die casting process wastewaters.
However, even after taking proper precautions, significant
levels of toxic pollutants can be generated in the process.
To reduce the levels of toxics, the BPT model treatment
system (and in turn the BAT No. 1 system) includes an
emulsion breaking system. Studies conducted by the Agency,
926
-------
and analytical data collected at two sampled plants (17089
and 12040), indicate that emulsion breaking is capable of
reducing toxic organic pollutant concentrations. The two
plants noted above practice emulsion breaking as provided in
the BPT model treatment system. In conjunction with the
in-process controls, emulsion breaking should provide
sufficient organic pollutant control to facilitate a high
degree of recycle.
The toxic organic pollutant treated effluent analytical data
from plants 17089 and 12040 provided the basis for the
effluent loadings which would be achieved by this
alternative. As noted above, the treatment practices
employed at these plants are similar those incorporated in
the model treatment system. Follow are the toxic organic
pollutant analytical data for the noted plants. The list of
selected pollutants will indicate treatment of those organic
pollutants considered for regulation. This list also
presents the predominant, as reflected in the analytical
data, pollutants in that group of pollutants considered for
regulation.
No. of Effluent Concentrations
(mq/1)
Pollutant Observations Average Median
001 Acenaphthene 6 0.019 0
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 6 0.063 0.006
022 Parachlorometacresol 6 0.058 0.020
023 Chloroform 6 0.138 0.086
065 Phenol 6 0.013 0.012
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 6 0.214 0
076 Chrysene 6 0.004 0
085 Tetrachloroethylene 6 0.054 0.052
Phenols (4AAP) 6 0.222 0.181
The increase in recycle from 85% (at BPT) to 95% (at BAT-1)
is based upon sampling data, and survey data for Plant
20223. In addition to the data from plant 20223, high rate
recycle is demonstrated at the BPT level of treatment in the
aluminum subcategory casting quench and die lube process
segments and in the zinc subcategory die casting and casting
quench process segment. Refer to Section IX. The practices
in these segments, particularly the die lube process
segment, demonstrate the relationship between in-process
controls (of casting sprays, lubricants, etc.) and the
ability to attain a high degree of recycle. In these
segments, controls to prevent or minimize process solution
contamination are a prime factor in attaining complete
927
-------
recycle.
as well.
This relationship applies to this process segment
Following are the effluent loadings for this BAT
alternative. The average concentration values of the
organic pollutants presented above were used as the basis
for the monthly average loadings. The treatment performance
data presented in Section IX provided the basis for the
toxic metals effluent loadings -which would be achieved by
this alternative. The Agency's selection of pollutants for
which BAT limitations are being proposed is based upon the
following considerations: the ability of the BAT
technologies to control a pollutant; the relative level,
discharge load, and impact of each pollutant; the need to
establish practical monitoring requirements; and the ability
of one pollutant to indicate the control of other
pollutant/s considered for regulation.
BAT ALTERNATIVE No. 1
EFFLUENT LOADINGS
ALUMINUM DIE CASTING PROCESS
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
001 Acenaphthene 0.0000092
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 0.0000305
022 Parachlorometa cresol 0.0000281
023 Chloroform 0.0000668
065 Phenol 0.0000063
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate 0.000104
076 Chrysene 0.0000019
085 Tetrachloroethylene 0.0000261
122 Lead 0.0000242
128 Zinc 0.000247
PhenolsUAAP) 0.000107
0.0000046
0.0000152
0.0000140
0.0000334
0.0000031
0.0000518
0.0000010
0.0000131
0.0000218
0.000102
0.0000537
928
-------
Alternative No. 2: Figure X-6
BAT No. 2 adds granular activated carbon adsorption to the
BPT recycle system. This alternative incorporates the
extensive treatment that may be required when in-process
changes (to limit the introduction of toxic organic
pollutants at the source) are not adopted. Instead, toxic
organic pollutant control is provided as a final treatment
step. This alternative is the most expensive of the three
alternatives.
The use of activated carbon adsorption for the removal of
toxic organic pollutants serves two purposes: to remove
toxic organics and to prevent the buildup of organic
materials, particularly phenols, in the recycle system. One
of the plants (Plant 17089) visited during the sampling
survey has installed an activated carbon system since the
sampling visit was conducted. The following table presents
a summary of the effluent loadings which would be achieved
with the technology incorporated in this treatment
alternative. These loadings are based upon concentrations
demonstrated in Agency studies ("Treatability of Organic
Priority Pollutants", May 1979) of activated carbon
adsorption system performance.
929
-------
BAT ALTERNATIVE NO. 2
EFFLUENT LOADINGS
ALUMINUM DIE CASTING PROCESS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
001 Acenaphthene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometacresol
023 Chloroform
065 Phenol
067 Butyl benzyl
phthalate
076 Chrysene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
122 Lead
128 Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000048
0.0000121
0.0000242
0.0000668
0.0000063
0.0000048
0.0000019
0.0000242
0.0000242
0.000247
0.0000242
0.0000024
0.0000060
0.0000121
0.0000334
0.0000031
0.0000024
0.0000010
0.0000121
0.0000218
0.000102
0.0000121
Alternative No. 3: Figure X-7
The third BAT alternative provides for the 95% recycle of
the BAT No. 2 effluent. The justifications provided for BAT Nos.
1 and 2 apply to this treatment alternative as well.
Selection of a BAT Alternative
Based upon its applicability to and attainability by the plants
within this process segment, the proposed BAT limitations are
based upon the performance of BAT Alternative No. 1. This
alternative also exhibits the lowest cost of implementation. On
a model basis, the investment and annual costs of BAT Alternative
No. 2 are 14 and 66 times greater, respectively, than the
investment and annual costs of BAT Alternative No. 1. Refer to
Table VIII-31.
The proposed BAT limitations would result in the removal of 55 kg
per year of toxic organics and toxic metal pollutants from the
BPT effluent.
930
-------
Lead Casting
The proposed BPT effluent limitations for two of the three lead
casting subcategory process segments (grid casting and melting
furnace scrubber) provide for no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to navigable waters. As the BPT level of treatment
effluent from the other process segment may contain high
concentrations of lead, the control of this toxic pollutant is
addressed by the alternatives developed for this process segment.
Continuous Strip Casting Process
The following two BAT alternatives are incremental to the BPT
model treatment system. The treatment technologies incorporated
in the BAT alternative treatment systems reflect the current
practices of plants in this process segment.
Alternative No. 1: Figure X-8
This treatment alternative incorporates filtration of the
effluent from the BPT model treatment system. Four of the
five plants in this segment provide filtration of their
process wastewaters prior to discharge. This treatment
component is capable of achieving additional reductions in
toxic metals levels as a result of removing additional
particulate matter as lead may be present in the particulate
or precipitate forms. The following table presents a
summary of the effluent loadings which would be achieved
with the technology incorporated in this treatment
alternative. These effluent loadings are based upon the
performance data of the combined metals data base (refer to
Sections VII and IX) for precipitation, sedimentation, and
filtration technologies. These technologies are
demonstrated in this process segment. Sections VII and IX
provide discussions of the concentration data upon which
these effluent loadings are based. The selection of lead
for regulation is based upon the pollutant selection
procedures noted previously in this section.
931
-------
BAT ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
EFFLUENT LOADINGS
LEAD CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING PROCESS
Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant or Any One Day Monthly Average
Pollutant Property (kq/kkq) (kq/kkq)
122 Lead 0.0000227 0.0000204
Alternative No. 2: Figure X-9
This treatment alternative incorporates the filtration
component of BAT No. 1 and adds complete recycle of the
filter effluent. One of the five plants (Plant 10169) in
this process segment currently achieves complete recycle
using the treatment technologies provided in the model
treatment system. This alternative achieves no discharge of
process wastewater pollutants to navigable waters.
Selection of a BAT Alternative
These are presently no direct discharges in this segment,
therefore, BAT limitations are not appropriate. No BAT
alternative has been selected, and no BAT limitations are being
proposed for the lead subcategory continuous strip casting
segment.
Zinc Casting
The proposed BPT limitations for the die casting and casting
quench process segment provides for no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters. The BPT level of
treatment for the melting furnace scrubber process segment
provides for a blowdown which contains a number of toxic
pollutant. Therefore, three BAT alternatives have been developed
for the control of these pollutants.
Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
Alternative No. 1: Figure X-10
932
-------
This BAT treatment alternative is based on complete recycle
of the BPT model treatment system effluent. This level of
treatment is demonstrated at plant 04622. As little
additional equipment would be needed to close the recycle
loop, implementation costs for this alternative are minimal.
In addition, effluent monitoring costs are eliminated and
the purchases of makeup water are reduced.
Alternative No. 2: Figure X-ll
This alternative incorporates sulfide precipitation,
filtration and activated carbon treatment of the BPT system
effluent. The application of the filtration and activated
carbon adsorption technologies is based upon a transfer of
technologies from the aluminum subcategory melting furnace
scrubber process segment. Plant 17089 uses these treatment
technologies in this process segment. Refer to the previous
discussions in this section for details regarding the
applicability and transfer of treatment technologies between
the aluminum and zinc casting subcategories.
Sulfide precipitation is incorporated for the purpose of
providing optimum toxic metal pollutant removal. ~~ The
potassium permanganate phenols destruction component of the
BPT model system is not required when activated carbon
adsorption is used. This is the most expensive of the BAT
alternatives in this process segment as it reflects the
costs associated with the installation of the extensive
treatment (i.e., activated carbon) necessary to reduce toxic
organic pollutant concentrations to the fullest extent. The
effluent concentrations used as the bases for these loadings
are based upon data presented in Sections VII and IX and
upon upon studies ("Treatability of Organic Priority
Pollutants", May 1979) conducted by the Agency to determine
activated carbon adsorption capabilities. Following is a
summary of the effluent loadings which would be attained
with the technologies incorporated in this treatment
alternative. The selection of pollutants for regulation
follows the procedures noted previously in this section.
933
-------
BAT ALTERNATIVE NO. 2
EFFLUENT LOADINGS
ZINC MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER PROCESS
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
021
022
031
034
055
065
067
128
2,4, 6-trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
2, 4-dichlorophenol
2, 4-dimethylphenol
Naphthalene
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkg)
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0001
0003
0003
0003
0003
0003
57
15
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
0000630
0001 17
0003
1
5
Maximum for
Monthly Averages
(kq/kka)
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0000787
000157
000157
000157
000157
000157
0000315
0000600
000157
Alternative No. 3: Figure X-12
BAT No. 3 provides for closing the recycle loop in the
scrubber equipment package provided by the manufacturer.
This mode of operation is termed complete internal recycle.
The mode of treatment most prevalent among plants operating
zinc melting furnace scrubbers consists of extensive
internal recycle, generally greater than 90 percent,
followed by treatment of the recycle system effluent.
However, some plants extensively recycle within the scrubber
equipment package and then discharge a process effluent
without further treatment.
The ability of scrubbers to tolerate high recycle rates
without detrimental effects on performance prompted the
development of this BAT alternative. Refer to Section IX
for a review of the viability of high recycle rate and
complete recycle in melting furnace scrubber systems.
This alternative is the least costly of the three BAT
alternatives. The ability of the scrubber equipment to
provide sufficient treatment for the attainment of complete
recycle is demonstrated by plant 04622.
Selection of a BAT Alternative
The proposed BAT effluent limitations in this process segment are
based upon the first alternative, i.e., no discharge of process
934
-------
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters. Complete recycle
systems are demonstrated in this process segment and are
economically achievable.
Several toxic organic pollutants may remain in the BPT level of
treatment effluent. To remove these toxic organic pollutants the
Agency considered activated carbon adsorption technology as the
only technology capable of removing these pollutants. On a model
basis, the investment and annual costs of activated carbon
adsorption and filtration (needed to ensure proper carbon
adsorption system operation) are 11 and 32 times greater,
respectively, than the costs of BAT Alternative No. 1. Refer to
Table VIII-94.
The proposed BAT limitations would result in the removal of 665
kg per year of toxic pollutants.
Effluent Pollutant Load Summary
Table X-l presents a summary of the pollutant load reductions
achieved in each subcategory and process segment as a result of
implementing the various BAT levels of treatment. These data
pertain to complete recycle and direct discharge operations.
Complete recycle operations only contribute to the raw waste
pollutant loads. Section XIII presents pertinent details on the
pretreatment standards. Refer to Section VIII for summaries of
the industry-wide costs of treatment for the various
subcategories.
ANALYSIS OF BAT DISCHARGE OPTIONS
As with the BPT level of treatment, discharge alternatives were
also considered for the BAT level of treatment. These discharge
alternatives, incorporating 90% and 50% recycle, are similar to
those addressed in the BPT discussion (see Section IX). The
assumptions made and the evaluation processes followed are
similar to the assumptions and review processes of the BPT
discharge alternative analysis.
The 90% and 50% recycle options considered as possible bases for
BPT were rejected for the reasons set forth in Section IX.
Complete recycle is economically achievable and will remove
substantial quantities of toxic pollutants. A number of process
segments would discharge toxic organic pollutants (principally
phenolic compounds) if complete recycle were not the basis for
BAT. These pollutants would appear in the range of 0.5 mg/1 to
30.7 mg/1 in the discharges. Neither the 90% nor the 50% recycle
option was based upon technologies that would treat these toxic
organic pollutants. If a discharge option were selected for BAT
935
-------
and these pollutants required treatment, the total cost of these
options would far exceed the cost of complete recycle.
As with the BPT discharge alternatives, alternative effluent
limitations were developed for the 90% and 50% recycle
alternatives. These alternative limitations are presented in
Tables X-2 (for the 90% recycle alternative) and X-3 (for the 50%
recycle alternative).
936
-------
-H 00 OO
O CN CM
O 00 00
000
oo
o
o o
SN <-t ~H \O O O
-* O
00 O O
f-
ON O O
m
ON
l"» O O
CO
co
1
o
1
X
W
CO
<
o
(J
H
Z
<
H
D
>J
i-J
OH
H
Z
W
*2
fa
W
o
£
CO
z
o
M
H
W
OH
0
W
OB
1
CO
M
a
X
i^
CO
V
*-s^
60
CO
•o
CO
4-1
C
CO
4J
3
T-4
O
OH
1
C
0
o
c
0
z
u
• H
x
0
H
s-
o
V.
0
• H
X
0
H
i— i
CO
C
0
• H
4J
e
CO
i-H
CO
JJ
0)
Z
^
1
^
CO
u
•H
CO
60
O
CN O O
• • I
000 000
co CM CM co m in
O O O vO O O
O O O CM O O
o o o o o o
CN CM
h 0)
H ,-J
» H EH
CO CLt
-------
^H
1
X
w
J
pa
2
CO
3
o
_3
Is
1
nJ
iJ
O
PH
g
U
S3
fa
fa
w
o
w
H
S
od
EH
Q
^
«
w
£H
<
3
w
H
CO
<
S
!
/*s
en
l
0
^H
X
l-l
CO
0)
^
••s^
60
CO
•o
o
4J
C
CO
4J
3
1—4
i-H
O
0.
CO
§
M
H
$
w
%
w
o
1
o
CO
M
a
o
o;
u
N
a
5
H CM
0
Ed U
02 U
M <
a cu
,
C
0
o
C
0
z
u
• H
X
o
H
i— i
C
o
4J
C
Ol
C
o
r^ O o
f^
m
ON
NO
f— 1
C
0
4-1
C
01
>
NO O O
NO
iri
•«
CN
CM
•it
co
f»4
CO
44
Ol
S
CO O O
CM
/—\
en
s.
U
•H
X
o
H
4J
a-
£
4-1
n
01
w
H
^
ca
u
•r>
C
CO
60
O
^
M
*
i— 1
V
J
o
.
moo
CO
CM
S H H
BC PS pa
4J
B
60
CO
CO
m
01
u
O
CM
C
o
• H
u
0)
*-4
1-4
o
o
u
co
3
Q
^
\4
O
60
01
4J
CO
u
•s
CO
0]
3
O
Id
01
r».OO ONOO -*OO
r~ r» -H
CO CM CM
NO
(MOO CMOO r~oO
-* NO O
i-H «^ ^H
•t •»
i-H «"H
CM
ON NO
. •
rnOO OOOO OOO
o m
M
ps.
CM
^H
CM
fs. vO
• •
moo ooo ooo
o
^H
>HH »HH !*H^
pj^papa p^papa o^papa
•o
Oi C
O cfl X!
CO U
C 60 C
l-i Si C V
3 0 -H 3
fa C 1-1 O"
l-i 01 O
jjf.8 &
-------
CO
I
o
4J
B C
O 0)
odz >
I CO
B B
O O
O
d o o
O O O -H O O
CN
CN
tN 00 CO
•* -M 00
O O O -31 CO i-H
O"v vO
H 33
o o o
CO
o
o
CO
o
o o o
CM
o
o o o
o
o
o o o o o o
CO
o
-H O O
o o o
vO
o
vO O
ITl O O
m
o o
odd
••H
in
CN o
m cs
O O
o o
co
s_^
so
o
•H
O B
H CO
X 60|
o i-i
H O
o o o
o o o
CO
o
o o o
CO
CO
-H O
o\ o o
O CO
-* r-
p^ f-i O
co d o
r»
O
I
UN
CO 01
4) >
I-l 01
H iJ
3 H
CO p*
(A «
H H
PQ CO
» H H
to a- <;
PC Ifl CQ
» H H
H H
OJ
E
bt
0)
CA
CO
03
4)
O
O
ca
00 VH
C 01
I-l U
o w
c
o
•H
U
o
01
e j:
CO CJ
60 0)
•S3
4J
CO 60
CO C
0) CO
o<3
01
U
CO
M
•5
1-1
60 O)
B J3
•* ^»
4J 3
•-I I-l
0) U
IH
O
60
01
iJ
CO
U
42
CD
S
3
• H
cu
0)
60
U
B
O
H
939
-------
TABLE X-2
ALTERNATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
90% RECYCLE DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVE
Subpart A - Aluminum Casting Subcategory
(a) Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Zinc
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.000124 0.0000512
(b) Die Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Acenaphthene
2,4,6-tr ichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Chrysene
Tetrachloroethylene
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000184
0.0000610
0.0000561
0.000134
0.0000126
0.000207
0.0000039
0.0000523
0.0000484
0.000494
0.000215
0.0000092
0.0000305
0.0000281
0.0000668
0.0000063
0.000104
0.0000019
0.0000261
0.0000436
0.000203
0.000107
940
-------
(c) Die Lube Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Chlorofoorm
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000012
0.0000026
0.0000002
0.0000041
0.0000010
0.0000123
0.0000010
0.0000098
0.0000006
0.0000013
0.0000001
0.0000021
0.0000005
0.0000059
0.0000009
0.0000040
0.0000043
0.0000021
Subpart B - Copper Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Copper
Lead
Zinc
0.000110
0.0000086
0.0000877
0.0000524
0.0000077
0.0000361
941
-------
(b) Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper 0.000603 0.000288
Zinc 0.000481 0.000198
Subpart C - Ferrous Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Copper
Lead
Zinc
0.0000748
0.0000058
0.0000596
0.0000356
0.0000053
0.0000245
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper 0.000694 0.000331
Lead 0.0000542 0.0000488
Zinc 0.000553 0.000228
942
-------
(c) Slag Quench Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum tor
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper
Lead
Zinc
0.000192
0.0000150
0.000153
0.0000916
0.0000135
0.0000631
(d) Casting Quench and Mold Cooling Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copperl
Lead*
Zinc1
0.000117
0.0000092
0.0000936
0.0000560
0.0000083
0.0000385
These limitations would be applicable only when casting
quench and mold cooling wastewaters are treated with other
ferrous subcategory process wastewaters.
(e) Sand Washing Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Copper
Lead
Zinc
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
0.000598 0.000285
0.0000467 0.0000421
0.000477 0.000196
943
-------
Subpart D - Lead Casting Subcategory
(a) Grid Casting Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Lead 0.0000023 0.0000020
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/100 Ib) of Metal Poured
Lead 0.0000308 0.0000277
Subpart E - Magnesium Casting Subcategory
(a) Grinding Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.000681 0.000280
944
-------
(b) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Zinc 0.0000094 0.0000039
Subpart F - Zinc Casting Subcategory
[a) Die Casting and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.0000170 0.0000070
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.000321 0.000132
Phenols (4AAP) 0.00315 0.00157
945
-------
TABLE X-3
ALTERNATIVE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
50% RECYCLE DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVE
Subpart A - Aluminum Casting Subcategory
(a) Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Zinc
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.000621 0.000256
(b) Die Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Acenaphthene
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Chrysene
Tetrachloroethylene
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000920
0.000305
0.000281
0.000668
0.0000629
0.00104
0.0000194
0.000261
0.000242
0.00247
0.00107
0.
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0000460
000152
000140
000334
0000315
000518
0000097
000131
000218
00102
000537
946
-------
(c) Die Lube Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
2, 4, 6-trichlorophenol
Chloroform
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000060
0.0000132
0.0000012
0.0000205
0.0000052
0.0000614
0.0000048
0.0000489
0.0000213
0.0000030
0.0000066
0.0000006
0.0000103
0.0000026
0.0000293
0.0000043
0.0000202
0.0000107
Subpart B - Copper Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Copper
Lead
Zinc
0.000550
0.0000430
0.000438
0.000262
0.0000388
0.000180
947
-------
(b) Mold Cooling and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper 0.00302 0.00144
Zinc 0.00240 0.000990
Subpart C - Ferrous Casting Subcategory
(a) Dust Collection
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Copper
Lead
Zinc
0.000374
0.0000292
0.000298
0.000178
0.0000263
0.000123
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper 0.00347 0.00165
Lead 0.000271 0.000244
Zinc 0.00277 0.00114
948
-------
(c) Slag Quench Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Copper
Lead
Zinc
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
0.000961
0.0000751
0.000766
0.000458
0.0000676
0.000315
(d) Casting Quench and Mold Cooling Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
kq/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Copper1
Lead1
Zinc1
0.000587
0.0000459
0.000468
0.000280
0.0000413
0.000193
These limitations would be applicable only when casting quench
and mold cooling wastewaters are treated with other ferrous
subcategory process wastewaters.
(e) Sand Washing Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum
Any One
for
Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
Copper
Lead
Zinc
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
0.00299
0.00234
0.00238
0.00143
0.000210
0.000981
949
-------
Subpart D - Lead Casting Subcategory
(a) Grid Casting Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximun for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Lead 0.0000113 0.0000102
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Lead 0.000154 0.000139
Subpart E - Magnesium Casting Subcategory
(a) Grinding Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.00340 0.00140
950
-------
(b) Dust Collection Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Sand Handled
Zinc 0.0000468 0.0000193
Subpart F - Zinc Casting Subcategory
(a) Die Casting and Casting Quench Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kg/kkg (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.0000851 0.0000350
(b) Melting Furnace Scrubber Operations
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
kq/kkq (lb/1000 Ib) of Metal Poured
Zinc 0.00161 0.000661
Phenols (4AAP) 0.0157 0.00787
951
-------
0. <
a a
M
UJ
-------
0. <
>
M
ui
tr.
OT Z
o
z t-
111
•
a
953
-------
954
-------
03 CD
2
CO
O
CO O OJ
Z IT Z
UJ
a: 5 z <
a _i x ._
Z<3 5
3 U. S
£ 1
§
M
UJ
cr
o
o
."71
r
0
z
H
_l
UJ
0
<
z
X
(T
UJ
CD
m
a:
2
UJ
^_
05
•^
~~|. '
!-•
i
UJ
t
o
>•
o
UJ
ir
1
SSS" I
955
-------
>• Z CO <
a: 5 <
°
ID
956
-------
957
-------
958
-------
§.
H> 1—
a <
i
I
i
i
V
CJ
INMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN
g
Z
UJ
OUNDRY INDUSTRY STUDY
LEAD CASTING
u.
1
OUS STRIP CASTING OPERAT
BAT ALTERNATIVE N2 1
3
Z
K
Z
0
o
CD
H
FIGURE
lfm
Q
U1
^»
|
I "' I
x
I 'JI
I *. «' ^* k**l
O O Q.'
|0 Oj
L I
959
-------
(T
UJ
CL <
03 CD
in
z
o
IT
U)
S~
Of
O O Z
S C I" >
fc£ ^H
= < 2 <
Q O ° Z
-Q I y
S
z
o
H
UJ
-------
ft W
ri"l
I * H
o I
T1
*£
1 3 Z I I
I « O I
en Z
< <
Jr 2
O QZ
a. ui
r;
-r-r-=
-rn
D-H i
' '
B "rr
1 o 5 I
L
i 3 i i 5 i r
L:J L:J--
si
r
-
,, O UJ I
o £ < a) -J
?KZ 3$ h«-
SO OK
CO 2
58
58 I
__I_J
>
o
LJ
O
O
t-
O
-------
]
| POLYMER 1
1 T '
i r:r
=> i 3 1
1 '
cc
LU a*
SSIjj
r*c:^
,r"
_ y-—i
3 1 1 « |
L^L:>
H—
s l
!>
1 *
^-t1-!
r-l III, 0
1 1 L '
1 S 1 r
1 ZINC 1 1 i h
1 MELTING 1 1
FURNACE H^
SCRUBBERS 1
(95 % INTERNAL RECYCLE)' I
^_ _J L
>
u
_ ^J — 1 oc !"T
Ul UJ
\^^ H H
= 1
\ s s
r- — T-|i i
/ M« i
i ; i
I u
c1 r1
i 1
^ ;gi
jj^j ^p
^ 1 L J
w 1 1 1 p— J "
-J j"^. f^. _- 1 Q
°^^ i |SS
w -^ I r ^^
i o0u.
. g-
FOUNDRY INDUSTRY STUDY
ZINC CASTING
MELTING FURNACE SCRUBBER OPERATIONS
BAT ALTERNATIVE NO Z
]
1
(
- K
L «
D a
^^
M
UJ
CE
O
O
u.
- _
Own. 3/21/79
I
B
^, rmj\ ii
L-»< S5 I &
J (/> 1- i
UJ LJ UJ
«M_I
962
-------
Q
3
M
LU
O
o uj
§5
Z
UJ
UJ
a
tu
UJ
Ui
N
lii QC
u uj
< CD
Z ID
3 IT
U. U
CO
e
!E^
o o
:- V
<~ o
UJ
CC
ui
a.
s
UJ
ui
o
963
-------
SECTION XI
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The 1977 Amendments added Section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act
establishing the "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) [biochemical oxygen demanding
pollutants (BOD5J, total suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform,
and pH], and any additional pollutants defined by the
Administrator as "conventional" (oil and grease, 44 FR 44501,
July 30, 1979).
BCT is not an additional limitation but replaces BAT for the
control of conventional pollutants. In addition to other factors
specified in Section 304(b)(4)(B), the Act requires that BCT
limitations be assessed in light of a two part "cost-
reasonableness" test. American Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F.2d
954 (4th Cir. 1981). The first test compares the cost for
private industry to reduce its conventional pollutants with the
costs to publicly owned treatment works for similar levels of
reduction in their discharge of these pollutants. The second
test examines the cost-effectiveness of additional industrial
treatment beyond BPT. EPA must find that limitations are
"reasonable" under both tests before establishing them as BCT,
In no case may BCT be less stringent than BPT.
EPA published its methodology for carrying out the BCT analysis
on August 29, 1979 (44 F.R. 50732). In the case mentioned above,
the Court of Appeals ordered EPA to correct data errors
underlying EPA's calculation of the first test, and to apply the
second cost test. (EPA has argued that a second cost test was
not required).
EPA has determined that the BAT alternatives considered in this
category are capable of removing significant amounts of
conventional pollutants. On October 29, 1982, the Agency
proposed a revised BCT methodology. EPA is deferring proposing
BCT limitations for this category until the revised methodology
can be applied to the technologies available for the control of
conventional pollutants in this category.
965
-------
SECTION XII
EFFLUENT QUALITY ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION
OF NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
A new source is defined as any source the construction of which
is commenced after the publication of proposed regulations
prescribing new source performance standards. The basis for New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under Section 306 of the Act
is to be the best available demonstrated technology. New plants
have the opportunity to design the best and most efficient
manufacturing processes and wastewater treatment technologies.
Congress, therefore, directed EPA to consider the best
demonstrated processes and operating methods, in-plant control
measures, end-of-pipe treatment technologies, and other
alternatives that reduce pollution to the maximum extent
feasible, including, where practicable, no discharge of
pollutants to navigable waters.
Identification of. NSPS
For the 14 process segments in which "no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants" is proposed at BPT, EPA did not develop
alternative treatment models for NSPS. BAT is equivalent to BPT
for these process segments and represents current, state-of-the-
art treatment facilities and practices. Therefore, no additional
treatment alternatives or practices have been considered by the
Agency for NSPS. For these 14 process segments the proposed NSPS
are equivalent to the proposed BAT limitations.
For the remaining 5 process segments EPA considered alternative
NSPS treatment models that are equivalent to the BPT and the BAT
treatment alternatives.
Following is a summary of the NSPS model treatment alternatives
with references to the equivalent BPT and BAT alternatives:
NSPS Equivalent
Process Alternative Reference Models
Aluminum-Investment NSPS No. 1 BPT
Casting NSPS No. 2 BPT and BAT No. 1
NSPS No. 3 BPT and BAT No. 2
Aluminum-Melting Furnace NSPS No. 1 BPT
Scrubber NSPS No. 2 BPT and BAT No. 1
967
-------
NSPS No,
BPT and BAT No. 2
Aluminum-Die Casting
Lead-Continuous
Strip Casting
NSPS NO. 1 BPT
NSPS No. 2 BPT and BAT No. 1
NSPS No. 3 BPT and BAT No. 2
NSPS No. 4 BPT and BAT No. 3
NSPS No. 1 BPT
NSPS No. 2 BPT and BAT No. 1
NSPS No. 3 BPT and BAT No. 2
Zinc-Melting Furnace
Scrubber
NSPS No. 1 BPT
NSPS No. 2 BPT and BAT No. 1
NSPS No. 3 BPT and BAT No. 2
NSPS No. 4 BPT and BAT No. 3
Figures XII-1 through XII-17 depict the above NSPS alternative
treatment systems. Refer to Section IX for illustrations of the
model treatment systems for the remaining process segments.
Rationale for NSPS
In those process segments in which the proposed BPT effluent
limitations require no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants, complete recycle clearly represents the best
demonstrated technology.
NSPS Effluent Levels
For those five process segments for which BPT and BAT treatment
models and alternatives were developed, the effluent levels
attainable by the NSPS treatment alternatives are identical to
those presented for the corresponding treatment models and
alternatives in Sections IX and X. As noted above, the NSPS
model treatment systems for the remaining process segments
provide a treatment approach similar to that of the BPT and BAT
model treatment systems, i.e., no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to navigable waters.
Selection of_ an NSPS Alternative
In the 15 process segments in which the proposed BAT levels of
treatment achieve no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
to navigable waters, the proposed NSPS are equal to the proposed
BAT limitations.
In two process segments (aluminum investment casting and aluminum
melting furnace scrubber), the selected NSPS alternatives are
968
-------
identical to the BPT model treatment systems, i.e., NSPS No. 1.
In the investment casting process segment complete recycle is
neither demonstrated nor readily transferred. Likewise, complete
recycle is not demonstrated in the aluminum melting furnace
scrubber process segment.
In the aluminum die casting segment and the lead continuous strip
casting process segments, the proposed NSPS are based upon the
demonstrated treatment technologies of the NSPS Alternative No. 2
treatment systems. While the Agency considered treatment
alternatives beyond the NSPS Alternative No. 2 level of
treatment, the Agency concluded that the other alternatives are
not demonstrated. The selected alternatives are equivalent to
the selected or preferred BAT model treatment systems. Details
pertaining to these treatment systems, and the resulting limits
and standards, were previously reviewed in Sections IX and X.
Following are the proposed NSPS for the three process segments
with discharge standards other than zero discharge:
PROPOSED NSPS
Aluminum-Investment Casting Process
Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant or Any One Day Monthly Average
Pollutant Property (kg/kkg) (kg/kkg)
TSS 1.103 0.538
Oil and Grease 0.538 0.323
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
969
-------
PROPOSED NSPS
Aluminum Melting Furnace Scrubber Process
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
TSS
Oil and Grease
pH
0.0166
0.00809
Within the ranqe of
0.00809
0.00486
7.5 to 10
PROPOSED NSPS
Aluminum-Die Casting Process
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
Acenaphthene
2, 4, 6-trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Chrysene
Tetrachloroethylene
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
TSS
Oil and Grease
pH
0.0000092
0.0000305
0.0000281
0.0000668
0.0000063
0.000104
0.0000019
0.0000261
0.0000242
0.000247
0.000107
0.00363
0.00242
Within the ranqe of
0.0000046
0.0000152
0.0000140
0.0000334
0.0000031
0.0000518
0.0000010
0.0000131
0.0000218
0.000102
0.0000537
0.00266
0.00242
7.5 to 10
970
-------
PROPOSED NSPS
Lead-Continuous Strip Casting Process
Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant or Any One Day Monthly Average
Pollutant Property (kq/kkq) (kg/kkg)
Lead 0.0000227 0.0000204
TSS 0.00340 0.00250
Oil and Grease 0.00227 0.00227
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10
971
-------
912
-------
O
o
UJ
_l
o
>-
o
UJ
tr
a —
3 I-
(t |~ O >
^~ < £5 P
ill!
Sis"
Q ^ UJ CO
l
0
O
0.
Q
ul to ce
> < LU
973
-------
3 ,5 - (T,
0. LU
, O >
jfll
en
Ul
fO
LU
cr
974
-------
975
-------
<
ll—
z
O
ir
ID
UJ
CE
976
-------
(O
o
z
UJ
o
K-
ac.
>-
Q
10
g
o
r w ,
FIGURE
K
UJ
Z
o
tr
a.
_i
<
i-
LJ
2
CO K
CO
< 3 0.
(9
977
-------
tn
f-
I.
u
IT
i
U.
Z< uj 0-
R 52
?
1
978
-------
CO
^
iZ
z a 5 w
- = £5
>- 5 01 <
979
-------
980
-------
07
UJ
tr
CO
o
2 X UJ
W >
5- H
o 5
Ki=£>
!-«?•'-
-------
T-®--
D-
s
z
g
-
ssss
Q < < Z
z o o a:
Q Q.
>- < £
o:
p <
O
UJ
cr
ID
982
-------
UJ
Ifl
IT CM
-
o z
o o u
£z z>
*H H H
CO OT
0.
b
O
o
UJ
ca
o
Z K 1-5
C I- CO ir
Q.
O
983
-------
in
z
o
ro
UJ
cc
i- i-
in in
3 <
a o
— Q
13
S=K
a: n
<
in
in
O
O
"I
k
10 I
01
Q
O
UJ
tr
Q
(T
UJ
00.
o
984
-------
tn
g
>- 2
Q Q.
P O -
">
OU on Z
z a:
~ O 1.1 LU
«
2 "-8;
985
-------
co
O
cM
O 01
CO CO
— <
a o
>
O
> z
z
tr to
3 a.
U_ CO
in
LU
o:
a
u_
986
-------
987
-------
z
UJ
z
o
PROTECTI
_i
LU
z
o
IE
Z
UJ
0
- S 0 <
|N|£
3 3 CO
o "- z
"" O
Z
^
LU
Z
s
UJ
or
LZ
^M
O)
CM
M
10
e
1
^^
H
-1
UJ
2
o
is
-------
SECTION XIII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR DISCHARGES
TO PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS
Introduction
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 pass through of toxic pollutants at POTW systems. The
legislative history of the 1977 Clean Water Act indicates that
pretreatment standards are to be technology-based, i.e.,
analogous to the best available technology for the removal of
toxic pollutants.
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 facilitate the installation of
adequate treatment capabilities.
General Pretreatment Standards
For detailed information on Pretreatment Standards refer to 46 FR
9404 et seq, "General Pretreatment Regulations for Existing and
New Sources of Pollution," (January 28, 1981). See also 47 FR
4518 (February 1, 1982). In particular, 40 CFR Part 403
describes national standards (prohibited and categorical
standards), revision of categorical standards through removal
allowances, and POTW pretreatment programs.
In developing the proposed pretreatment standards for foundry
operations, the Agency gave primary consideration to the
objectives and requirements of the General Pretreatment
Regulations. The Agency determined that uncontrolled discharges
of certain metal molding and casting operations' wastewaters to
POTWs would result in the pass through of toxic pollutants.
Categorical Pretreatment Standards
POTWs are usually not designed to treat the toxic pollutants
(primarily the toxic metals) present in foundry process
wastewaters. Instead, POTWs are typically designed to treat
989
-------
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS),
fecal coliform bacteria, and pH.
Before proposing pretreatment standards, the Agency examined
whether the pollutants discharged by the industry pass through
the POTW or interfere with the POTW operation or sludge disposal
practices. In determining whether pollutants pass through a
POTW, the Agency compares the percentage of a pollutant removed
by a POTW with the percentage removed by direct dischargers
applying BAT. A pollutant is deemed to pass through the POTW
when the average percentage removed nationwide by a well-operated
POTW meeting secondary treatment requirements is less then the
percentage removed by direct dischargers complying with BAT
effluent limitations for that pollutant.
This approach to the definition of pass through satisfies two
competing objectives set by Congress: that standards for
indirect dischargers be equivalent to standards for direct
dischargers, while, the treatment capability and performance of
the POTW be recognized and taken into account in regulating the
discharge of pollutants from indirect dischargers. Rather than
comparing the mass or concentration of pollutants discharged by
the POTW with the mass or concentration discharged by a direct
discharger, the Agency compared the percentage of the pollutants
removed in treatment. The Agency takes this approach because a
comparison of the mass or concentration of pollutants in a POTW
effluent with the mass or concentration in a direct discharger's
effluent would not take into account the mass of pollutants
discharged to the POTW from non-industrial sources nor the
dilution resulting from the addition of large amounts of non-
industrial wastewater.
In the foundry category the Agency has concluded that the toxic
metals and toxic organics that would be regulated under these
proposed standards would pass through the POTW.
The average percentage of toxic metals removed by POTWs
nationwide ranges from 19 to 65 percent (as seen below).
National Removal Credit Efficiencies
Cadmium 38%
Chromium 65%
Copper 58%
Lead 48%
Nickel 19%
Silver 66%
Zinc 65%
990
-------
Total Regulated Metals 62%
Cyanide 52%
•o
EPA developed the "national removal credits" on the basis of its
"Fate of Priority Pollutants in POTWs" report (EPA 440/1-82/303).
The Agency estimates that the percentage of toxic metals that can
be removed by a direct discharger applying BAT is expected to be
aboVe 70 percent. Accordingly, these pollutants pass through
POTW's. In addition, since toxic metals are not degraded in the
POTW (they either pass through or are removed in the sludge),
their presence in the POTW sludge may limit a POTW's chosen
sludge disposal method.
In addition to toxic metals, the POTW study collected limited
data on toxic organic pollutants. Removals of these pollutants,
some of which are also discharged by foundries, are in the range
of 60 to 95 percent. Complete recycle of process wastewater
removes all toxic organic pollutants from discharge. For the one
process segment, aluminum die casting, with a PSES discharge
allowance for toxic organic pollutants, the toxic organic
pollutant removals are estimated to be 95 percent. The Agency
has concluded that the toxic organic pollutants regulated under
these proposed standards would pass through a POTW.
The toxic pollutant removal provided by POTWs is incidental to
the POTW's main function of conventional pollutant treatment.
POTWs have, historically, accepted quantities of many pollutants
which are well above levels which POTWs have the capacity to
treat adequately.
Due to the presence of toxic pollutants in wastewaters from
foundry operations, pretreatment must be provided to ensure that
these pollutants do not pass through the POTW.
Pretreatment standards for total suspended solids, oil and
grease, and pH are not proposed because these pollutants can be
effectively treated at POTWs.
The following discussions identify the rationale for the model
treatment technologies, the expected levels of pollutant removal,
and, finally, the selection of pretreatment models upon which the
categorical proposed PSES and PSNS are based.
Identification of_ Pretreatment
For the 14 process segments in which "no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants" is proposed at BPT, EPA did not develop
alternative treatment models for PSES and PSNS. BAT is
991
-------
equivalent to BPT for these process segments. The proposed PSES
are technology-based and analogous to the proposed BAT
limitations for toxic pollutants in these 14 process segments.
For the same 14 process segments, the proposed NSPS are "no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants." In these segments
the Agency is proposing PSNS equivalent to NSPS.
By eliminating the discharge to a POTW, complete recycle provides
the maximum level of toxic pollutant control. In addition,
expenditures for effluent monitoring and for POTW user fees are
reduced or eliminated. The model treatment systems for these
process, segments are illustrated in Sections IX and X. For the
remaining 5 process segments EPA considered alternative PSES and
PSNS treatment models that are equivalent to the BAT and NSPS
treatment alternatives.
Following is a summary of the treatment
remaining five process segments.
model bases for the
Process
Aluminum Investment
Casting
PSES/PSNS
Alternative
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
Aluminum Melting Furnace No. 1
Scrubber No. 2
No. 3
Aluminum Die Casting
Lead Continuous
Strip Casting
Zinc Melting Furnace
Scrubber
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
Reference Models
BPT
BPT and BAT No. 1
BPT and BAT No. 2
BPT
BPT and BAT No. 1
BPT AND BAT No. 2
BPT
BPT and BAT No. 1
BPT and BAT No. 2
BPT and BAT No. 3
BPT
BPT and BAT No. 1
BPT and BAT No. 2
BPT
BPT and BAT No. 1
BPT and BAT No. 2
BPT and BAT No. 3
Figures XIII-1 through XIII-17 illustrate the above PSES and PSNS
treatment models.
992
-------
Selection of PSES and PSNS
The Agency found no POTW dischargers in either segment of the
magnesium casting subcategory. Therefore, the Agency is not
proposing PSES for the magnesium subcategory grinding scrubber or
dust collection process segments. The proposed PSNS in these two
segments are equivalent to the proposed NSPS.
The following discussions address each of the process segments
for which pretreatment alternatives were developed.
Aluminum-Investment Casting
The Agency is not proposing PSES or PSNS because at the levels of
total suspended solids and oil and grease discharged from this
process these pollutants are considered compatible with treatment
by POTWs. Furthermore, the toxic metals present in the raw
wastewaters of this process segment are below the treatability
levels of precipitation and sedimentation technologies.
Aluminum - Melting Furnace Scrubber
The Agency is not proposing PSES or PSNS because at the levels of
total suspended solids and oil and grease discharged from this
process these pollutants are considered compatible with treatment
by POTWs. Furthermore, the toxic metals present in the raw
wastewaters of this process segment are below the treatability
levels of precipitation and sedimentation technologies.
Aluminum - Die Casting
In this process segment the Agency is proposing PSES equivalent
to the proposed BAT limitations and PSNS equivalent to the
proposed NSPS. The technologies used as the bases for the
proposed PSES and PSNS are identical and represent the best
demonstrated technology in this segment. Refer to Sections X and
XII for details on the selection of the treatment alternative,
the selection of pollutants to be regulated, and the development
of effluent limitations and standards. The proposed PSES would
result in the removal of 59.4 kg per year of toxic pollutants.
Following are the proposed PSES and PSNS for the aluminum die
casting process segment.
993
-------
PROPOSED PSES AND PSNS
Aluminum-Die Casting Operations
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
Acenaphthene
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Parachlorometacresol
Chloroform
Phenol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Chrysene
Tetrachloroethylene
Lead
Zinc
Phenols (4AAP)
0.0000092
0.0000305
0.0000281
0.0000668
0.0000063
0.000104
0.0000019
0.0000261
0.0000242
0.000247
0.000107
0.0000046
0.0000152
0.0000140
0.0000334
0.0000031
0.0000518
0.0000010
0.0000131
0.0000218
0.000102
0.0000537
Lead - Continuous Strip Casting
In the lead continuous strip casting process segment the Agency
is proposing PSES based upon sedimentation, precipitation, and
filtration technologies (BAT Alternative 1). These technologies
are demonstrated by four of the five continuous strip casting
plants. The proposed PSES would result in the removal of 6.9 kg
per year of toxic metals. The Agency is proposing PSNS
equivalent to PSES. Refer to Sections X and XII for additional
details on the selection of the treatment alternative, the
selection of a regulated pollutant, and the development of
effluent standards.
PROPOSED PSES AND PSNS
Lead Continuous Strip Casting Operations
Pollutant
Pollutant
or
Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
(kq/kkq)
Maximum for
Monthly Average
(kq/kkq)
Lead
0.0000227
0.0000204
994
-------
Zinc - Melting Furnace Scrubber
In this process segment the Agency is proposing PSES equivalent
to the proposed BAT limitations and PSNS equivalent to the
proposed NSPS. The technologies used as the bases for the
proposed PSES and PSNS are identical and represent the best
demonstrated technology in this segment. Refer to Sections X and
XII for details on the selection of the treatment alternative.
The proposed PSES and PSNS are no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to a POTW.
POTW Removal Rate Comparison
The toxic metal pollutant removal rates of the selected
pretreatment alternatives for the two process segments which
incorporate a discharge are compared to the POTW removal rates
for these pollutants:
Lead Zinc
Actual POTW 48% 65%
Aluminum Subcategory-
Die Casting Process 99% >99%
Lead Subcategory - Continuous
Strip Casting Process 89%
995
-------
As shown above the selected alternatives will remove these toxic
metals (i.e., prevent the pass through of toxic metals at POTWs)
to a significantly greater degree than would occur if these
wastewaters were discharged untreated to POTWs. The
achievability of the proposed standards is reviewed in Sections
IX, X, and XII.
ANALYSIS OF PSES DISCHARGE OPTIONS
As with the BPT level of treatment, discharge alternatives were
also considered for the PSES level of treatment. These discharge
alternatives, incorporating 90% and 50% recycle, are similar to
those addressed in the BPT discussion (see Section IX) . The
assumptions made and the evaluation processes followed are
similar to the assumptions and review processes of the BPT
discharge alternative analysis.
The 90% and 50% recycle options considered as possible bases for
PSES were rejected for the reasons set forth in Section IX.
Complete recycle is economically achievable and will remove
substantial quantities of toxic pollutants. A number of process
segments would discharge toxic organic pollutants (principally
phenolic compounds) if complete recycle were not the basis for
PSES. These pollutants would appear in the range of 0.5 mg/1 to
30.7 mg/1 in the discharges. Neither the 90% nor the 50% recycle
option was based upon technologies that would treat toxic organic
pollutants. If a discharge option were selected for PSES and
these pollutants required treatment, the total cost of these
options would far exceed the cost of complete recycle.
The alternative PSES and PSNS which would be established if
either discharge alternative were selected are equivalent to the
alternative BAT limitations presented in Tables X-2 and X-3.
996
-------
iu t— iu o
u. ue>
LU UIQUJ O
997
-------
CM
LJ
CC
Z3
O
UJ
> S
99G
-------
tno
= o to
i
fT)
UJ
tr
Z3
2
Ll_
999
-------
-------
If)
o
m
Id
cc
:D
o
o
(-
o
o
cc
I
K
_i a
Ld
1001
-------
at
UJ
UJ
in
o
(O
i
UJ
cc
£
£
5
1002
-------
o
(£
Q.
<
Ul
1003
-------
>- f
111!
>_ HZ;
IT OTUJ(
§SSt
to
GO
LJ
tr
• uj
5;
tu
V)
0.
en
t:
1004
-------
1005
-------
«2
LJ
(X
ID
O
LU
V)
0.
1006
-------
o
Q.
I,
c *
o _
0) ?
or «
O) X
o <
Q O
s*
CL UJ
O >
11
I- IE
co uj
< h
o 3!
CO*
z> y
z Q-
O
o
Q
1007
-------
s
o
0.
(J
o
IT
CL
UJ
i
D-
1008
-------
00 C/V
o <
Q CJ
5 _ i (o
>-§£-
tn
«<<
0.
n
Q.
CO
o
Z
K
O
o
o
o
LU
_l
u
>.
o
UJ
ce
Q
O OQ.
o O
1009
-------
CO
g _
II
Ld
a. LU
co a: i-
13 UJ <
£zsi
t- H Zl U
CO <" Q; |_
S< cj —I
O en ^
Z '
1010
-------
LU
21—
_ <
3 z
si
< <
2S
a.
UJ
2
_j
/^XMH^MM
\^X
~
^.^
r*
O
H™
I*
O LU <
>• zfflz
UL — 03 Q;
3 < O ^J
|°wf
— o LU
-------
1012
-------
^
o
z
UJ
o
o
PROTECT)
_ i
<
K
•z
UJ
z
o
cr
UJ
CO
z
o
^ *f
v crz
Q UJ
INDUSTRY SI
: CASTING
SCRUBBER C
i -ALTERNATE
^J -5*
^_ z o ^
§S ^ n
Z *•
1 =i
o "-§
^
z to
i-co
-ia.
UJ
s
t~-
•
^3
PQ
rl
LU
cr
^
ul
CJ
i
q
<2
o z
Z CO CC O
£3S]£H
-i < en 5 UJ
2 Z m <
^ 5 z Qi
M
ui
cr
Q
a
1
a.
o
UJ
O
z
UJ
O
1013
-------
SECTION XIV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Environmental Protection Agency was aided in the preparation
of this Development Document by the Cyrus Wm. Rice Group of NUS
Corporation. Rice's effort was managed by Mr. Thomas J. Centi.
Mr. David E. Soltis and Mr. Samuel A. Young directed the
engineering activities and were assisted by Ms. Debra
M. Wroblewski, Ms. Joan 0. Knapp, Mr. Joseph J. Tarantino, and
Mr. J. Steven Paquette. Field and sampling programs were
conducted under the leadership of Mr. David E. Soltis and Mr.
Samuel A. Young. Laboratory and analytical services were
conducted under the guidance of Miss C. Ellen Gonter and
Mrs. Linda Dean. The drawings contained within were prepared by
the RICE drafting personnel Mr. William B. Johnson,
Mr. Keith Christner, and Mr. Richard J. Deluca, under the
supervision of Mr. Albert M. Finke. The work associated with
calculations of raw waste loads and effluent loads is attributed
to Mr. David E. Soltis, Ms. Debra M. Wroblewski, Ms. Joan Knapp,
and Mr. Joseph J. Tarantino. The cost estimates for treatment
models were prepared by Mr. Albert M. Finke. Computer services
were provided by Mr. J. Steven Paguette, Mr. Joseph J. Tarantino,
Ms. Joan 0. Knapp, and Mr. Henry K. Hess.
Acknowledgement and appreciation are given to Ms. Kaye Storey,
Ms. Carol Swann, Ms. Pearl Smith and Ms. Glenda Nesby of the
Agency's word processing staff for their tireless and dedicated
effort in this document. Acknowledgement and appreciation are
also given to Ms. Ellen Siegler of the Agency's Office of General
Counsel, Mr. John Kukulka of the Agency's Economic Analysis
Branch, and Mr. Mahesh Podar of the Agency's Office of Policy and
Resource Management. The administrative assistance provided by
Mrs. Irena Wagner of the C.W. Rice Group of NUS Corporation is
also greatly appreciated.
Finally, the excellent cooperation of the many companies who
participated in the survey and contributed pertinent data is
gratefully appreciated. Special thanks is also given to the Cast
Metals Federation and the American Foundrymen's Society.
1015
-------
SECTION XV
REFERENCES
1. Bader, A. J., "Waste Treatment for an Automated Gray and
Nodular Iron Foundry", Proceedings of_ the Industrial Waste
Conference, 22nd, Purdue University, pp. 468-476 (1967).
2. ' "Chrysler's Winfield Foundry Solves Pollution Problem",
Foundry, 97, pp. 162, 167-169 (September, 1969).
3. "Cupola Emission Control", Engles and Weber (1967).
4. "Cupola Pollution Control at Unicast", Foundry, 98, pp, 240,
242 (April, 1970).
5. Deacon, J. S.M "In Defense of the Wet Cap", Modern Casting,
pp. 48-49 (September, 1973).
6. "Emissions Control System is Based on Impingement", Foundry,
101, N. 9, pp. 108-110 (September, 1973).
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Development Document
for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category - Final,
EPA 440/182/024, Washington, D.C., May 1982.
8. Foundry, "1973 Outlook" (January, 1973).
9. "Foundries Look at the Future", Foundry (October, 1972).
10. "Inventory of Foundry Equipment", Foundry (May, 1968).
11. "Iron Casting Handbook", Gray and Ductile Iron Foundries
Society, Inc., 1971, Cleveland, Ohio.
12. Manual Standard Industrial Classification (1967).
13. "Metal Casting Industry Census Guide", Foundry (August,
1972).
14. Miske, Jack C., "Environment Control at Dayton Foundry",
Foundry, 98, pp. 68-69 (May, 1970).
15. Settling Basins Clean GM Foundry Water", Foundry, 97, p. 146
(February, 1969).
1017
-------
16. U. S. Department of Commerce, "Iron and Steel Foundries and
Steel Ingot Producers", Current Industrial Reports, pp. 1-18
(1971).
17. U. S. Department H.E.W., Public Health Service Publication,
I99-AP-40.
18. Wagner, A. J. , "Grede's Wichita Midwest Division Honored
for Top Environmental Control Job", Modern Casting, 58, N.6,
pp. 40-43 (December, 1970).
19. "Water Pollution From Foundry Wastes", American Foundrymen's
Society (1967).
20. Waters, 0. B., "Total Water Recycling for Sand System
Scrubbers", Modern Casting, pp. 31-32 (July, 1973).
21. U.S. Industrial Outlook, 1977, U.S. Department of Commerce.
22. Building Construction Cost Data, 1978 Edition.
23. "Richardson Rapid System", 1978-79 Edition, by Richardson
Engineering Services, Inc.
24. U.S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Manufacturers, 1970.
25. Wiese-Nielsen, K. Dr., "High Pressure Water Jets Remove
Investment Casting Shells", Foundry M/T, September, 1977.
26. "Sand Reclamation - A Status Report of Committee 80-S",
Modern Casting, Manual 79, pp. 60.
27. David Kanicki, "Water at Neenah Foundry", Modern Casting,
July 1978, pp. 44.
28. Eckenfelder, W. Wesley, Industrial Water Pollution Control.
29. Menerow, Nelson, L., Industrial Water Pollution.
30. Parsons, William A. Dr., Chemical Treatment of Sewage and
Industrial Wastes.
31. Kearney, A. T. and Company, Inc., "Study of Economic Impacts
of Pollution Control on the Iron Foundry Industry", 1971.
1018
-------
SECTION XVI
GLOSSARY
Acrylic Resins - Synthetic resins used as sand binders for
coremaking. These resins are formed by the polymerization of
acrylic acid or one of its derivatives with benzoyl peroxide or a
similar catalyst. The most frequently used starting materials
for these resins include acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, or
acrylonitrile. Since exposure of these binder materials to hot
metal temperatures could cause breakdown of these binders,
cyanide might be generated.
Agglomerate. The collecting of small particles together into a
larger mass.
Air Setting Binders - Sand binders which harden by exposure to
air. Sodium silicate, Portland cement, and oxychloride are the
primary constituents of such binders.
Magnesia used in the blending of oxychloride can contain small
amounts of impurities such as calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide or
calcium silicate which increase the volume change during the
setting process, thus decreasing mold strength and durability.
To eliminate this lime effect, 10 percent of finely divided
metallic copper is added to the mixture.
Alkyd Resin Binders - Cold set resins used in the forming of
cores. This type of binder is referred to as a three component
system using alkyd-isocyanate, cobalt naphthenate, and diphenyl
methane di-isocyanate. Cobalt naphthenate is the drier and
diphenyl methane di-isocyanate is the catalyst. Exposure of
these binders to hot metal temperatures can cause the breakdown
of these binder materials, and the resulting degradation products
might include naphthalenes, phenols, and cyanides, in some
separate or combined form.
Alloying Materials and Additives - The following is a list of
materials known to be used in foundry operations.
1019
-------
Aluminum
Beryllium
Bismuth
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Carbon
Cerium
Chloride
Chromium
Cobalt
Columbium
Copper
Hydrogen
Iron
Lead
Lithium
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Nickel
Nitrogen
Oxygen
Phosphorus
Potassium
Selenium
Silicon
Sulfur
Tantalum
Tin
Titanium
Tungsten
Vanadium
Zinc
Zirconium
Baqhouse. An independent structure or building that contains
fabric bags to collect dusts. Usually incorporates fans and dust
conveying equipment.
Binder. Any material used to help sand grains to stick together.
Borides - A class of boron containing compounds, primarily
calcium boride, used as a constituent in refractory materials.
Metallic impurities that often accompany the use of these
materials include titanium, zirconium, hafnium, vanadium,
niobium, tantalum, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, thorium, and
uranium.
Bulk Bed Washer. A wet type dust collector consisting of a bed
of lightweight spheres through which the dust laden air must pass
while being sprayed by water or liquor.
Catalysts - Materials used to set binder materials used in core
and mold formation. Primary set catalysts used are phosphoric
acid and toluenesulfonic acid. Exposure of residual catalyst
materials in the mold to hot metal temperatures could cause
chemical breakdown of these materials with the possible
generation of free toluene.
Charcoal - A product of the destructive distillation of wood.
Used for heat and as a source of carbon in the foundry industry.
Because of the nature of the destructive distillation process,
charcoal may contain residuals of toxic pollutants such as
phenol, benzene, toluene, naphthalene, and nitrosamines.
Charge. A minimum combination of the various materials required
to produce a hot metal of proper specifications.
Chrome Sand - (Chrome-Iron Ore) - A dark material containing dark
brown streaks with submetallic to metallic luster. Usually found
as grains disseminated in perioditite rocks. Used in the
preparation of molds.
1020
-------
Chromite Flour - (See Chrome Sand above) - Chrome sand ground to
200 mesh or finer, can be used as a filler material for mold
coatings for steel castings.
Clarification. The process of removing undissolved materials
from a liquid, specifically by sedimentation.
Classifier. A device that separates particles from a fluid
stream by size. Stream velocity is gradually reduced, and the
larger sized particles drop out when the stream velocity can no
longer carry them.
Cleaning Agents and Degreasers - Ethylene dichloride,
polychloroethylene, trichloroethylene.
Coagulant. A compound which, when added to a wastewater stream,
enhances wastewater settleability. The coagulant aids in the
binding and agglomeration of the particles suspended in the
wastewater.
Coatings - Corrosion Resistant - Generally alkyd or epoxy resins.
See Alkyd Resin Binders and Epoxy Resins. Applied to metal molds
to prevent surface corrosion.
Coke-Foundry - The residue from the destructive distillation of
coal. A primary ingredient in the making of cast iron in the
cupola. Because of the nature of the destructive distillation
process and impurities in the coal, the coke may contain
residuals of toxic pollutants such as phenol, benzene, toluene,
naphthalene and nitrosamines.
Coke-Petroleum - Formed by the destructive distillation of
petroleum. Like foundry coke, petroleum coke can also be used
for making cast iron in the cupola.
Coke-Pitch - Formed by the destructive distillation of petroleum
pitch. Used as a binder in the sand molding process.
Coolants - Water, oil and air. Their use is determined by the
extent and rate of cooling desired.
Cope. The top half of a two-piece sand mold.
Core. An extra-firm shape of sand used to obtain a hollow
section in a casting by placing it in a mold cavity to give
interior shape to a casting.
Core Binders - Bonding and holding materials used in the
formation of sand cores. The three general types consist of
1021
-------
those that harden at room temperature, those that require baking,
and the natural clays. Binders that harden at room temperature
include sodium silicate, Portland cement, and chemical cements
such as oxychloride. Binders that require baking include the
resins, resin oils, pitch, molasses, cereals, sulfite liquor, and
proteins. Fireclay and bentonite are the clay binders.
Core Binder Acceleratros - Used in conjunction with Furan resins
to cause hardening of the resin-sand mixture at room temperature.
The most commonly used accelerator is phosphoric acid.
Core and Mold Washes - A mixture of various materials, primarily
graphite, used to obtain a better finish on castings, including
smoother surfaces, less scabbing and buckling, and less metal
penetration. The filler material for washes should be refractory
type composed of silica flour, zircon flour or chromite flour.
Core Oils - Used in oil-sand cores as a parting agent to prevent
the core material from sticking to the cast metal. Core oils are
generally classified as mineral oils (refined petroleum oils) and
are available as proprietary mixtures or can be ordered to
specification. Typical core oils have specific gravities of 0.93
to 0.965 and contain a minimum of 70 percent nonvolatiles at
1770C (350°F).
Crucible. A highly refractory vessel used to melt metals.
Cupo1a. A verticle shaft furnace consisting of a cylindrical
steel shell lined with refractories and equipped with air inlets
at the base and an opening for charging with fuel and melting
stock near the top. Molten metal runs to the bottom.
Die Coatings - Oil containing lubricants or parting compounds
such as carbon tetrachloride, cyclohexane, methylene chloride,
xylene and hexamethylenetetramine. The coatings used to prevent
castings from adhering to the die and to provide a casting with a
better finish. A correctly chosen lubricant will allow metal to
flow into cavities that otherwise cannot be filled.
Drag. The lower half of a two-piece sand mold.
Electrode. Long cylindrical rods made of carbon or graphite and
used to conduct electricity into a charge of metal.
Epoxy Resins - Two component resins used to provide corrosion
resistant coatings for metallic molds or castings., These
materials are synthetic resins obtained by the condensation or
polymerization of phenol, acetone, and epichlorohydrin
(chloropropylene oxide). Alkyds, acrylates, methacrylates and
1022
-------
allyls, hydrocarbon polymers such as indene, coumarone and
styrene, silicon resins, and natural and synthetic rubbers all
can be applied as additives or bases. Polyamine and amine based
compounds are normally used as curing agents. Because of the
temperatures to which these materials are exposed, and because of
the types of materials that are used to produce many of the
components of these materials, toxic pollutants such as zinc,
nickel, phenol, benzene, toluene, naphthalene, and possibly
nitrosamines could be generated.
Fi1ter Cake. That layer of dewatered sludge removed from the
surface of a filter. This filter is used to reduce the volume of
sludge generated as a result of the waste treatment process.
Flask. A rectangular frame open at top and bottom used to retain
molding sand around a pattern.
Flocculation. The process in which particles agglomerate,
resulting in an increase in particle size and settleability.
Flux. A substance used to promote the melting or purification of
a metal in a furnace.
Furan Resins - A heterocyclic ring compound formed from diene and
cyclic vinyl ether. Its main use is as a cold set resin in
conjunction with acid accelerators such as phosphoric or toluene
sulfonic acid for making core sand mixtures that harden at room
temperature. Toluene could be formed during thermal degradation
of the resins during metal pouring.
Furfuryl Alcohol - A synthetic resin used to formulate core
binders. The amount of furfuryl alcohol used depends on the
desired core strength. One method of formulating furfuryl
alcohol is by batch hydrogenation of furfuryl at elevated
temperature and pressure with a copper chromite catalyst.
Furnace Charge - Scrap - Various toxic pollutant metals may be
present in the raw materials charged in the melting furnace.
These pollutants originate from various sources - iron ore, pigs,
steel or case scrap, automotive scrap, and ferroalloys. These
pollutants may be antimony, arsenic, chromium, copper, lead,
titanium, and zinc.
Gate. An entry passage for molten metal into a mold.
Gilsonite - A material used primarily for sand binders. It is
one of the purest natural bitumens (99.9 percent) and is found in
lead mines. Lead may be present as an impurity in Gilsonite.
1023
-------
Gypsum Cement - A group of cements consisting primarily of
calcium sulfate and produced by the complete dehydration of
gypsum. It usually contains additives such as aluminum sulfate
or potassium carbonate. It is used in sand binder formulation.
Head. A large reservoir of molten metal incorporated into a mold
to supply hot metal to a shrinking portion of a casting during
its cooling stage.
Heat Treat. To adjust or alter a metal property through heat.
Hydraulic Cyclone. A fluid classifying device that separated
heavier particles from a slurry.
Impingement. The striking of air or gasborne particles on a wall
or baffle.
Impregnating Compounds - Materials of low viscosity and surface
tension used primarily for the sealing of castings. Polyester
resins and sodium silicate are the two types of materials used.
Phthalic anhydride and diallyl phthalate are used in the
formulation of the polyester resins.
Induction Furnace. A crucible surrounded by coils carrying
alternating electric current. The current induces magnetic
forces into the metal charged into the crucible. These forces
cause the metal to heat.
Investment Mold Materials - A broad range of waxes and resins
including vegetable wax, mineral wax, synthetic wax, petroleum
wax, insect wax, rosin, terpene resins, coal tar resins,
chlorinated elastomer resins, and polyethylene resins used in the
manufacture and use of investment molds. The presence of coal
tar resins in investment mold materials might indicate the
possible presence of toxic pollutants such as phenol, benzene,
toluene, naphthalene, and nitrosamines as residues in the resins
or as possible products of degradation of these resins when
subjected to heat.
Ladle. A vessel used to hold or pour molten metal.
Lignin Binders - Additives incorporated into resin-sand mixtures
to improve surface finish and to eliminate thermal cracking
during pouring. Lignin is a major polymeric component of woody
tissue composed of repeating phenyl propane units. It generally
amounts to 20-30 percent of the dry weight of wood. Phenol might
be generated during thermal degradation of lignin binders during
metal pouring.
1024
-------
Lubricants - Calcium stearate, zinc stearate and carnauba wax are
lubricating agents added to resin sand mixtures to permit the
easy release of molds from patterns.
Mica - A class of silicates with widely varying composition used
in the refractory making process. They are essentially silicates
of aluminum but are sometimes partially replaced by iron,
chromium and an alkali such as potassium, sodium or lithium.
Mold. A form made of sand, metal, or refractory material, which
contains the cavity into which molten metal is poured to produce
a casting.
MOLDING
COgMolding. The C02 (carbon dioxide) molding processes uses
sodium silicate binders to replace the clay binders used in
sand molds and cores. In the C02 process, a low strength
mold or core is made with a mixture of sodium silicate
(3-4%) and sand. Carbon dioxide gas is passed through the
sand, causing the sodium silicate to develop a dry
compressive strength greater than 200 psi. Ready-to-use
cores and complete molds can be made quickly, with no baking
or drying needed. The high strength developed by the C02
process enables molds to be made and poured without back-up
flasks or jackets.
No-Bake Molds. The process is of fairly recent (15 years)
origin. The sand coating consists of a binder and catalyst,
their interaction results in a molded sand with high green
strength (over 200 psi). The name of the process derives
from the fact that the mold requires no baking. The amount
of sand used, and the general form of the molds are similar
to green sand operations; however, the high strength permits
flask removal and mold pouring without a jacket. The
castings poured using this process have good dimensional
accuracy and excellent finish.
Permanent Mold Casting. A metal mold consisting of two or
more metal parts is used repeatedly for the production of
many castings of the same form. The molten metal enters the
mold by gravity. Permanent mold casting is particularly
suitable for high-volume production of small, simple
castings that have a uniform wall thickness and no undercuts
or intricate internal coring.
Plaster Mold Casting. Plaster mold casting is a specialized
casting process used to produce nonferrous castings that
have greater dimensional accuracy, smoother surfaces and
1025
-------
more-finely reproduced details than can be obtained with
sand molds or permanent molds.
Shell Molding. Shell molding is a process in which a mold
is formed from a mixture of sand and a heat-setting resin
binder. The sand resin mixture is placed in a heated metal
pattern in which the heat causes the binder to set. As the
sand grains adhere to each other, a sturdy shell, which
becomes one half of the mold, is formed. The halves are
placed together with cores located properly, clamped and
adequately backed up, and then the mold is poured. This
process produces castings with good surface finish and good
dimensional accuracy while using smaller amounts of molding
sand.
No Bake Binders - Furan resins and alkyd-isocyanate compounds are
the two predominant no bake binders. Furan resins, as previously
mentioned, are cyclic compounds which use phosphoric acid or
toluenesulfonic acid as the setting agents. Alkyd-isocyanate
binders have fewer limitations in use than furan resins, but the
handling of cobalt naphthenate does present problems.
Pattern. A form of wood, metal, or other material around which
molding material is placed to make a mold for casting metals.
Phenolic Resins - Phenol formaldehyde resins - A group of varied
and versatile synthetic resins. They are made by reacting almost
any phenolic and an aldehyde. In some cases, hexamethylene-
tetramine is added to increase the aldehyde content. The resins
formed are classified as one and two step resins depending on how
they are formed in the reaction kettle. Both types of materials
are used separately or in combination in the blending of
commercial molding materials. Due to the thermal degradation of
phenolic resins that may occur during metal pouring, phenol and
formaldehyde may be generated.
Pitch Binders - Thermosetting binders used in coremaking. Baking
of the sand-binder mixture is required for evaporation-oxidation
and polymerization to take place.
Polymeric Flocculant (Polyelectrolyte). High molecular weight
compounds which, due to their charges, aid in particle binding
and agglomeration.
Quenching. A process of inducing rapid cooling from an elevated
temperature.
1026
-------
Quenching Oil - Medium to heavy grade mineral oils used in the
cooling of metal. Standard weight or grade of oil would be
similar to standard SAE 60.
Recycle - The practice of returning, in whole or in part, treated
or untreated process wastewaters to the process.
Recuperator. A steel or refractory chamber used to reclaim heat
from waste gases.
Riser Compounds - Extra strength binders used to reduce the
extent of riser erosion. Such materials generally contain
lignin, furfuryl alcohol and phosphoric acid.
Rosins, Natural - (Gum rosin, colophony, pine resin, common
rosin) - A resin obtained as a residue after the distillation of
turpentine oil from crude turpentine. Rosin is primarily an
isomeric form of the anhydride of abietic acid. It is one of the
more common binders in the foundry industry.
Sand Flowability Additives - A mixture of sand, dicalcium
silicate, water and wetting agents. This combination is based on
a process of Russian origin which achieves a higher degree of
flowability than either the conventional sand mix or those with
organic additives.
Scrap. Usually refers to miscellaneous metal used in a charge to
make new metal.
Sand Binders - Binder materials are the same as those used in
core making. The percentage of binder may vary in core and molds
depending on sand strength required, extent of mold distortion
from hot metal and the metal surface finish required.
Seacoal - Ground bituminous coal used to help control the thermal
expansion of the mold and to control the composition of the mold
cavity gas during pouring.
Shot Blast. A casting cleaning process employing a metal
abrasive (grit or shot)propelled by centrifugal or air force.
Shakeout. The operation of removing castings from the mold. A
mechanical unit for separating the mold material from the
solidified casting.
Slag. A product resulting from the action of a flux on the
oxidized non-metallic constituents of molten metals.
1027
-------
Slag Quench. A process of rapidly cooling molten-slag to a solid
material. Usually performed in a water trough or sump.
Snorkel. A pipe through the furnace roof, or an opening in a
furnace roof, used to withdraw the furnace atmosphere.
Spray Chamber. A large volume chamber in a flowing stream where
water or liquor sprays are inserted to wet the flowing gas.
Sprue. A vertical channel from the top of the mold used to
conduct the molten metal to the mold cavity.
Tapping. The process of removing molten metal from a furnace.
Tuyere. An opening in a cupola for introduction of air for
combustion.
Urea Formaldehyde Resins - An important class of thermosetting
resins identified as aminoplastics. The parent raw materials
(urea and formaldehyde) are united under controlled temperature
and pH to form intermediates that are mixed with fillers
(cellulose) to produce molding powders for patterns.
Venturi Scrubber. A wet type of dust collector that uses the
turbulence developed in a narrowed section of the conduit to
promote intermixing of the dust laden gas with water sprayed into
the conduit.
Washing Cooler. A large vessel where a flowing gas stream is
subjected to sprays of water or liquor to remove gasborne dusts
and to cool the gas stream by evaporation.
Wet Cap. A mechanical device placed on the top of a stack that
forms a curtain from a water stream through which the stack gases
must pass.
Wetting Compounds - Materials which reduce the surface tension of
solutions thus allowing uniform contact of solution with the
material in question. Sodium alkylbenzene sulfonates comprise
the principal type of surface-active compounds, but there are a
vast number of other compounds used.
1028
•U.S. GOyEMOffllfT FHIMIKOWICE : 1982 0-3Bl-085/4*r7
-------
|