-------
CO Metal Powder Production Wet APC Slowdown
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum for
Monthly Average
mg/kkg (Ib/billion Ibs) of iron, copper, and aluminum powder
produced
120
121
122
COPPER
CYANIDE
LEAD
ALUMINUM
IRON
OIL S. GREASE
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
pH Within
3,400
530
740
16,000
3,200
26,000
40,000
the range of
1,600
210
340
7,200
1,600
26,000
32,OOO
7.5 to 10.0 at all times.
(d) Sizing/Repressing Spent Lubricants
There shall be no discharge of process wastewater pollutants,
(.e) Oil-Resin Impregnation Wastewater
Pollutant or
Pollutant Property
Maximum for
Any One Day
Maximum ±"or
Monthly Average
mg/kkg (Ib/billion Iba) of iron, copper, and aluminum powder
metallurgy parts impregnated with oil-resin
12O COPPER
121 CYANIDE
122 LEAD
ALUMINUM
IRON
OIL & GREASE
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
Pri
95.0
15.0
21 .0
460. O
89.0
750. O
1,100.0
45.0
6.O
1O.O
2OO.O
45.0
750. O
89O.O
Within the range of 7.5 to 10.0 at all times.
305
-------
(f) Steam Treatment Wet APC Slowdown
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
mg/kkg (Ib/billion Ibs) of iron, copper, and aluminum powder
powder metallurgy parts steam treated
120 COPPER 360 17O
121 CYANIDE 57 23
122 LEAD 80 37
ALUMINUM 1,700 770
IRON 340 17O
OIL & GREASE 2,8OO 2,80O
TOTAL SUSPENDED 4,300 3,40O
SOLIDS
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 10.0 at all timea.
Tumbling, Burnishing And Cleaning Waatewater
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
mg/kkg (Ib/billion Iba) of iron, copper, and aluminum powder
metallurgy parts tumbled, burnished, or cleaned
120 COPPER 920 44O
121 CYANIDE 140 57
122 LEAD 200 93
ALUMINUM 4,400 1,900
IRON 860 440
OIL & GREASE 7,200 7,2OO
TOTAL SUSPENDED 11,OOO 8,60O
SOLIDS
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 1O.O at all times.
306
-------
(h) Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants
Pollutant or Maximum for Maximum for
Pollutant Property Any One Day Monthly Average
mg/kkg (Ib/billion Ibs) of iron, copper, and aluminum powder
metallurgy parts sawed or ground
120 COPPER 1,300 610
121 CYANIDE 200 80
122 LEAD 280 130
ALUMINUM 6,100 2,70O
IRON 1,200 610
OIL & GREASE 10,OOO 10,000
TOTAL SUSPENDED 15,OOO 12,000
SOLIDS
pH Within the range of 7.5 to 1O.O at all times.
(i> Degreasing Spent Solvents
There shall be no discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
10. EPA is considering promulgating PSES which are less stringent
than the standards now proposed for PSES for seven of the eleven
subcategories. The standards would be based on the treatment
effectiveness achievable by the application of chemical
precipitation and sedimentation (lime and settle) technology and
in-process flow reduction control methods. In addition, EPA is
considering promulgating PSES which are more stringent than the
standards now proposed for PSES for the Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming and
the Iron And Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal Powder Production And
Powder Metallurgy Subcategories. The standards would be based on
the treatment effectiveness achievable by the application of
chemical precipitation and sedimentation with the additiojn of
filtration (lime, settle, and filter) technology and in-process
flow reduction control methods. In addition, EPA is considering
promulgating PSES for the Zinc Forming Subcategory. The standards
would be based on the treatment effectiveness achievable by one of
the following:
1. the application of chemical precipitation and sedimentation
(lime and settle) technology;
2. the application of chemical precipitation and sedimentation
(lime and settle) technology and in-process flow reduction
control methods; or
3. the application of chemical precipitation and sedimentation
with the addition of filtration (lime, settle, and filter)
technology and in-process flow reduction control methods.
In addition, the Beryllium Forming Subcategory would still be
excluded from PSES. In the event that the Agency decides to
promulgate these alternate PSES, the following would apply for
existing sources:
307
-------
3LJBPART A. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE BERYLLIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
[Reserved]
SUBPART B. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE LEAD/TIN/BISMUTH FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for antimony and lead would be the same as specified
in Section II, Part 8, Subpart B.
SUBPART C. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE MAGNESIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, zinc, ammonia, fluoride, and magnesium
would be the same as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart C.
SUBPART D. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE NICKEL/COBALT FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, nickel, and fluoride would be the same
as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart D.
SUBPART E. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE PRECIOUS METALS FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards £or cadmium, copper, silver, and cyanide would be the
same as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart E.
SUBPART F. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE REFRACTORY METALS FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for copper, nickel, columbium, fluoride, molybdenum,
tantalum, tungsten, and vanadium would be the same as specified in
Section II, Part 8, Subpart F.
SUBPART G. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE TITANIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for cyanide, lead, zinc, ammonia, fluoride, and
titanium would be the same as specified in Section II, Part 8,
Subpart G.
SUBPART H. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE URANIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for cadmium, copper, nickel, fluoride, radium, and
uranium would be the same as specified in Section II, Part 8,
Subpart H.
308
-------
SUBPART I. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE ZINC FORMING SUBCATEGORY BASED
ON LIME AND SETTLE TECHNOLOGY
The standards for chromium, cyanide, and zinc would be the same as
specified in Section II, Part 2, Subpart I.
SUBPART I. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE ZINC FORMING SUBCATEGORY BASED
ON LIME AND SETTLE TECHNOLOGY AND FLOW REDUCTION
The standards for chromium, cyanide, and zinc would be the same as
specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart I.
SUBPART I. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE ZINC FORMING SUBCATEGORY BASED
ON LIME, SETTLE AND FILTER TECHNOLOGY AND FLOW
REDUCTION
The standards for chromium, cyanide, and zinc would be the same as
specified in Section II, Part 3, Subpart I.
SUBPART J. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE ZIRCONIUM/HAFNIUM FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, cyanide, nickel, ammonia, fluoride,
hafnium, and zirconium would be the same as specified in Section II,
Part 8, Subpart J.
SUBPART K. ALTERNATE PSES FOR THE IRON AND STEEL/COPPER/ALUMINUM
METAL POWDER PRODUCTION AND POWDER METALLURGY
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for copper, cyanide, lead, aluminum, and iron would
be the same as specified in Section II, Part 3, Subpart K.
11. EPA is considering promulgating PSNS which are less stringent
than the standards now proposed for PSNS for nine of the eleven
subcategories. The standards would be based on the treatment
effectiveness achievable by the application of chemical
precipitation and sedimentation (lime and settle) technology and
in-process flow reduction control methods. In addition, EPA is
considering promulgating PSNS which are more stringent than the
standards now proposed for PSNS for the Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming and
the Iron And Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal Powder Production And
309
-------
Powder Metallurgy Subcategories. The standards would be based on
the treatment effectiveness achievable by the application of
chemical precipitation and sedimentation with the addition of
filtration (lime, settle, and filter) technology and in-process
flow reduction control methods. In the event that the Agency
decides to promulgate these alternate PSNS, the following would
apply for new sources:
SUBPART A. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE BERYLLIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for beryllium, copper, cyanide, and fluoride would be
the same as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart A.
SUBPART B. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE LEAD/TIN/BISMUTH FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for antimony and lead would be the same as specified
in Section II, Part 8, Subpart B.
SUBPART C. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE MAGNESIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, zinc, ammonia, fluoride, and magnesium
would be the same as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart C.
•*
SUBPART D. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE NICKEL/COBALT FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, nickel, and fluoride would be the same
as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart D.
SUBPART E. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE PRECIOUS METALS FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for cadmium, copper, silver, and cyanide would be the
same as specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart E.
SUBPART F. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE REFRACTORY METALS FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for copper, nickel, columbium, fluoride, molybdenum,
tantalum, tungsten, and vanadium would be the same as specified in
Section II, Part 8, Subpart F.
310
-------
SUBPART G. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE TITANIUM FORMING 3UBCATEGORY
The standards for cyanide, lead, zinc, ammonia, fluoride, and
titanium would be the same as specified in Section II, Part 8,
Subpart G.
SUBPART H. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE URANIUM FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for cadmium, copper, nickel, fluoride, radium, and
uranium would be the same aa specified in Section II, Part 8,
Subpart H.
SUBPART I. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE ZINC FORMING SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, cyanide, and zinc would be the same aa
specified in Section II, Part 8, Subpart I.
SUBPART J. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE ZIRCONIUM/HAFNIUM FORMING
SUBCATEGORY
The standards for chromium, cyanide, nickel, ammonia, fluoride,
hafnium, and zirconium would be the same as specified in Section II,
Part 8, Subpart J.
SUBPART K. ALTERNATE PSNS FOR THE IRON AND STEEL/COPPER/ALUMINUM
METAL POWDER PRODUCTION AND POWDER METALLURGY
SUBCATEGORY
The standards ±"or copper, cyanide, lead, aluminum, and iron would
be the same as specified in Section II, Part 3, Subpart K.
311
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
LEGAL AUTHORITY
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
established a comprehensive program to "restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's
waters," under Section 101(a). By July 1, 1977, existing indus-
trial dischargers were required to achieve "effluent limitations
requiring the application of the best practicable control tech-
nology currently available" (BPT), under Section 301(b)(1)(A);
and by July 1, 1983, these dischargers were required to achieve
"effluent limitations requiring the application of the best
available technology economically achievable . . . which will
result in reasonable further progress toward the national goal of
eliminating the discharge of all pollutants" (BAT), under Section
301(b)(2)(A). New industrial direct dischargers were required to
comply with Section 306 new source performance standards (NSPS),
based on best available demonstrated technology; existing and new
dischargers to publicly owned treatment works (POTW) were subject
to pretreatment standards under Sections 307 (b) (PSES) and (c)
(PSNS), respectively, of the Act. While the requirements for
direct dischargers were to be incorporated into National Pollu-
tant Discharge Elimination System (NDPES) permits issued under
Section 402 of the Act, pretreatment standards were made enforce-
able directly against discharges to a POTW (indirect discharg-
ers). Although Section 402(a)(l) of the 1972 Act authorized the
'setting of NPDES permit requirements for direct dischargers on a
case-by-case basis, Congress intended that, for the most part,
control requirements would be based on regulations promulgated by
the Administrator of EPA. Section 304(b) of the Act required the
Administrator to promulgate regulations providing guidelines for
effluent limitations setting forth the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of BPT and BAT.
Moreoever, Sections 304(c) and 306 of the Act required promulga-
tion of regulations for new sources (NSPS); and Sections 304(f),
307(b), and 307(c) required promulgation of regulations for pre-
treatment standards. In addition to these regulations for desig-
nated industry categories, Section 307(a) of the Act required the
Administrator to promulgate effluent standards applicable to all
dischargers of toxic pollutants. Finally, Section 301(a) of the
Act authorized the Administrator to prescribe any additional
regulations "necessary to carry out his functions" under the Act.
EPA was unable to promulgate many of these regulations by the
dates contained in the Act. In 1976, EPA was sued by several
environmental groups and in settlement of this lawsuit, EPA and
313
-------
the plaintiffs executed a "Settlement Agreement," which was
approved by the Court. This Agreement required EPA to develop a
program and adhere to a schedule for promulgating for 21 major
industries' BAT effluent limitations guidelines, pretreatment
standards, and new source performance standards for 65 "priority"
pollutants and classes of pollutants. See Settlement Agreement
in Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. v. Train, 8 ERG 2120
(D.D.C. 1976), modified 12 ERG 1833 (D.D.C. 1979), and modified
by October 26, 1982, August 2, 1983, and January 6, 1984.
On December 27, 1977, the President signed into law amendments to
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 95-217). The Act,
as amended, is commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act.
Although this Act makes several important changes in the federal
water pollution control program, its most significant feature is
its incorporation of several of the basic elements of the Settle-
ment Agreement program for toxic pollution control. Sections
301(b)(2)(A) and 301 (b)(2)(C) of the Act now require the achieve-
ment, by July 1, 1984, of effluent limitations requiring applica-
tion of BAT for toxic pollutants, including the 65 priority pol-
lutants and classes of pollutants (the same priority pollutants
as listed in Natural Resources Defense Council v. Train), which
Congress declared toxic under Section 307(a) of the Act. Like-
wise, EPA's programs for new source performance standards and
pretreatment standards are now aimed principally at control of
these toxic pollutants. Moreover, to strengthen the toxics con-
trol program, Congress added Section 304(e) to the Act, authoriz-
ing the Administrator to prescribe "best management practices"
(BMPs) to prevent the release of toxic and hazardous pollutants
from plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste dis-
posal, and drainage from raw material storage associated with, or
ancillary to, the manufacturing or treatment process.
The 1977 Amendments added Section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act estab-
lishing "best conventional pollutant control technology) (BCT)
for discharges of conventional pollutants from existing indus-
trial point sources. Conventional pollutants are those mentioned
specifically in Section 304(a)(4) (biochemical oxygen demanding
pollutants (BODO, total suspended solids (TSS) , fecal
coliform, and pH) and any additional pollutants defined by the
Administrator as conventional." (To date, the Agency has added
one such pollutant, 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
314
-------
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 FR 50372). In the case mentioned above,
the Court of Appeals ordered EPA to correct data errors underly-
ing EPA's calculation of the first test, and to apply the second
cost test. (EPA argued that a second cost test was not
required.) On October 29, 1982, the Agency proposed a revised
BCT methodology (47 FR 49176).
For nontoxic, nonconventional pollutants, Sections 301(b)(2)(A)
and (b)(2)(F) require achievement of BAT effluent limitations
within three years after their establishment or July 1, 1984,
whichever is later, but not later than July 1, 1987.
The purpose of this document is to provide the supporting techni-
cal data regarding water use, pollutants, and treatment technolo-
gies for BPT, BAT, BCT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS effluent limitations
and standards that EPA is proposing for the nonferrous metals
forming category under Sections 301, 304, 306, 307, and 501 of
the Clean Water Act.
GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
EPA gathered and evaluated technical data in the course of devel-
oping these guidelines in order to perform the following tasks:
1. To profile the category with regard to the production,
manufacturing processes, geographical distribution,
potential wastewater streams, and discharge mode of
nonferrous metals forming plants.
2. To subcategorize, if necessary, in order to permit
regulation of the nonferrous metals forming category in
an equitable and manageable way. This was done by
taking all of the factors mentioned above plus others
into account.
3. To characterize wastewater, detailing water use, waste-
water discharge, and the occurrence of toxic, conven-
tional, and nonconventional pollutants, in waste stream;
from nonferrous metals forming processes.
315
-------
4. To select pollutant parameters--those toxic, conven-
tional, and nonconventional pollutants present at signi-
ficant concentrations in wastewater streams--that should
be considered for regulation.
5. To consider control and treatment technologies and
select alternative methods for reducing pollutant
discharge in this category.
6. To consider the costs of implementing the alternative
control and treatment technologies.
7. To present possible regulatory alternatives.
Sources of Industry Data
Data on the nonferrous metals forming category were gathered from
previous EPA studies, literature studies, inquiries to federal
and state environmental agencies, raw material manufacturers and
suppliers, trade association contacts, wastewater treatment
equipment manufacturers, and the nonferrous metals forming
manufacturers themselves. All known nonferrous metals formers
were sent a data collection portfolio (dcp) requesting specific
information concerning each facility. Finally, a sampling
program was carried out at 17 plants. The sampling program con-
sisted of screen sampling, performed under authority provided by
Section 308 of the Clean Water Act, and analysis to determine the
presence of a broad range of pollutants and quantification of the
pollutants present in nonferrous metals forming wastewater. Spe-
cific details of the sampling program and information from the
above data sources are presented in Section V.
Literature Review. EPA reviewed and evaluated existing litera-
ture for background information to clarify and define various
aspects of the nonferrous metals forming category and to deter-
mine general characteristics and trends in production processes
and wastewater treatment technology. Review of current litera-
ture continued throughout the development of these guidelines.
Existing Data Review. Information related to nonferrous metals
forming processes, wastewater, and wastewater treatment technol-
ogy was compiled from a number of sources. Technical data
gathered for development of guidelines for related categories,
such as the aluminum forming, copper forming, metal finxshing,
nonferrous metals manufacturing, electroplating, and battery
manufacturing categories, were reviewed and incorporated into
this guideline, where applicable.
Frequent contact has been maintained with industry personnel.
Contributions from these sources were particularly useful for
clarifying differences in production processes.
316
-------
Plant Survey and Evaluation. The nonferrous metals forming
plants were surveyed to gather information regarding plant size,
age and production, the production processes used, and the quan-
tity, treatment, and disposal of wastewater generated at these
plants.
A listing of plants believed to be in the nonferrous metals form-
ing category was compiled from a Dun and Bradstreet computer
listing, publications and telephone contacts with various trade
associations believed to represent parts of the industry, the
Thomas Register, and telephone contacts with commodity special-
ists at the Bureau of Mines. These sources resulted in the
identification of approximately 1,000 plants as being possibly
engaged in nonferrous metals forming activities. The SIC codes
used were: (1) 3356: Rolling, Drawing, Extruding of Nonferrous
Metals; (2) 3357: Drawing and Insulating Nonferrous Wire;
(3) 3463: Nonferrous Forgings; and (4) 3497: Metal, Foil, and
Leaf.
A comprehensive telephone survey was undertaken in order to
determine which plants should comprise a final mailing list,
i.e., whether or not nonferrous metals forming operations were
present at each of the plants on the original list. During the
telephone survey, questions were asked concerning what metals are
formed at a particular plant, the type of forming operations
utilized^on the metal, i.e., rolling, drawing, extruding, forg-
ing, casting, cladding, or powder metallurgy and their associated
water usage, discharge, and treatment-in-place. Respondents also
were asked what surface treatment, cleaning, washing, and/or
rinsing operations are utilized and their associated water usage,
discharge, and treatment-in-place. At the conclusion of the
telephone survey, many of the plants on the original list were
determined not to be within the scope of the nonferrous metals
forming category.
A list of those plants believed to be a part of the category was
then compiled in preparation for dcp distribution. The results
of the telephone survey are documented in the administrative
record for this rulemaking.
During the first week of April 1983, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approved the mailing of 365 data collection portfol-
ios to plants believed to be in the category. On April 19, 1983,
these 365 dcp's were sent out under the authority of Section 308
of the Clean Water Act to companies on the mailing list. The
dcp's were sent to the corporate office of each company and
addressed to the highest ranking corporate official which could
be identified. The dcp instructions clearly stated that the
portfolio was to be completed for each facility operated by that
company which has operations which are defined in the instruc-
tions to be nonferrous metals forming.
317
-------
An additional 47 dcp's were sent out on June 21, 1983 when the
Agency decided to include metal powder production and powder
metallurgy operations of all metals, including iron and steel,
copper, and aluminum in the scope of the category. All but five
of these dcp's were sent to companies which had been sent a non-
ferrous metals forming dcp on April 19, 1983. Between April 19,
1983 and July 11, 1983, seven more dcp's were sent out, as addi-
tional facilities believed to be in the category were located.
All companies were allowed 30 days from receipt of the dcp in
which to complete and return the portfolio.
In all, dcp's were sent to 377 firms. Approximately 95 percent
of the companies responded to the survey. In many cases, com-
panies contacted were not actually members of the nonferrous
metals forming category as it is defined by the Agency. Where
firms had nonferrous metals forming operations at more than one
location, a dcp was returned for each plant. A total of 294
dcp's applicable to the nonferrous metals forming category were
returned. In cases where the dcp responses were incomplete or
unclear, additional information was requested by telephone or
letter.
The dcp responses were interpreted individually, and the follow-
ing data were documented for future reference and evaluation:
Company name, plant address, and name of the contact
listed in the dcp.
Metal types formed at the plant.
Plant discharge status as direct (to surface water),
indirect (to POTW), or zero discharge by metal type.
Production process streams present at the plant, as well
as associated flow rates; production rates; operating
hours; wastewater treatment, reuse, or disposal methods;
and the quantity and nature of process chemicals used.
Plant age and number of employees.
Availability of pollutant monitoring data provided by the
plant.
The summary listing of this information provided a consistent,
systematic method of evaluating and summarizing the dcp
responses. In addition, procedures were developed to simplify
subsequent analyses. The procedures developed had the following
capabilities:
318
-------
Selection and listing of plants containing specific pro-
duction process streams or treatment technologies.
Summation of the number of plants containing specific
process streams and treatment combinations.
Calculation of the percent recycle present for specific
streams and summation of the number of plants recycling
this stream within various percent recycle ranges.
Calculation of annual production values associated with
each process stream and summation of the number of plants
with these process streams having production values
within various ranges.
Calculation of water use and blowdown from individual
process streams.
The calculated information and summaries were important and fre-
quently used in the development of this guideline. Summaries
were used in the category profile, evaluation of subcategoriza-
tion, and analysis of in-place treatment and control technolo-
gies. Calculated information was used in the determination of
water use and discharge values for the conversion of pollutant
concentrations to mass loadings.
Discharge Monitoring Reports. To supplement existing data
regarding treatment-in-place and the long-term performance of
that treatment, the Agency collected discharge monitoring report
(DMR) data from state and EPA Regional offices for direct dis-
chargers. DMR data are self-monitoring data supplied by permit
holders to meet state or EPA permit requirements. These data
were available from 17 nonferrous metals forming plants; however,
the data vary widely in character and nature due to the dissimi-
lar nature of the monitoring and reporting requirements placed on
nonferrous metals forming plants by the NPDES permit issuing
authority. These data were not used in the actual development of
the proposed limitations.
Engineering Site Visits and Sampling Trips. In addition to the
above data sources,EPA sampled 17nonferrous metals forming
plants. Plant visits were made to sample treated and untreated
wastewater and to gather additional information on manufacturing
processes, wastewater flows, and wastewater treatment technolo-
gies and associated costs. Samples were collected at these 17
plants in order to characterize the wastewaters from the various
nonferrous metals forming manufacturing operations and to char-
acterize the performance of existing treatment systems. The 17
plants selected for sampling practice some combination of hot
rolling, cold rolling, drawing, extrusion, forging, tube reduc-
ing, cladding, metal powder production and powder metallurgy, as
319
-------
well as the associated operations of casting, heat treatment,
surface treatment, alkaline cleaning, sawing, grinding, tumbling,
burnishing, and product testing. These plants were chosen for
sampling because the flow rates and pollutant concentrations in
the wastewaters discharged from their manufacturing operations
are representative of the flow rates and pollutant concentrations
of wastewaters generated by similar operations at other plants in
the nonferrous metals forming industry.
Utilization of Industry Data
Data from the previously listed sources were used to develop BPT,
BAT, and BCT limitations and NSPS and pretreatment standards as
described in this document. Subcategorization of the nonferrous
metals forming category, described in Section IV, was based on
information obtained from previous EPA studies and the technical
literature and our own sampling data. Sampling results were used
to determine raw wastewater characteristics, presented in Section
V, and to select pollutant parameters for control, as described
in Section VI. After determining the pollutants requiring
control and the concentrations at which they are commonly found,
applicable treatment technologies were identified. The applica-
bility of wastewater treatment technologies currently in use at
nonferrous metals forming plants (reported in dcp's and observed
at sampled plants) was especially considered. These technologies
are described in Section VII. Section VIII describes the method
used to estimate the cost of various treatment technology
options. The cost estimates were based on data from the techni-
cal literature and from equipment manufacturers. Finally, data
from dcp's and sampling, along with estimated treatment system
performance, were used to develop the limitations and standards
described in Sections IX, X, XI, XII, and XIII of this document.
The data were used first to select treatment technologies
applicable to the category and then to calculate achievable
effluent pollutant concentrations for each subcategory.
DESCRIPTION OF THE NONFERROUS METALS FORMING CATEGORY
The nonferrous metals forming category is generally included
within SIC 3356, 3357, 3463, and 3497 of the Standard Industrial
Classification Manual, prepared in 1972 and supplemented in 1977
by the Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the
President. These SIC codes are: (1) 3356: Rolling., Drawing,
Extruding of Nonferrous Metals; (2) 3357: Drawing arid Insulating
Nonferrous Wire; (3) 3463: Nonferrous Forgings; and (4) 3497:
Metal, Foil, and Leaf. The category includes establishments
engaged in the forming of nonferrous metals and their alloys,
except for copper and aluminum for which separate regulations
have recently been promulgated [40 CFR Part 468 (48 FR 36942,
August 15, 1983), 40 CFR Part 467 (48 FR 49126, October 24,
320
-------
1983)]. Separate regulations have been or will be proposed for
casting of parts [40 CFR Part 464 (proposed at 47 FR 51512 on
November 15, 1982)] and for casting which is an integral part of
a nonferrous metal smelting and refining operation [40 CFR Part
421 (nonferrous metals manufacturing phase I, proposed at 40 CFR
7032, February 17, 1983, to be promulgated shortly; nonferrous
metals manufacturing phase II, scheduled for proposal shortly)].
For the purpose of this regulation, nonferrous metal has been
defined as any pure metal other than iron, copper, or aluminum;
or metal alloy for which a metal other than iron, copper, or
aluminum is its major constituent by weight. Alloys are consid-
ered as only one metal type. The metal type of any particular
alloy is defined to be the metal that is the major component in
percent by composition. Thus, an alloy which is 53 percent lead
and 47 percent zinc is considered as lead, and an alloy which is
40 percent nickel, 35 percent zinc, and 25 percent tin is consid-
ered as nickel. Forming of an alloy which is greater than 50
percent iron, copper, or aluminum is not included in the
category.
Use of the term "metal" throughout this document is not meant to
imply pure metals only. "Metal" means any substance having
metallic properties, including alloys composed of two or more
chemical elements, of which at least one is an elemental metal.
Thus "copper" means copper and its alloys (brass, bronze, nickel
silver, beryllium copper, etc.), "iron" means iron and its alloys
(including steel, an alloy of iron and carbon), and so forth.
Forming is the deformation of a metal into specific shapes by hot
or cold working. The major forming operations include rolling,
extruding, forging, and drawing. Minor forming operations
included in the category are cladding, tube reducing, metal
powder production and powder metallurgy. Associated operations
performed as an integral part of the forming process are also
included in the category. These operations are casting for
subsequent forming, heat treatment, surface treatment, alkaline
cleaning, solvent degreasing, sawing, grinding, tumbling,
burnishing, product testing, and air pollution controls on
forming operations and the associated operations.
Iron, copper, and aluminum powder manufacturing and powder metal-
lurgy are covered under the nonferrous metals forming category in
order to keep all of the powder operations under a single cate-
gory, although the other forming operations for these metals are
covered under separarate regulations [iron and Steel, 40 CFR Part
420; Copper Forming, 40 CFR Part 468 (48 FR 36942, August 15,
1983); Aluminum Forming, 40 CFR Part 467 (48 FR 49126, October
24, 1983)]. Separate regulations have been or will be proposed
for metal powders produced as an integral part of a nonferrous
321
-------
metal smelting and refining operation (40 CFR Part 421; see full
citation above). Only production of metal powders, ferrous and
nonferrous, in operations which do not significantly increase
their purity are included in the nonferrous metals forming
category.
Casting which is an integral part of nonferrous metals forming is
included in the nonferrous metals forming category, i.e., shot-
casting and casting of billets, ingots, bars, and strip which are
subsequently formed on-site.
Wastewater discharges covered by the nonferrous metals forming
point source category, as delineated above, are not subject to
regulation under 40 CFR Part 413 (electroplating) or 40'CFR Part
433 (metal finishing).
Historical
The nonferrous metals forming category covers forming operations
performed on 31 metals. A group of nine of the metals has been
excluded from this regulation under Paragraph 8(a)(iv) of the
Settlement Agreement. These metal types are listed in Table
III-l. They are excluded from regulation because, according to
information reported on dcp's, they are not formed on a produc-
tion scale in the United States or because the forming operations
performed on them do not discharge wastewater. The 22 nonferrous
metal types that are covered under this regulation are listed in
Table III-2.
Employment data are given in the dcp responses for 235 plants (80
percent of the plants known to be engaged in nonferrous metals
forming). These plants report a total of 35,000 workers involved
in nonferrous metals forming. At an average plant, 120 employees
are engaged in nonferrous metal forming. The employment distri-
bution of nonferrous metals forming workers at the 235 plants is:
34 percent employ fewer than 25 people in nonferrous metals
forming operations; 68 percent employ fewer than 100 people in
this capacity; and 94 percent employ fewer than 500 people.
Nonferrous metals forming plants are not limited to any one geo-
graphical location. As shown in Figure III-l, plants are found
throughout most of the United States, but the majority are
located east of the Mississippi River. Population density is not
a limiting factor in plant location. Nonferrous metals forming
plants tend to be more common in urban areas, but they are
frequently found in rural areas as well.
The majority of the nonferrous metals forming plants (57 percent)
that reported the age of their facilty indicated they were built
since 1954. Table III-3 shows the age distribution of nonferrous
322
-------
metals forming plants according to their classification as
direct, indirect, and zero discharge type.
Product Description
Nonferrous metals are formed by a variety of operations,
described in the second half of this section. The product of one
operation is often the starting material for a subsequent opera-
tion, as shown in Figure III-2. Cast ingots and billets are the
starting point for making sheet and plate, extrusions, and forg-
ings, as well as rod, for use in drawing operations. Rolled
sheet and plate can be used as stock for stampings, can blanks,
and roll formed products; as finished products in building, and
aircraft construction; or as foil. Extrusions can be used as raw
stock for forging and drawing; or can be sold as final products,
such as beams or extruded tubing. Forgings are either sold as
consumer products or used as parts in the production of
machinery, aircraft, and engines.
Products manufactured by nonferrous metals forming operations
generally serve as stock for subsequent fabricating operations.
Because the 22 metals included in this category have a wide range
of physical, chemical, and electrochemical properties, they are
used in a wide range of fabricated products. The forming and
associated operations in common use for a particular metal depend
on what is possible, given the physical properties of the metal,
and what is required for a specific application. For example:
Beryllium, used in aerospace applications because of its
high strength and light weight, is rolled into sheet
products. Because it is difficult to cast, it is
commonly consolidated into billets by powder metallurgy
techniques.
Bismuth has a low melting point and thus is rolled into
strip for use in fuses. When alloyed with lead, tin,
and/or cadmium, it is also extruded and drawn into solder
wire.
Cobalt is often alloyed with nickel, and is formed by the
same method used to form steels. It is used for applica-
tions requiring strength and corrosion resistance at high
temperatures, such as turbine blades.
Hafnium is formed into control rods for nuclear reactors
because of its special properties.
Lead is extruded and swaged into bullets because it is
dense and inexpensive. When alloyed with tin, bismuth,
and cadmium, it is extruded into solder, an application
323
-------
which makes use of its low melting point. Lead is formed
into cases for automobile batteries because of its elec-
trochemical properties and because it is inexpensive.
Magnesium is extruded into cases for batteries used in
portable communications equipment. The application takes
advantage of the metal's electrochemical properties and
light weight.
Nickel is often alloyed with chrome and iron to make
stainless steel alloys, many greater than 50 percent
nickel. It is formed by all major forming operations and
is used in applications requiring corrosion resistance at
high temperatures, such as tubing for steam and gas tur-
bines and in jet engines.
Precious metals (silver, gold, platinum, and palladium)
are corrosion-resistant and good electrical conductors.
Because of their expense, they are often used as a thin
layer clad to a layer of base metal (usually copper or
nickel) which is rolled into strip and stamped into
electrical contacts. Pure and clad precious metals are
also drawn to wire used to fabricate jewelry. The
corrosion resistance of precious metals makes them useful
in dentistry.
Refractory metals (columbium, molybdenum, rhenium, tanta-
lum, tungsten, and vanadium) must be formed at high tem-
peratures (relative to other metals) or as powders
because they have melting points above 1,960°C. Their
unique properties make them useful for specialized appli-
cations. Columbium is used as a structural material in
nuclear reactors. Molybdenum is drawn into semiconductor
wires. Tantalum is used in very small capacitors and
heat transfer and furnace equipment. Tungsten finds wide
application as filaments for electric light bulbs. As
tungsten carbide, it is used in cutting tools and
abrasives because of its extreme hardness.
Tin is used in solder, usually alloyed with lead.
Titanium, used in aerospace applications because of its
high strength and light weight, is formed by all major
forming techniques. It is also used for corrosion-resis-
tant hardware and surgical implants.
Uranium, when composed of 0.2 to 0.3 percent 235y (the
fissionable isotope), remainder 238u} is called
depleted uranium. This material is extruded into armor
piercing projectiles because it is extremely dense.
324
-------
Zinc is light weight and corrosion-resistant. It is
rolled into sheet for architectural uses and stamped into
pennies. Its chemical properties make it useful for
battery cases and lithographic plates.
Zirconium is used to clad nuclear fuel rods in water
cooled reactors and as a construction material in
chemical plants because of its high melting point and
corrosion resistance. It is extruded into tubes and
rolled into plate and sheet.
Some forming operations are more commonly used on some metals
than others. For instance, 67 percent of plants which form lead,
tin, or bismuth extrude these metals. Only 6 percent of lead
forming plants forge (swage) the metal. Casting is not common at
refractory metals plants (8 percent of the plants) but powder
metallurgy is (63 percent of the plants). Precious metals are
commonly rolled (67 percent) and drawn (50 percent), but seldom
extruded (15 percent).
Production of formed nonferrous metal products is tabulated in
Table III-4. Production varies widely, from as little as two and
a half million pounds of cobalt to 384 million pounds of lead
products formed in 1981. Approximately 203 million pounds of
iron, steel, copper, and aluminum powders and parts made from
powder were produced in 1981. Reported production of formed
nonferrous metals at individual plant sites rangecl from 24 kg (53
pounds) to almost 23 million kg (51 million pounds) during 1981.
Wastewater Generation and Treatment
One hundred forty-eight plants indicated that no wastewater from
nonferrous metals forming operations is discharged to either
surface waters or a POTW. Of the remaining 146 plants, 32 dis-
charge an effluent from nonferrous metals forming directly to
surface waters, 107 discharge indirectly, sending nonferrous
metals forming effluent through a POTW, and seven plants dis-
charge both directly and indirectly. The volume of nonferrous
metals forming wastewater discharged by plants in this category
ranges from 0 to 680 million liters per year (0 to 180 million
gallons per year). The mean volume is approximately 19 million
liters per year (5.0 million gallons per year) for those plants
having discharges. Only 84 of the discharging plants provided
enough information to calculate the volume of wastewater dis-
charged. Of these 84 plants, 20 percent discharge less than
38,000 liters per year (10,000 gallons per year); 55 percent
discharge less than 3,800,000 liters per year (1,000,000 gallons
per year); and 81 percent discharge less than 38,000,000 liters
per year (10,000,000 gallons per year). There is no correlation
between overall water use and total nonferrous metals production
for a plant as a whole. However, correlations can be developed
325
-------
between water use or wastewater discharge and production on a
process basis, as discussed in Section V.
Approximately 50 percent of the plants reported some form of
treatment of wastewater from nonferrous metals forming processes.
The most common forms of wastewater treatment are pH adjustment,
clarification, and gravity oil separation (skimming). Recircu-
lation, including in-line filtration and cooling towers, is
frequently used to control the volume of wastewater generated.
Other flow reduction techniques demonstrated include countercur-
rent cascade and spray rinsing. Oily wastes are separated into
oil and water fractions by emulsion breaking using heat, or chemi-
cals. Gravity separation is frequently used to separate neat oil
and broken emulsions from the water fraction. The oil portion is
usually removed by a contractor, although some plants dispose of
it by land application or incineration. Wastewater treatment
sludges generally are not thickened, but are disposed of without
treatment; however, vacuum and pressure filters, centrifuges, and
drying beds are occasionally used. Sludge disposal methods
include landfill and contractor removal. Disposal of wastewater
is being accomplished by discharge to surface waters or a POTW,
by contractor removal, or by land application (lagoons and septic
tanks).
DESCRIPTION OF NONFERROUS METALS FORMING PROCESSES
In the remainder of this section, nonferrous metal forming opera-
tions and operations associated with nonferrous metal forming are
described in detail. In these descriptions, particular emphasis
is placed on the use of water and generation of wastewater. The
major nonferrous metals forming operations covered under this
guideline include:
1. Rolling, drawing, extruding and forging of nonferrous
metals other than copper and aluminum;
2. Cladding of any metals other than iron, steel, copper,
and aluminum to any base metal (including iron, steel,
copper, and aluminum);
3. Production of powders of all metals (including iron,
copper, and aluminum) by mechanical methods or atomiza-
tion; and
4. Manufacture of parts from powders of all metals
(including iron, copper, and aluminum).
Nonferrous metal forming operations which are associated with the
above operations are also covered under this guideline. These
include:
326
-------
1. Casting of nonferrous metals for subsequent forming;
2. Heat treatment;
3. Chemical surface treatments (acid, caustic, chromate);
4. Chemical cleaning (molten salt, alkaline);
5. Degreasing;
6. Mechanical surface treatments (tumbling, burnishing,
milling);
7. Sawing and grinding; and
8. Product testing.
Water is used in forming of nonferrous metals to achieve desired
metal characteristics such as tensile strength, malleability,
hardness, and specific surface characteristics. Water can be
used without additives, as in contact cooling and rinsing; in
combination with soaps and oils, as in lubricating various opera-
tions; and in combination with other chemicals, as in surface
treatment and cleaning operations. Water is used in vapor form
to steam clean and surface treat some metals and as a high pres-
sure jet in the production of metal powders by atoraization. In
addition to its use in applications which directly affect metal
properties, water is used in cleaning nonferrous metal forming
plants and equipment and in devices used to control air pollution
generated during forming. A tally of wastewater sources in the
nonferrous metals forming industry is presented in Section V.
Regulatory flow allowances for waste streams under BPT, BAT,
NSPS, pretreatment standards, and BCT are presented and discussed
in Sections IX, X, XI, XII, and XIII, respectively.
EPA recognizes that plants sometimes combine wastewater from
nonferrous metals forming and other processes and nonprocess
wastewater prior to treatment and discharge. Pollutant discharge
allowances will be established by this guideline only for nonfer-
rous metals forming process wastewater. The flows and wastewater
characteristics for other waste streams are a function of the
plant operations, layout, and water handling practices. As a
result, the pollutant discharge effluent limitation for waste-
water streams other than nonferrous metals forming process water
will be prepared by the permitting authority on a case-by-case
basis, applying other effluent limitations and guidelines, if
appropriate. These wastewaters are not further discussed in this
document.
327
-------
Nonferrous Metals Forming Operations
Rolling. Rolling is the process of reducing the cross-sectional
area of metal stock, or otherwise shaping metal products, through
the use of rotating rolls. Cylindrical rolls are used to produce
flat shapes; grooved rolls produce rounds, squares, and struc-
tural shapes. Two common roll configurations are shown in Figure
III-3. Because multiple passes through the rolls are often
required to reduce the metal to the desired thickness, mills are
frequently designed to allow rolling in the reverse direction.
Rolling employs either hot- or cold-working techniques depending
on the kind of metal or alloy, and the properties desired in the
final product. Hot rolling is defined as rolling above the
recrystallization temperature of the metal and is typically the
first step in a series of operations to produce a rolled product.
Cast ingots or billets are usually reduced by hot rolling to
elongated forms, known as blooms or slags. The rolling mills
used for this operation are generally referred to as "breakdown
mills" or "roughing mills." Additional hot or cold rolling can
then follow the "breakdown" process. A diagram of a reversing
hot strip mill which would be used subsequent to a "breakdown"
operation is presented in Figure III-4.
Cold rolling is defined as rolling below the recrystallization
temperature of the metal and may be carried out at temperatures
much higher than ambient and still be considered "cold rolling.
A diagram of a typical 4-high cold rolling mill is presented in
Figure III-5.
The rolling process is used to produce any one of a number of
intermediate or final products from cast metal. Rolling is used
to make flat products such as plate, sheet, strip, and foil.
Plate is defined as being greater than or equal to 6.3 mm (0.25
inch) thick, and is usually produced from ingots by hot: rolling.
Cold rolled flat products are generally classified as sheet [from
6.3 to 0.15 mm (0.249 to 0.007 inch) thick] and foil [below 0.15
mm (0.006 inch) thick].
Rod, bar, and wire may be produced by either hot or cold rolling
using grooved rolls. Rod is defined as having a solid round
cross section 0.95 cm (3/8 inch) or more in diameter. Bar is
also identified by a cross section with 0.95 cm (3/8 inch) or
more between two parallel sides, but it is not round. Wire is
characterized by a diameter of less than 0.95 cm (3/8 inch).
A specialized cold rolling operation, called tube reducing, is
used to reduce the diameter and wall thickness of tubing. A
mandrel is inserted in the tubing which is then rolled between a
pair of rolls with tapered grooves. This process is used on
nickel, silver, zirconium, and titanium tubing.
328
-------
As will be discussed later in this section, heat treatment is
usually required before and between stages of the rolling pro-
cess. Ingots are usually made homogeneous in grain structure
prior to hot rolling in order to remove the effects of casting on
the metal's mechanical properties. Annealing is typically
required between passes or after cold rolling to keep the metal
ductile and remove the effects of work hardening. The kind and
degree of heat treatment applied depends on the metal and alloy
involved, the nature of the rolling operation, and the properties
desired in the product.
It is necessary to use a cooling and lubricating compound during
rolling to prevent excessive wear on the rolls, to prevent adhe-
sion of metal to the rolls, and to maintain a suitable and uni-
form rolling temperature. Water and oil-in-water emulsions,
stabilized with emulsifying agents such as soaps and other polar
organic materials, are used for this purpose in hot rolling oper-
ations. Emulsion concentrations usually vary between 5 and 10
percent oil. Evaporation of the lubricant as it is sprayed on
the hot metal serves to cool the rolling process. Mist elimina-
tors may be used to recover rolling emulsions that are dispersed
to the atmosphere. The emulsions are typically filtered to
remove metal fines and other contaminants and recirculated
through the mills. The use of deionized water to replace evapo-
rative and carryover losses and the addition of bactericides and
antioxidizing agents are practiced at many plants to increase the
life of the emulsions. Nevertheless, the emulsions eventually
become rancid or degraded and must be eliminated from circulation
either by continuous bleed or periodic discharge.
Water without additives is also used as a coolant and lubricant
in hot rolling operations. The water is typically not recycled,
but used once and discharged. Mineral oil or kerosene-based
lubricants are used in cold rolling operations. Neat oils are
used to roll nickel, zinc, and refractory metals. Kerosene-based
lubricants are used to roll precious metals. Often a light oil
or emulsion is used to lubricate the outside of a tube during
tube reducing, while the inside is lubricated with a heavier oil
or grease.
The steel rolls used in hot and cold rolling operations may
require periodic machining to remove metal buildup and to grind
away any cracks or imperfections that appear on the surface of
the rolls. The survey of the industry indicated that roll
grinding with an oil-in-water emulsion is common practice. This
emulsion is usually recycled and periodically discharged after
treatment with other emulsified waste streams at the plant.
The surveyed plants have 131 rolling operations. Wastewater is
discharged from lead, nickel/cobalt, zinc, precious metals,
titanium, and refractory metals rolling operations.
329
-------
Drawing. Drawing is pulling of metal through a die or succession
of dies to reduce its diameter, alter the cross-sectional shape,
or increase its hardness. This process is used to manufacture
tube, rod, bar, and wire. In the drawing of tubing, one end of
an extruded tube is swaged to form a solid point and then passed
through the die. A clamp, known as a bogie, grips the swaged end
of tubing, as shown in Figure III-6. A mandrel is then inserted
into the die orifice, and the tubing is pulled between the man-
drel and die, reducing the outside diameter and the wall thick-
ness of the tubing. Wire, rod, and bar drawing is accomplished
in a similar manner, but the metal is drawn through a simple die
orifice without using a mandrel. A diagram of a typical
hydraulic draw bench is presented in Figure III-7.
Drawing may be carried out hot or cold. In order to ensure uni-
form drawing temperatures and avoid excessive wear on the dies
and mandrels used, it is essential that a suitable lubricant be
applied during drawing. A wide variety of lubricants are used
for this purpose. Heavier draws, which have a higher reduction
in diameter, may require oil-based lubricants, but oil-in-water
emulsions are used for many applications. Graphite, ground
glass, soap powders, and soap solutions may also be used for some
of the lighter draws. Drawing oils are usually recycled until
their lubricating properties are exhausted.
Intermediate annealing is frequently required between draws in
order to restore the ductility lost by cold working of the drawn
product. Degreasing of the metal may be required to prevent
burning of heavy lubricating oils in the annealing furnaces.
The surveyed plants have 96 drawing operations. Spent lubricants
are discharged from lead, nickel, zinc, and precious metals
drawing operations.
Extrusion. In the extrusion process, high pressures are applied
to a cast metal billet, forcing the metal to flow through a die
orifice. The resulting product is an elongated shape or tube of
uniform cross-sectional area. If a piercing mandrel is used, or
if the center of the billet or round has been removed by boring
or trepanning, the extruded product is a tube.
There are two basic methods of extrusion practiced in the nonfer-
rous metals forming category:
Direct extrusion, and
Indirect extrusion.
The direct extrusion process is shown schematically in Figure
III-8. A heated cylindrical billet is placed into the ingot
chamber, and the dummy block and ram are placed into position
330
-------
behind it. Pressure is exerted on the ram by hydraulic or
mechanical means, forcing the metal to flow through the die open-
ing. The extrusion is sawed off next to the die, and the dummy
block and ingot butt are released. Hollow shapes are produced
with the use of a mandrel positioned in the die opening so that
the metal is forced to flow around it. A less common technique,
indirect extrusion, is similar, except that in this method, the
die is forced against the billet extruding the metal in the oppo-
site direction through the ram stem. A dummy block is not used
in indirect extrusion. Diagrams of extrusion tooling equipment
and a typical extrusion press are presented in Figures III-9 and
111-10, respectively.
Although some metals, such as lead, can be extruded cold, most
metals are heated first to reduce adhesion of the die to the
extrusion and the resulting cracks and flakes in the extruded
product (galling). Extrusion at elevated temperatures also
reduces the amount of work hardening that will be imposed on the
product. Heat treatment is frequently used after extrusion to
attain the desired mechanical properties and will be described,
in detail, later in this section. At some plants, contact
cooling of the extrusion, sometimes called press heat treatment,
is practiced as the extrusion leaves the press. This can be done
in one of three ways: with a water spray near the die, by
immersion in a water tank adjacent to the runout table, or by
passing the metal through a water wall. Contact cooling water
may also be used to cool extrusion dummy blocks, though no plants
in this category specifically reported its use. Following an
extrusion, the dummy block drops from the press and is cooled
before being used again. Air cooling is most commonly used for
this purpose, but water may be used to quench the dummy blocks.
The extrusion process requires the use of a lubricant to prevent
adhesion of the metal to the die and ingot container walls. In
hot extrusion, limited amounts of lubricant are applied to the
ram and die ace or to the billet ends. For cold extrusion, the
the container walls, billet surfaces, and die orifice must be
lubricated with a thin film of viscous or solid lubricant. Many
lubricants are used in extruding the metals in this category.
Neat oils are used to lubricate nickel and uranium extrusion,
emulsified oils for zirconium and titanium. Molten glass is also
used as a lubricant in nickel extrusion; it acts as a heat insu-
lator as well as a lubricant. Graphite and molybdenum disulfide
in an oil or water base are other commonly used lubricants. Some
metals (zirconium, beryllium, nickel) may be encased in a copper
or steel can before extrusion. The can prevents galling of the
core metal and is reduced to a very thin shell as a result of the
extrusion. The thin shell is then removed from the core metal by
acid pickling and/or machining.
331
-------
The steel dies used in the extrusion proces require frequent
dressing and repairing to ensure the necessary dimensional pre-
cision and surface quality of the product. The metal that has
adhered to the die orifice is typically removed by grinding or
polishing, which is a dry process.
The surveyed plants have 81 extrusion operations. Wastewater is
discharged from lead, nickel, precious metals, titanium, refrac-
tory metals, zirconium, and uranium extrusion operations.
Forging. Forging is deforming metal, usually hot, with compres-
sive force into desired shapes, with or without dies. The actual
forging process is a dry operation. Five types of forging are
commonly practiced in the nonferrous metals forming category:
Closed die forging,
Open die forging,
Rolled ring forging,
Impacting, and
- Swaging.
In each of these techniques, pressure is exerted on dies or
rolls, forcing the heated stock to take the desired shape. The
first three processes are types of hot working; the other two are
cold working.
Closed die forging (Figure III-lla), the most prevalent method,
is accomplished by hammering or squeezing the metal between two
steel dies, one fixed to the hammer or press ram and the other to
the anvil. Forging hammers, mechanical presses, and hydraulic
presses can be used for the closed die forging of nonferrous
metals. The heated stock is placed in the lower die and, by one
or more blows of the ram, forced to take the shape of the die
set. In closed die forging, the metal is shaped entirely within
the cavity created by these two dies. The die set comes together
to completely enclose the forging, giving lateral restraining to
the flow of the metal.
The process of open die forging (Figure Ill-lib) is similar to
that described above, but in this method, the shape of the forg-
ing is determined by manually turning the stock and regulating
the blows of the hammer or strokes of the press. Open die forg-
ing requires a great deal of skill and only simple, roughly
shaped forgings can be produced. It is primarily used as a
breakdown process to improve the workability of cast billets and
332
-------
to form them into rounds, octagons, and other shapes. Occasion-
ally the process is used in development work in which items are
produced in small quantities making the cost of closed-type dies
prohibitive.
The process of rolled ring forging is used in the manufacture of
seamless rings. In one type of ring rolling, a hollow cylindri-
cal billet is rotated between a mandrel and pressure roll to
reduce its thickness and increase its diameter (Figure III-12a).
In another type of ring rolling, a hollow preform is mounted on a
saddle/mandrel and reduced in wall thickness by the repeated
blows of a hammer (Figure III-12b).
Impacting, depicted in Figure 111-13, is a combination of cold
forging and cold extrusion. The process is performed by placing
a cut-off piece of metal in a bottom die. A top die consisting
of a round or rectangular punch is fastened to the press ram and
is driven into the metal slug. This causes the metal to be
driven up around the top punch. Usually, the metal adheres to
the punch and must be stripped off as the press ram rises.
Swaging, the process of forming a taper or a reduction on metal
products such as rod and tubing, is another type of forging.
When swaging is the initial step in drawing tube or wire, a solid
point is formed by repeated blows of one or more pairs of oppos-
ing dies (this process is also called pointing). Swaging can
also be used to reduce the diameter of tube or wire without a
subsequent drawing operation, especially when the metal being
worked is brittle (e.g., tungsten). The process of making
tapered bullets from lead wire is also called swaging.
Proper lubrication of the dies is essential in forging nonferrous
metals. Colloidal graphite in either a water or an oil medium is
usually sprayed onto the dies for this purpose in the hot working
types of forging. For shallow impressions, a single spray is
usually adequate. Dies may be sprayed manually or with automatic
sprays timed with the press stroke. Deeper cavities may require
a second manual spray or swabbing to ensure that all die surfaces
are covered.
Particulates and smoke may be generated from the partial combus-
tion of oil-based lubricants as they contact the hot forging
dies. In those cases, air pollution controls may be required.
Baghouses, wet scrubbers, and commercially available dry scrub-
bers are in use at nonferrous metals forming facilities.
Oil-in-water emulsions and neat oils are used as lubricants in
swaging processes. The lubricants are usually filtered to remove
metal fines and other contaminants and recirculated. As the
lubricants become rancid or degraded they are discarded, either
through continuous bleed or periodic batch discharge.
333
-------
In addition to use in lubricants and air pollution control, water
is used to cool forging dies, clean equipment, and in heat treat-
ment. Quenching is employed to attain desired metallurgical
properties, usually by plunging hot pieces in a water bath imme-
diately after forging. Titanium, refractory metals, zirconium,
magnesium, and uranium forgings are sometimes treated this way.
The surveyed plants have 81 forging operations. Wastewatter is
discharged from lead, nickel, titanium, refractory metals,
zirconium, magnesium, and uranium forging operations.
Cladding. A clad metal is a composite metal containing two or
morelayers that have been bonded together. Some typical clad
configurations are shown in Figure 111-14. The bonding may have
been accomplished by roll bonding (co-rolling), solder applica-
tion (brazing), or explosion bonding.
In the roll bonding process, a permanent bond between two metals
is obtained by rolling under high pressure in a bonding mill.
The high pressure increases the temperature of the metals, pro-
moting codiffusion so that a metallurgical bond forms at the
interface. In some cases a sintering step is required to
increase bond strength. Clad metals consisting of a base metal
with an overlay or inlay of precious metal are produced for the
electrical/electronics industry and for jewelery applications
(e.g., gold filled wire). To produce an inlay, a ditch is skived
in the base metal, filled with a strip of precious metal and
rolled to form a bond.
The solder application or brazing process is also used to make
clad metals. The term soldering is used where the temperature
range falls below 425°C (800°F). The term brazing is used where
the temperature exceeds 425°C (800°F). In this process, a thin
layer (film or foil) of a low melting point metal is placed
between two layers of metal to be bonded. The three-layer
assembly is then placed into a furnace at the melting temperature
of the filler metal. Bonding results from the intimate contact
produced by the dissolution of a small amount of the base metal
and the top metal in the molten filler metal, without direct
fusion of the two metal layers. Upon cooling, the clad material
can be formed by any of the forming operations previously
described.
A third method of producing clad metals, pressure bonding, is a
combination of roll bonding and solder bonding. A three-layer
assembly of solder and the metals to be bonded is placed into a
furnace, just as in solder bonding. However, the heating is
accompanied by the application of pressure, as in roll bonding.
The bonded metal may be cooled by a water spray after it is
removed from the bonding furnace.
334
-------
In explosion bonding, the metallurgical joining of two or more
metals is accomplished by the force of a carefully detonated
explosion. The explosion moves progressively across the surface
of the cladder metal, accelerating it across a "standoff dis-
tance" and against the backer metal. The force of the explosion
shears away the oxide- and nitride-containing surface layers of
both metals and causes them to behave as a fluid. The sheared
away layers are jetted out ahead of the point where the two
metals collide. As the collision point advances, the jetting
action produces metallurgically clean surfaces which, under
extreme pressure, allow normal interatomic and intermolecular
forces to create an electron-sharing bond. The result is a cold
weld, with a characteristic wave pattern at the weld interface
caused by the turbulent plastic metal flow after collision.
Explosion bonding is used to produce clad plate, sheet and tubes,
and to form structural transition joints. Clad plate can be used
in the gauge at which it is formed or it can be rolled down to
final gauge.
Except for pressure bonding which uses some contact cooling
water," all of the cladding processes described above are dry pro-
cesses. The main source of process wastewater in metal cladding
operations is in cleaning the metal surfaces prior to bonding.
For small batch operations, the cleaning steps can involve dip-
ping the metal into small cleaning bath tanks and hand rinsing
the metal in a sink. For larger continuous operations, the metal
may be cleaned in a power scrubline. In a typical scrubline,
metal strip passes through a detergent bath, spray rinse, acid
bath, spray rinse, rotating abrasive scrub brushes, and a final
rinse. The metal may then pass through a heated drying chamber
or may air dry.
Metal Powder Production. For regulatory convenience, the produc-
tion of all metal powders, including iron, steel, copper, and
aluminum, has been included in this category. Atomization,
depicted in Figure 111-15, is the most common method of producing
metal powders. In this process, a stream of fluid, usually water
or gas, impinges upon a molten metal stream, breaking it into
droplets which solidify as powder particles. The size and shape
of atomized powder is determined by jet configuration, jet
design, composition of the impinging medium, and composition of
the metal. Generally, gas atomization is used to produce
spherical particles while water atomization is used to produce
irregularly shaped particles, required for powder metallurgy
applications in which a powder is cold pressed into a compact.
In addition, cooling times play an important role in determining
particle configuration. Annealing usually accompanies atomiza-
tion for the purpose of rearranging internal crystal structures
of metal powders, and consequently improving strength.
335
-------
Powders are also produced by disintegration of solid metal into
powder by mechanical comminution. This process is used for brit-
tle ores or chemically embrittled metals. It is also used to
produce powder from turnings and other scrap of more ductile
metals. The most commonly utilized pieces of mechanical reduc-
tion equipment are ball mills, vortex mills, hammer mills, disc
mills, and roll mills. Powder production with this type of
machinery tends to produce angular, irregular, rod-like, and
flaked physical structures. Occasionally, powders are milled in
a water slurry.
In addition to its use as an atomization medium and a milling
slurry, water is used in the equipment used to control particu-
late air pollution from metal powder production operations (wet
scrubbers and electrostatic, precipitators) .
Surveyed plants produce powders from all of the metals formed by
traditional means except titanium and rhenium (see Table III-4).
Iron, stainless steel, and copper alloy powders are produced in
the largest quantities and by the greatest number of manufac-
turers. The high demand for these metal powders is caused by
their large-scale applications in the auto manufacturing and
machining industries. After iron and steel, copper, and alumi-
num, and their alloys, the metal powders produced in the largest
quantity are tungsten and tungsten carbide, lead and its alloys,
and nickel and its alloys. Wastewater is discharged from nickel,
precious metals, iron and steel, copper, aluminum, and refractory
metals powder production operations.
Production of Powder Metallurgy Parts. Metal powders are formed
into parts by a "press and sinter" operation, consisting of
blending metal powders, compacting the mixture in a die and then
heating or sintering the compacted powder in a controlled atmo-
sphere to bond the particles into a strong shape. A diagram of
two pressing configurations is presented in Figure 111-16.
Compaction forces range from 1 to 350 kkg (1.1 to 385 tons).
Following compaction, "green" metal powder compacts are sent to a
furnace for sintering. Furnace temperatures are held below the
melting point of the metal being sintered, from 1,000°C to
1,800°C.
To prevent formation of oxide films on particle surfaces (which
inhibit formation of metallic bonds between particles) an inert
atmosphere or vacuum must be maintained inside the sintering
furnace. Hydrogen, although expensive, is the most commonly used
inert gas. Alternatively, vacuum systems capable of maintaining
a pressure of 10 MPa (2.96 x 10~6 in Hg) are typically
employed. As an extra precaution against contamination with air,
the vacuum furnace and its inlet and outlet ports may be jacketed
with inert gas.
336
-------
During the sintering process, air present in the metal compacts
before sintering is exhausted, thus decreasing the porosity of
the compact and increasing its strength. Further strengthening
occurs as surface metal atoms recrystallize, realigning into a
close crystal lattice pattern.
For some applications, porosity may be further decreased by the
process of infiltration, in which a liquid phase is allowed to
penetrate the pores between metal particles during sintering.
The liquid used may be a nonalloying metal with a lower melting
point than the compacted metal, oil, or an anti-friction polymer
such as polytetrafluoroethylene. Infiltration with copper is
commonly used in manufacturing tungsten and molybdenum compacts
for electrical contacts.
In some cases, a final mechanical fabrication step, repressing or
coining, is used. In this process, the sintered compact is
deformed in a closed die to produce a final shape. Pressures
applied during coining range up to 700 MPa (100,000 psi),
depending on the size and shape of the die and the nature of the
metal compact being formed. In some cases a lubricant is used to
prevent the compact from adhering to the sizing die. This
lubricant is usually not discharged from the process, but lost
through drag-out on the parts. Sintered metal compacts also may
be rolled, extruded, or drawn.
Finishing operations used subsequent to the forming of parts from
metal powder include deburring, steam oxidation, and treatment
with rust inhibitor. Deburring may be sand blasting or shot
peening, both of which are dry, or tumbling with grit suspended
in water. Because of their porosity, parts made from iron and
steel powders may oxidize excessively. To prevent this, steam
treatment to produce a protective oxide layer or treatment with
rust inhibitors are commonly used. Air pollution from the steam
treatment operation is sometimes controlled by wet scrubbers.
As described above, process wastewater is generated in the pro-
duction of powder metallurgy parts after the pressing and sinter-
ing steps. In addition to tumbling and steam treating, the parts
may be cleaned or degreased (alkaline, detergent, or solvent)
prior to packing and shipping. These cleaning operations are
identical to those performed on other metal products and will be
described in detail later in this section.
Operations Associated With Nonferrous Metals Forming
Casting. Casting consists of filling a shaped container or mold
with molten metal so that upon solidification, the shape of the
mold is reproduced. Only casting which is an integral part of
nonferrous metals forming is included in the category, that is,
337
-------
shot-casting and casting of billets, ingots, bars, and strip
which are subsequently formed on-site. Casting performed as part
of a smelting or refining operation is included in the nonferrous
metals manufacturing point source category, 40 CFR Part 421.
Casting of parts is included in 40 CFR Part 464, proposed on
November 15, 1982 at 47 FR 51512.
The choice of casting method depends on the metal or alloy being
cast and the ultimate use of the cast form. The casting methods
used in nonferrous metals forming can be divided into four
classes:
Stationary casting;
Direct chill casting, including arc casting;
Continuous casting;
Shot casting.
The method of casting most widely practiced at nonferrous metals
forming plants is stationary or pig casting which allows for
recycle of in-house scrap. In this process, molten metal is
poured into cast iron molds and allowed to air cool. Lubricants
are not usually required. Although water may be sprayed onto the
molten metal to increase the cooling rate, this generally does
not result in any discharge.
Direct chill casting is characterized by continuous solidifica-
tion of the metal while it is being poured. The length of an
ingot cast using this method is determined by the vertical
distance it is allowed to drop rather than by mold dimensions.
As shown in Figures 111-17 and 111-18, molten metal is tapped
from the melting furnace and flows through a distributor channel
into a shallow mold. Noncontact cooling water circulates within
this mold, causing solidification of the metal. The base of the
mold is attached to a hydraulic cylinder which is gradually
lowered as pouring continues. As the solidified metal leaves the
mold, it is sprayed with contact cooling water to reduce the tem-
perature of the forming ingot. The cylinder continues to descend
into a tank of water, causing further cooling of the ingot as it
is immersed. When the cylinder has reached its lowest position,
pouring stops and the ingot is lifted from the pit. The
hydraulic cylinder is then raised and positioned for another
casting cycle.
In direct chill casting, lubrication of the mold is required to
ensure proper ingot quality. Lard or castor oil is usually
applied before casting begins and may be reapplied during the
338
-------
drop. Much of the lubricant volatilizes on contact with the
molten metal, but contamination of the contact cooling water with
oil and oil residues does occur.
Arc casting is a form of direct chill casting used for refractory
metals, metals with melting points too high to easily cast by
conventional techniques (tungsten, molybdenum, tantalum,
columbium, vanadium, and rhenium). The bars serve as consumable
electrodes in an arc-melting process. The end product of refin-
ing these metals is a powder which can be compacted and sintered
into solid bars. Under vacuum, in an appropriate furnace con-
sisting of a water-cooled copper crucible, the preformed bars
form an electrode for striking a high current, low voltage arc
between the bar and a starting pad of metal. As the bar is
progressively melted, molten metal falls through the arc and
forms an ingot which gradually freezes into solid form. The
ingot may be remelted to improve purity or directly fabricated to
product form.
Many nonferrous metals forming plants use continuous casting
instead of, or in addition to, direct chill casting methods.
Unlike direct chill casting, no restrictions are placed on the
length of the casting, and it is not necessary to interrupt pro-
duction to remove the cast product. The use of continuous
casting eliminates or reduces the degree of subsequent rolling
required.
A relatively new technology, continuous casting of metal first
came into practice in the late 1950's. Since then, improvements
and modifications have resulted in the increased use of this pro-
cess. Current applications in this category include the casting
of sheet and strip. Because continuous casting affects the
mechanical properties of the metal cast, the use of continuous
casting is limited by the metals and alloys used, the nature of
subsequent forming operations, and the desired properties of the
finished product. In applications where continuous casting can
be used, the following advantages have been cited:
Increased flexibility in the dimensions of the cast
product;
Low capital costs, as little as 10 to 15 percent of the
cost of conventional direct chill casting and hot rolling
methods; and
Low energy requirements, reducing the amount of energy
required to produce comparable products by direct chill
casting and rolling methods by 35 to 80 percent, depend-
ing on the product being cast.
339
-------
In addition, the use of continuous casting techniques has been
found to significantly reduce or eliminate the use of contact
cooling water and oil lubricants.
Two continuous casting processes are commonly used in the indus-
try. Methods in use at a particular plant will vary somewhat,
but they are similar in principle to the processes diagrammed
schematically in Figures 111-19 and 111-20. Continuous sheet
casting, shown in Figure 111-19, substitutes a single casting
process for the conventional direct chill casting, scalping,
heating, and hot rolling sequence. The typical continuous sheet
casting line consists of melting and holding furnaces, a caster,
pinch roll, shear, bridle, and coiler. Molten metal flows from
the holding furnace to the caster headbox. The level of molten
metal maintained in the headbox causes the metal to flow upwards
through the top assembly, which distributes it uniformly across
the width of the casting rolls. The metal solidifies as it
leaves the tip and is further cooled and solidified as it passes
through the internally water-cooled rolls. It leaves the caster
as a formed sheet and successively passes through pinch rolls, a
shear, and a tension bridle before being wound into a coil. The
cooling water associated with this method of continous sheet
casting never comes into contact with the metal.
Continuous strip casting is pictured in Figure 111-20. Molten
metal flows from a casting pot through an open-ended die. The
die is water cooled and has the same cross-section as the cast
strip. As the metal leaves the die, it descends vertically past
water sprays, guided by rolls. The strip can be coiled as it is
cast, or small sections can be cut from the end as the strip
continues to grow.
Metal shot is commonly produced by casting of a number of metals,
including lead and precious metals. In the shot casting process
pictured in Figure 111-21, metal ingots are melted in a furnace,
the furnace is tapped, and the molten metal is poured down a
trough or into a heated mold. At the bottom of the trough or
mold is a shot mold plate, typically made of steel or a ceramic
material, which has holes punched in it. The size of the shot
pellets is determined by the size of the holes.
As the molten metal flows through the holes in the shot mold it
forms droplets. The droplets become round as they descend
through several inches of air, then fall into a tank of water for
quick quenching. This water may be stagnant or circulating. In
some shot casting operations a wetting agent is added to the
quench water, altering the surface tension and ensuring the
formation of spherical shot particles. To prevent excessive loss
of quench water through evaporation and to maintain the water
temperature required by some operations, the quench water may be
cooled using noncontact cooling water in a jacket around the
tank.
340
-------
Cast shot may be processed through a sizing operation to remove
the irregular shaped particles. Reject shot is usually remelted
and recast.
In addition to its use to cast metal, water is used in equipment
which controls air pollution from stationary casting and shot-
sizing operations. Water is also used to wash billets immedi-
ately after casting. In vapor form, water is used to draw a
vacuum from some melting furnaces. The condensed steam, which
may carry any material volatilized during melting, is
recirculated with a periodic blowdown.
The surveyed plants have 88 casting operations. Wastewater is
discharged from lead, nickel, zinc, precious metals, and
refractory metals casting operations.
Heat Treatment. Heat treatment is an integral part of nonferrous
metals forming practiced at nearly every plant in the category.
It is frequently used both in-process and as a final step in
forming to give the metal the desired mechanical properties.
There are four general types of heat treatment:
Homogenizing, to increase the workability and help con-
trol recrystallization and grain growth following
casting;
Annealing, to soften work-hardened and heat-treated
metals, relieve stress, and stabilize properties and
dimens ions;
Solution heat treatment, to improve mechanical properties
by maximizing the concentration of hardening contaminants
in solid solution; and
Artificial aging, to provide hardening by precipitation
of constituents from solid solution.
Homogenizing, annealing, and aging are dry processes, while solu-
tion heat treatment typically involves significant quantities of
contact cooling water.
During casting, large crystals of intermetallic compounds are
distributed heterogeneously throughout the ingot. Homogeni-
zation of the cast ingot provides a more uniform distribution of
the soluble constituents within the metal. By reducing the brit-
tleness caused by casting, homogenization prepares the ingot for
subsequent forming operations. The need for homogenization and
the time and temperatures required are dependent on the metal and
alloy involved, the ingot size, the method of casting used, and
the nature of the subsequent forming operations. Typically, the
341
-------
ingot is heated to an appropriate temperature and held at that
temperature for four to 48 hours. The ingots are then allowed to
air cool.
Annealing is used by plants in the nonferrous metals forming
category to remove the effects of.strain hardening or solution
heat treatment. In the annealing operation, the metal is raised
to its recrystallization temperature. Nonheat-treatable, strain-
hardened metals need only be held in'the furnace until the
annealing temperature is reached; heat-treatable metals usually
require a detention time of two to three hours. In continuous
furnaces such as that pictured in Figure 111-22, the metal is
raised to higher temperatures and detained in the furnace for 30
to 60 seconds. Once removed from the annealing furnace, it is
essential that the heat-treatable metals be cooled at a slow,
controlled rate. After annealing, the metal is in a ductile,
more workable condition suitable for subsequent forming opera-
tions. Some metals are annealed in a protective (nonoxidizing)
atmosphere to prevent discoloration of the bright surface. This
process is called bright annealing and is commonly used to anneal
silver and its alloys. Typical protective atmospheres are
dissociated ammonia, hydrogen, and nitrogen.
Solution heat treatment, also referred to as solution annealing,
is accomplished by raising the temperature of a heat-treatable
metal to the eutectic temperature, where it is held for the
required length of time, then quenching it rapidly. As a result
of this process, the metallic constituents, in the metal are held
in a super-saturated solid solution, improving the mechanical
properties of the metal. The required length of time the metal
must be held at the eutectic temperature varies from one to 48
hours. Certain nonferrous metal alloys can be solution heat
treated immediately following extrusion and forging. In this
procedure, known as press heat treatment, the metal is extruded
or forged at the required temperatures and quenched with contact
cooling water as it emerges from the die or press.
The quenching techniques used in solution heat treatment are fre-
quently critical in achieving the desired mechanical properties.
The sensitivity of metals and alloys to quenching varies, but
delays in transferring the product from the furnace to the
quench, a quenching rate that is incorrect or not uniform, and
the quality of the quenching medium used can all have serious
detrimental effects. With few exceptions, contact cooling water
is used to quench solution heat treated products. Spray or flush
quenching is sometimes used to quench thick products. Solution
heat treated forgings of certain metals can be quenched using an
air blast rather than a water medium. Air quenching can also be
used for certain extrusions following press heat treatment. The
continuous annealing operation depicted in Figure 111-22 contains
a spray quench zone.
342
-------
Artificial aging, also known as precipitation heat treatment, is
applied to some nonferrous metals in order to cause precipitation
of super-saturated constituents in the metal. The metal is
heated to a relatively low temperature for several hours and then
air cooled. Artificial aging is frequently used following solu-
tion heat treatment to develop the maximum hardness and ultimate
tensile and yield strength in the metal. For certain metals, the
mechanical properties are maximized by sequentially applying
solution heat treatment, cold working, and artificial aging.
Chemical Surface Treatments. Surface treatment operations per-
formed as an integral part of forming processes are within the
scope of the nonferrous metals forming category. For the pur-
poses of this regulation, surface treatment of nonferrous metals
is considered to be an integral part of nonferrous metals forming
whenever it is performed at the same plant site at which
nonferrous metals are formed.
A number of chemical treatments may be applied to nonferrous
metals after they are formed. The objective of these treatments
is to in some way alter the surface of the metal, either by
removing some of it or changing its characteristics. Wastewater
discharges from these operations are generated when these solu-
tions must be replaced with fresh chemicals and in rinsing opera-
tions used to remove residual solution from the formed metal
after treatment. The contaminants in the spent solution and
rinse water are a function of the chemicals used to make the
solutions and the metal treated. Most of the contaminants are
acids, bases, and metal salts.
The most frequently used chemical surface treatments are designed
to remove the surface layer of oxidized metal created during
forming of nonferrous metals at elevated temperatures. The most
common method of removing this layer is to dissolve it in acid in
an operation known as pickling, brightening, etching, or acid
surface treatment. In addition to removing the oxide layer from
a metal surface, this treatment will remove burned-on lubricants
and any other substances not entirely removed by solvent or
alkaline cleaning.
Pickling operations can be batch operations in which formed parts
are moved from tank to tank to be dipped in acid baths, overflow-
ing rinse tanks and spray chambers. The rinses are usually plain
water, but occasionally ammonia solutions are used. A diagram of
a bulk product pickling tank is presented in Figure I11-23. A
continuous surface treatment linet consisting of a series of
tanks, can be used to provide strip metal with a series of
treatments. A diagram of a typical continuous strip pickling
line is presented in Figure 111-24.
343
-------
Sulfuric, hydrochloric, ammonium bifluoride, hydrofluoric, phos-
phoric, nitric, and chromic acids or acid mixtures are commonly
used as pickling solutions. The pickling process may be chemical
(formed metal is immersed in a tank of pickling solution and held
until scale is removed) or electrochemical (electric current is
forced through the pickling bath to speed up the pickling
process). Acid concentration, bath temperature, and process time
depend on the type of metal or alloy being treated, the compo-
nents of the pickling solution, and the amount of scale to be
removed.
Acid consumed during pickling operations must be periodically
replenished. Dissolved metal salts in the pickling solution
gradually reduce pickling efficiency. Spent pickle liquor may be
concentrated by high temperature precipitation of metal salts and
recycled to minimize acidic waste discharge.
Brightening solutions for nonferrous metals and alloys usually
contain mixtures of two or more acids: sulfuric, phosphoric,
nitric, chromic, or hydrochloric. Acid ratios and concemtrations
vary widely. Dipping times range from 5 seconds to greater than
5 minutes. Other chemicals such as metal salts, glycerol, or
ethylene glycol also may be added to brightening solutions.
The layer of oxide scale formed on nickel, cobalt, and certain
refractory metals is very difficult to remove with acid surface
treatments alone. Consequently these metals are treated by
dipping the formed parts into molten salts (usually sodium
chloride, potassium chloride, and sodium hydroxide) at 480 to
540°C for 15 minutes or more, then rinsing and quenching them in
a water bath. The scale loosened by the salt treatment is
removed by acid surface treatment followed by a rinse.
Anodizing and chemical conversion coating are used to change the
characteristics of the surface of formed metal by chemically or
electrochemically depositing an inorganic coating to the metal.
These coatings are applied for corrosion protection and in
preparation for painting.
Anodizing is an electrochemical oxidation process which forms an
insoluble oxide of the metal on the formed metal surface. The
oxide coating is used to provide corrosion resistance, decorative
surfaces, a base for applying other coatings, and special elec-
trical or mechanical properties. Anodizing is applied by immers-
ing the metal form in an acid solution (containing fluoride,
phosphate, chromate, and/or sodium ions) and passing a direct or
alternating electrical current through the metal form. After
anodizing, parts are rinsed in cold then hot water to facilitate
drying.
344
-------
The metal oxide layer formed on the metal surface (anode) is
extremely thin and nonporous. Electrolytic anodizing solutions
are composed of dilute sulfuric acid or dilute chromic acid.
Chemical conversion coatings are applied to previously-deposited
metal or base metal for increased protection, lubricity, or in
preparation for another special coating or to achieve a special
surface appearance. Typical operations include chromating to
form a protective film, and phosphating which is used to provide
a good base for paints and other organic coatings, to lubricate
the metal surface before cold forming or drawing, and to impart a
corrosion resistance. When chromating, the formed metal surface
is coated by immersion or wetting with a solution containing
hexavalent chromium and active organic and inorganic compounds.
When phosphating, the metal surface is wetted, usually by immer-
sion, with a phosphate solution which reacts with the metal
surface.
Surface treatments and their associated rinses are usually
combined in a single line of successive tanks. In some cases,
rinsewater from one treatment is reused in the rinse of another.
Surface treatment rinses are the major source of wastewater in
the nonferrous metals forming category. The surveyed plants have
142 surface treatment operations, many plants having several.
Wastewater is discharged from operations used to treat nickel,
cobalt, zinc, beryllium, precious metals, titanium, refractory
metals, zirconium, hafnium, magnesium, and uranium. Wastewater
is also generated by the equipment used to control air pollution
from surface treatment of nickel, titanium, refractory metals,
and uranium.
Alkaline Cleaning. Alkaline cleaning involves the removal of
oil, grease,and dirt from the surface of a formed metal product
using water with a detergent or other dispersing agent. Ultra-
sonic vibration is sometimes used in conjunction with chemical
cleaners to clean wire and other fine parts.
Alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Salts used include sodium hydroxide, sodium ortho-
silicate, trisodium phosphate, sodium metaborate, sodium carbon-
ate, and sodium polyphosphates. Frequently, two or more of these
salts are blended to form the cleaning solution.
Uninhibited alkaline cleaners will attack many nonferrous metals.
Therefore, inhibiting compounds which coat the metal with a thin
film to prevent etching, pitting, or tarnishing are typically
added to the cleaning solution.
Alkaline solutions are commonly used to clean formed metal parts
prior to chemical treatment or as a final step before packaging
345
-------
the product. The type of solution used depends on the metal to
be cleaned and the contaminant to be removed. Alkaline cleaning
is generally preceded by solvent cleaning via vapor degreasing or
cold cleaning. Following this step, formed metal parts are
immersed in or sprayed with the alkaline cleaning solution.
Solution concentration, temperature, and immersion time vary with
metal type.
Following alkaline treating, metal parts are rinsed with water.
Rinsewater is often warm, to decrease drying time and reduce
water spotting. Spent solutions and rinses are discharged from
alkaline cleaning processes. Streams are frequently combined
with acid waste streams to adjust wastewater pH prior to
discharge. In addition to cleaning nonferrous metals after they
are formed, alkaline cleaning is used to prepare metals for
cladding. The process may be hand cleaning or use a power
scrubline, as described in the cladding discussion above.
Alkaline cleaning is associated with lead, nickel, zinc, precious
metals, titanium, refractory metals, and zirconium forming
operations.
Decreasing. Solvent cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils
ana greases) applied to the surface of nonferrous metals during
mechanical forming operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods
include straight vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing,
spray-vapor degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified
solvent degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Straight vapor degreasing uses hot vapors of chlorinated solvents
to remove oils, greases, and waxes. A vapor degreasing unit
typically consists of an open steel tank as shown in Figure
111-25. Solvent at the bottom of the tank is heated to boiling,
generating hot vapors. The heavy vapors fill the tank and are
condensed at the top of the tank by cooling coils, thus contain-
ing the solvent vapors below the condensing coil level. Cooled
nonferrous metal forming products are lowered into the hot vapor
bath where solvent vapors condense onto the metal surface. Oils
and greases are dissolved from the metal surface by the solvent.
346
-------
Immersion-vapor degreasing is used to clean metal parts coated
with large quantities of oil, grease, or hard-to-remove soil.
Solvents used are the same as those used in straight vapor
degreasing. Metal parts are first immersed in boiling solvent,
then in a clean cool solvent rinse, and finally in solvent
vapors. Immersion in cool solvent rinses residual matter left
from the first cleaning and lowers the metal temperature so that
vapor rinsing will be effective. Clean solvent for the cool
rinse is supplied by condensation of pure vapors in the condenser
section of the degreaser. From the condenser, solvent flows into
the cool rinse chamber and overflows into the sump where it is
again vaporized.
When mild scrubbing action is required to remove grease or dirt,
spray-vapor degreasing is used. In this process, clean solvent
is pumped from the degreaser condenser to a spray lance. Parts
are impingement-sprayed with clean solvent to loosen soil and
insoluble material. Spray lances may be fixed so that parts move
in front of them for impingement, or may be hand-held so that an
operator may direct the spray. Parts enter the degreaser's vapor
phase, pass through the spray bank, and finally go through a
final vapor rinse.
Ultrasonic vapor degreasing is similar to immersion-vapor
degreasing, with ultrasonic transducers built into the clean
solvent rinse tank. Metal parts are initially cleaned by immer-
sion in boiling solvent, then immersed in cool solvent for ultra-
sonic scrubbing, followed by a vapor or spray-vapor rinse.
During ultrasonic scrubbing, high frequency sound waves are
transmitted through the solvent to the part, producing rapid
agitation and cavitation (formation/implosion of solvent
bubbles). The scrubbing action caused by solvent cavitation
efficiently removes particulate and insoluble materials from the
metal surface.
The ultrasonic frequency used depends on the type of part being
cleaned, the degree of soil contamination, and the solvent used.
The most commonly used frequency range is 20,000 to 50,000 cycles
per second.
Emulsified solvent degreasing is primarily used to remove both
water- and oil-soluble soils from complex mechanical parts.
Chlorofluorocarbons are typically employed as solvents in this
process. Reclamation of emulsified solvents is generally not
economical.
Water contaminated with salts and other water-soluble contami-
nants is periodically removed from the system and replaced with
clean water to renew the system's cleaning strength.
347
-------
Cold solvent cleaning involves hand wiping, spraying, and immer-
sion of metal parts in solvents to remove oil, grease, and other
contaminants from the metal surface. Petroleum and chlorinated
hydrocarbons are typically used in cold cleaning operations.
Contaminated solvents are reclaimed by distillation or are dis-
posed of via contractor.
Mechanical Surface Treatments. Mechanical surface treatments are
used,like chemicalsurface treatments, to alter the surface of
formed nonferrous metals. Machining, grinding, polishing, tumbl-
ing (barrel finishing), and burnishing are commonly used
mechanical surface treatments.
Machining is the general process of removing stock, in the form
of chips, from a workpiece by forcing a cutting tool through the
workpiece. Machining operations such as turning, milling, drill-
ing, boring, tapping, planing, broaching, sawing and cutoff,
slitting, shaving, threading, reaming, shaping, slotting,
hobbing, filing, and chamfering are included in this definition.
Grinding is the process of removing stock from a workpiece by the
use of a tool consisting of abrasive grains held by a rigid or
semirigid binder. The tool is usually in the form of a disk (the
basic shape of grinding wheels), but may also be in the form of a
cylinder, ring, cup, stick, strip, or belt. The most commonly
used abrasives are aluminum oxide, silicon carbide, and diamond.
The processes included in this unit operation are sanding (or
cleaning to remove rough edges or excess material), surface
finishing, and separating (as in cut-off or slicing operations).
Polishing is an abrading operation used to remove or smooth out
surface defects (scratches, pits, tool marks, etc.) that
adversely affect the appearance or function of a part. Polishing
is usually performed with either a belt or wheel to which an
abrasive such as aluminum oxide or silicon carbide is bonded.
Both wheels and belts are flexible and will conform to irregular
or rounded areas where necessary. The operation usually referred
to as buffing is included in the polishing operation.
Burnishing is the process of finish sizing or smooth finishing a
workpiece (previously machined or ground) by displacement, rather
than removal, of minute surface irregularities. It is accom-
plished with frictional contact between the workpiece and some
hard material, such as hardened metal balls.
Machining, grinding, polishing, and burnishing operations com-
monly use a recirculated oil-water emulsion to cool and lubri-
cate the contact between metal and finishing tool. Spent or
rancid lubricant is discharged periodically.
348
-------
Tumbling or barrel finishing is a controlled method of processing
parts to remove burrs, scale, flash, and oxides as well as to
improve surface finish. Widely used as a finishing operation for
many parts, it obtains a uniformity of surface finish not possi-
ble by hand finishing. For large quantities of small parts it is
generally the most economical method of cleaning and surface
conditioning.
Parts to be finished are placed in a rotating barrel or vibrating
unit with ceramic or metal slugs or abrasive media, water or oil,
and usually some chemical compound to assist in the operation.
As the barrel rotates slowly, the upper layer of the work is
given a sliding movement toward the lower side of the barrel,
causing the abrading or polishing action to occur. The same
results may also be accomplished in a vibrating unit, in which
the entire contents of the container are in constant motion.
VThen the parts have been sufficiently deburred they are drained
in a basket or shaker table and transferred to an oven for
drying. The tumbling solution is usually used once and then
discarded.
Sawing. Sawing is cutting a workpiece with a band, blade, or
circular disc having teeth. It may be required for a number of
metal forming processes. Before ingots can be used as stock for
rolling or extrusion, the ingot may require scalping or sawing to
a suitable length. Following processes such as rolling, extru-
sion, and drawing, the metal products may be sawed. The circular
saws and band saws used generally require a cutting lubricant in
order to minimize friction and act as a coolant. Oil-in-water
emulsions or mineral-based oils are usually applied to the sides
of the blade as a spray. In some cases, a heavy grease or wax
may be used as a saw lubricant. Normally, saw oils are not
discharged as a wastewater stream. The lubricants frequently are
carried over on the product or removed together with the saw
chips for reprocessing. In some cases, however, recycle and
discharge of a low-volume saw lubricant stream is practiced.
Product Testing. Various product testing operations are used to
check nonferrous metals parts for surface defects or subsurface
imperfections. Parts are submerged in a water bath and subjected
to ultrasonic signals, or in the case of tubing, pressurized with
air. Piping and tubing may also be filled with water and pres-
surized to test their integrity. Product testing operations are
sources of wastewater because the spent water bath or test media
must be periodically discarded due to the transfer into the
testing media of oil and grease, solids, and suspended and dis-
solved metals from each product tested.
349
-------
cn 13
n) 0)
•H
0) -H
•H cn
14-1 cn
•-4 cfl
CO :—I
cn o
i—I 0)
o M
01
a) S
0)
J3
cn
01
cn bo
M u
co cn
rd -H
O T3
cn
•H H
13
•-a
H
n
^3
4-1
O CD
JO M
cfl
0)
S3 13
H C
n)
-d
d «
nj c/l
H
rt
H «
U H
O
P-i
cn
4-1 cn
a w
cfl C
iH t\)
a,
QJ
a)
a.
in
H
M
O
CO
w
1—I PM
i !Z
M O
M
0) O
txD O
•i-l I—I
PLI H
PQ
H
cn
u
i—i
tn
O
w
350
-------
CN
M
M
OJ
bO
•H
351
-------
o
A. TWO - HIGH REVERSING MILL
B. THREE-HIGH CONTIGUOUS ROLLING MILL
Figure III-3
COMMON ROLLING MILL CONFIGURATIONS
352
-------
01
bO
•H
PH
H
Pi
H
H
O
ffi
O
w
01
•o
LU
353
-------
t-4
M
LO O
(U
bO
•H
Q
J
O
0
ffi
O
354
-------
UJ
bO
•H
CJ
Q
W
PQ
a:
UJ
Q
—I
O
355
-------
U
w
PQ
Q) Q
n
3 0
bO H
•H ,-J
Pn E>
356
-------
Z
-RAM
DUMMY BLOCK
INGOT
DIE
EXTRUSION
PISTON
INGOT
CONTAINER
DIE
HOLDER
Figure III-8
DIRECT EXTRUSION
357
-------
0)
bO
•H
CO
CO
9
Pi
§
H
CO
H
X
W
358
-------
B
H
W
C/D
O
i-l
I
M
M
H
0)
o
o
H
§
UJ
359
-------
PISTON ROD
RAM
TOP DIE
FORGING-
BOTTOM DIE
ANVIL CAP
ANVIL
A. CLOSED DIE FORGING
B. OPEN DIE FORGING
Figure III-ll
FORGING
360
-------
EDGING
ROLLS
PRESSURE ROLL
MANDREL
A, ROLLED RING FORGING
It
B, SADDLE/MANDREL FORGING
Figure 111-12
RING ROLLING
361
-------
Figure 111-13
IMPACTING
362
-------
INLAY EDGE STRIPE
STRIPE INLAY
2-PLY CLAD
4-PLY CLAD
Figure 111-14
SOME CLAD CONFIGURATIONS
363
-------
MOLTEN METAL
ATOMIZING AGENT,
GAS OR LIQUID
QUENCHING MEDIUM
Figure 111-15
ATOMIZATION
364
-------
A. Pressing In Single-End Die
B. Pressing In Double-End Die
Figure 111-16
POWDER METALLURGY DIE COMPACTION
365
-------
H
0)
bD
•i-l
H
H
o
g
H
O
366
-------
Coreless Induction Furnace
L
To Pollution Control
Equipment
Er Water Cooled Molds
Mold Table
Tank Water
Hydraulic Ram
Figure III-18
DIRECT CHILL (B.C.) CASTING UNIT
367
-------
0)
5-1
2
bO
•H
O
3
M
H
cn
-------
MELTING POT
CASTING POT
DIE WITH STRIP-SIZE OPENING
SILVER STRIP
Figure 111-20
CONTINUOUS STRIP CASTING
369
-------
MELTING POT
MOLLEN METAL
SHOT MOLD
WATER LEVEL
__ RECIRCULATING WATER
DRAIN
RECIRCULATION PUMP
DETACHABLE BOTTOM
Figure 111-21
SHOT CASTING
370
-------
N
O
§
O
Csl
CM
0)
V-l
3
hC
•H
W
U
2
I
O
W
Pd
W
.-1
t-4
O
Pi
371
-------
Ventilation
Pickling
Solutions
Figure 111-23
BULK PICKLING TANK
372
-------
0)
J-l
W
S
i— i
nJ
O
S
M
nJ
W
u
M CO
•H P
fe O
O
CJ
373
-------
CONDENSATE-
TROUGH
VAPOR ZONE
WATER JACKET
(NONCONTACT COOLING)
_, -SOLVENT
-HEATING ELEMENT
-CLEANOUT DOOR
A. OPEN TOP VAPOR DEGREASER
SHEET
VAPOR
ZONE
WiEATED SOLVENT
B. STRIP CONVEYORIZED DEGREASER
WATER
JACKET
Figure 111-25
VAPOR DECREASING
374
-------
Table III-l
METAL TYPES EXCLUDED FROM REGULATION UNDER
PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Gallium (Ga)
Germanium (Ge)
Indium (in)
Lithium (Li)
Manganese (Mn)
Neodymium (Nd)
Praseodymium (Pr)
375
-------
Table III-2
METAL TYPES COVERED UNDER THE NONFERROUS
METALS FORMING CATEGORY
Beryllium (Be)
Bismuth (Bi)
Cobalt (Co)
Columbium (Niobium) (Cb (Nb))
Gold (Au)
Hafnium (Hf)
Lead (Pb)
Magnesium (Mg)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni)
Palladium (Pd)
Platinum (Pt)
Rhenium (Re)
Silver (Ag)
Tantalum (Ta)
Tin (Sn)
Titanium (Ti)
Tungsten (W)
Uranium-Depleted (U)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
Zirconium (Zr)
Iron and and Steel, Copper,
and Aluminum Metal Powder
Production and Powder
Metallurgy Operations
376
-------
7.
S
ti
7
?l
?l
fe
°
IT)
?
^H
fO
vt
CM
m
2
CM
m
r
SI
m
00
<*1 OO
CM
O 00 CM
CM
In
m
ro
P!
£
x
•8
| 12
rH CU
o Bo
2 ^
-------
r»» m —i
en
Q
o
PH
Q
W
Q
O
PQ
O
H
H
O
D
Q
O
3
H
W
cn
o
w
I
U 4J
0> C/3
O =0^
CO ,-1 -J (S
a £
I a
i .2
d e
i-H «
H ^ u
i-l 1H C
VJ 14J U
»- <:
j=
CJ -U
n) -H f-i
378
-------
Section IV
INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION
In developing regulations for the nonferrous metals forming
category, the Agency considered whether different effluent limi-
tations and standards are appropriate for different segments of
the category. The regulations are technology based. If uniform
regulations are to be applied to the entire category, the tech-
nology upon which they are based must be available and appropri-
ate for every segment of the category. If not, subcategoriza-
tion is required. Subcategorization is also appropriate if
different pollutants are regulated in various segments of the
category.
EPA considers several factors to determine the appropriate sub-
categorization of a category. These include plant location and
nonwater quality environmental impacts, including energy costs
and solid waste generation. These factors affect the availabil-
ity of wastewater treatment technology. Other Subcategorization
factors which must be considered are raw materials, manufacturing
processes, products manufactured, plant size and age, and process
water use. These factors may influence wastewater characteris-
tics and thus determine the appropriateness of wastewater treat-
ment technologies and the presence of pollutants to be regulated.
EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF SUBCATEGORIZATION FACTORS
Factors Considered
The analysis of potential Subcategorization factors was carried
out in the context of the scope of the nonferrous metals forming
category. The manufacturing activities included in the category
are:
1. Forming of nonferrous metals other than copper and
aluminum by rolling, drawing, extruding, and forging
operations;
2. Production of ferrous and nonferrous metal powders;
3. Production of ingots and metal parts from ferrous and
nonferrous metal powders; and
4. Production of clad metals and bimetallics from
nonferrous metals other than copper and aluminum.
379
-------
The following factors were considered as a basis for subcategori-
zation:
1. Metal formed and raw materials used;
2. Manufacturing processes;
3. Products manufactured;
4. Process water use;
5. Plant size;
6. Plant age;
7. Plant location;
8. Solid waste generation and disposal, air emissions,
and energy usage; and
9. Individual waste streams generated by manufacturing
activities.
In addition to considering how the individual factors influenced
siibcategorization, the interrelationship between different fac-
tors was evaluated. An evaluation of these factors is presented
below.
Metal Formed and Raw Materials Used. The raw materials used in
the nonferrous metalsforming category can be classified as
follows:
Metal and metal alloys;
Lubricants and additives to lubricants; and
Surface treatment, degreasing, and furnace fluxing
chemicals.
The pollutants discharged from a particular forming operation are
dependent on the metal formed and other raw materials used in
that operation. For example, nickel forming wastewater will
contain nickel and any lubricants or surface treatment chemicals
used in forming and associated process steps. Nickel is probably
present in all nickel forming wastewater but the presence of
other pollutants varies from plant to plant and operation to
operation.
All of the manufacturing activities in this category, with the
exception of metal cladding, can easily be divided into subcate-
gories according to the metal formed. The metal formed and the
metallurgical properties that are required in the final product
will determine the other raw materials used during the forming
process itself and associated process steps. The metal formed
will also determine the manufacturing processes used, the
products manufactured, and the amount and type of process water
use.
Because the type of metal formed will have a major impact on
wastewater flow and characteristics, subcategorization of manu-
facturing activities by the type of metal formed is appropriate.
380
-------
Additionally, if two or more metals are formed by identical or
very similar operations, generating wastewaters of similar
characteristics, it is appropriate to group the metals into one
subcategory. One such grouping is the precious metals (gold,
silver, platinum, and palladium).
Pollutants generated by the production of clad metals and
bimetallics are dependent on the metals processed, just as are
discharges from other nonferrous metals forming processes.
However, because cladding involves more than one type of metal,
the categorization of this forming operation in a subcategoriza-
tion scheme based on the type of metal formed is not straight-
forward.
Of the 22 surveyed plants which reported clad metal production,
15 apply precious metal to a base metal. These plants use very
similar manufacturing operations and similar materials. Typi-
cally a gold or silver overlay or inlay is roll-bonded to a
copper-alloy base. Nickel and stainless steel are also used as
base metals.
The cladding of precious metals to base metals is closely asso-
ciated with precious metal forming. All but three of the 15
plants engaged in precious metal cladding also reported forming
precious metals. The clad metals are formed by the same tech-
niques and on the same equipment as pure metals. Therefore, it
is appropriate to group precious metal cladding with precious
metals forming.
Three plants reported cladding nonferrous metals other than pre-
cious metals to base metals in processes generating wastewater.
Just as cladding precious metals to base metal can be grouped
with precious metal forming, other cladding operations can be
grouped with the forming of the surface metal of the clad prod-
uct. For example, manufacture of nickel clad molybdenum would be
considered nickel forming but manufacture of molybdenum clad
nickel would be considered molybdenum forming.
The Agency does not consider the type of lubricant or surface
treatment, degreasing, and furnace fluxing chemicals to have a
major, organizing impact on the category's wastewater character-
istics. Subcategorization based on these raw materials would not
adequately distinguish the type of pollutants likely to be pres-
ent in waste streams from the resulting subcategories. For
instance, beryllium is likely to be present in wastewater gener-
ated from surface treatment of beryllium but is not expected to
be present in nickel surface treatment wastewater. Thus, raw
materials other than the metal formed are not appropriate
Subcategorization criteria.
381
-------
Manufacturing Processes. As discussed above, there are four
major manufacturing activities included in the nonferrous metals
forming category, each of which uses one or more distinct manu-
facturing processes. Subcategorization on the basis of manufac-
turing process would group all rolling operations, all drawing
operations, all extrusion operations, etc., together. The Agency
does not believe this is an appropriate basis for subcategoriza-
tion because it does not adequately distinguish the type of pol-
lutants likely to be present in waste streams from the resulting
subcategories. For instance, lead is likely to be present in
lead rolling wastewater but is not expected to be present in
nickel rolling wastewater.
Products Manufactured. Another approach is subcategorization
based on the products manufactured, as listed below:
Product
Plate
Sheet
Strip
Foil
Rod and bar
Tubing
Wire and cable
Other (L shapes, I-beams, etc)
Clad metals
Metal powders
Miscellaneous shapes
Associated
Manufacturing Process
Rolling
Rolling
Rolling
Rolling
Rolling, extrusion, drawing
Extrusion or drawing
Drawing or extrusion
Drawing or extrusion
Roll bonding, solder
application, explosion
bonding, co-drawing
Water atomization, gas
atomization, grinding, etc.
Forging, powder metallurgy
The product manufactured would be an excellent basis for subcate-
gorization if waste characteristics and the process to produce a
given item were the same from plant to plant; however, this is
not true for many formed metal products. For example, rods can
be produced by two different production processes which generate
similar wastewater (i.e., rolling and drawing), but the mass of
pollutants generated per unit of rod produced by rolling will be
different than the amount generated by drawing the rod. Further-
more, rods formed from different metals but produced by the same
process may use different lubricants, therefore generating a
waste with different characteristics. Because the type and mass
of pollutant generated per unit of product will be different
depending on the metal formed and type of forming operation^
employed, the type of products manufactured is an inappropriate
basis for subcategorizing the nonferrous metals forming category.
382
-------
Process Water Use. Major differences in water use (volume of
water applied to a process per mass of product) between facili-
ties with large and small production could be considered as a
factor in the development of subcategories.
A high water use per mass of product from a particular operation
would lead to a waste stream with lower pollutant concentration
than a lower production normalized water use (assuming the mass
of pollutant generated in a given process is dependent on the
mass of material processed). The differences in pollutant con-
centration may lead to differences in wastewater treatability and
required treatment technology. If the differences in process
water use are related to total plant production (if, for example,
small production requires a large amount of process water,
resulting in high production normalized water use and a low
pollutant concentration), process water use could be a basis for
subcategorization.
However, as will be discussed in Section V, analysis of the data
indicates that production normalized water use (i.e., gallons per
ton of metal formed) for a given unit operation is usually
independent of production volume. For example, a large direct
chill casting operation will use about the same amount of water
per ton of ingot produced as an operation casting much less
nonferrous metal by the same method. Production normalized water
use appears to be relatively constant over a wide range of pro-
ductions and therefore process water use is not an appropriate
parameter for subcategorization.
Plant Size. The number of employees and amount of metal pro-
cessed can be used as relative measures of the size of nonferrous
metals forming plants.
Wastewaters produced by a production process are largely indepen-
dent of the number of plant employees. Variations in staff occur
for many reasons, including shift differences, clerical and
administrative support, maintenance workers, efficiency of plant
operations, and market fluctuations. Due to these and other
factors, the number of employees is constantly fluctuating, mak-
ing it difficult to develop a correlation between the number of
employees and wastewater generation.
Subcategorization based on size in terms of production of non-
ferrous metals would group plants by the off-pounds of extru-
sions, sheets, rods, etc. This method of subcategorization does
not adequately distinguish between waste streams of differing
treatability nor does it determine a given plant's ability to
achieve effluent limitations.
Subcategorization based on size in terms of volume of wastewater
generated would be appropriate if the applicability of a parti-
cular treatment technology was dependent on the volume of water
383
-------
to be treated. However, this is not the case for wastewater
generated in the nonferrous metals forming category.
For the reasons discussed above, subcategorization on the basis
of size (number of employees, production, or volume of wastewater
generated) is not appropriate.
Plant Age. Most nonferrous metals forming plants have been built
in the past 30 years. Since metal forming technologies are
developing and changing rapidly, most plants have also been mod-
ernized frequently in order to remain economical. Therefore,
determination of a particular plant's technological age is very
difficult. Accordingly, plant age is not an appropriate basis
for subcategorization.
The potential subcategorization schemes presented above attempt
to create subcategories with similar waste characteristics.
Other factors which may affect 'the availability of wastewater
treatment technology must also be evaluated.
Plant Location. The geographical distribution of the nonferrous
metalsforming plants which responded to the dcp is presented in
Figure III-l. The plants are not limited to any one geographical
location, but they are generally located east of the Mississippi
River. Although some cost savings may be realized for facilities
located in nonurban settings where land is available to install
lagoons, equivalent control of wastewater pollutant discharge can
be achieved by urban plants with the use of physical and chemical
treatment systems that have smaller land requirements. Since
most plants are located in the eastern part of the United States
(an area where precipitation exceeds evaporation) or in urban
areas, evaporation and land application of the wastewater are not
commonly used. Thus, location does not appear to be a signifi-
cant factor on which to base subcategorization.
Solid Waste Generation and Disposal, Air Emissions and Energy
Usage.Certain manufacturingplantsmay belimitedin the waste-
water treatment technology available to them by their patterns of
solid waste generation and disposal, air emissions or energy us-
age. However, after a review of all available information, the
Agency was unable to identify any plant or type of plant which
has any unusual energy requirements or any unusual limitations in
available energy, solid waste disposal, or air emissions.
Individual Waste Streams Generated by Manufacturing Activities.
Most of the potential subcategorization schemes described above
attempt to create subcategories with similar waste characterist-
ics. An alternative to subcategorizing by a factor which only
indirectly influences wastewater characteristics is to consider
384
-------
each waste stream (such as nickel rolling spent emulsions, lead
shot casting contact cooling water, etc.) a separate subcategory.
The waste streams generated by the manufacturing activities
included in the nonferrous metals forming category are presented
in Section V of this document.
Use of this scheme will yield subcategories of homogeneous char-
acter and treatability. The principal benefit from using waste
streams as a basis for subcategorization is that an appropriate
effluent limitation or standard could be established for each
stream. For each regulated pollutant, a specific pollutant mass
discharge value could be calculated for each waste stream present
at the facility. These values would be summed to determine the
total mass discharge allowed for that pollutant at that facility.
The difficulties with this approach are the large number of sub-
categories - approximately 175 - that it would generate. The
Agency believes that a guideline with this many subcategories
would be extremely difficult to administer. However, waste
stream by waste stream analysis of production, flow, and
pollutants present was used to calculate pollutant mass
limitations for each subcategory.
Summary of Subcategorization
The nonferrous metals forming category can be subcategorized on
the basis of metal type formed. Based on information reported by
294 surveyed plants, 11 subcategories which have plants that
discharge process water to surface waters or a POTW can be
established. These subcategories are:
o Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming,
o Nickel/Cobalt Forming,
o Zinc Forming,
o Beryllium Forming,
o Precious Metals Forming,
o Iron and Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal Powder Production
and Powder Metallurgy
o Titanium Forming,
o Refractory Metals Forming,
o Zirconium/Hafnium Forming,
o Magnesium Forming, and
o Uranium Forming.
The iron and steel/copper/aluminum metal powder production and
powder metallurgy subcategory includes only manufacturing opera-
tions which involve metal powders. Forming of these metals is
covered by separate regulations. [iron and Steel, 40 CFR Part
420; Copper Forming, 40 CFR Part 468 (48 FR 36942, August 15,
1983); Aluminum Forming, 40 CFR Part 467 (48 FR 49126, October
24, 1983).]
385
-------
PRODUCTION NORMALIZING PARAMETER SELECTION
The objective of effluent limitations and standards is to reduce
the total quantity of pollutants discharged into surface waters.
Because plants could meet a concentration-based standard by dilu-
tion rather than treatment, mass limitations have been developed
for the nonferrous metals forming industry. In order for regula-
tions to be equitable for plants with large productions and. small
productions, the mass limitations must be normalized by an appro-
priate unit of production called a production normalizing param-
eter (PNP). That is, pollutant discharge limitations are written
as allowable mass of pollutant discharge per PNP (mg/PNP).
Therefore, for a PNP to be appropriate, mg/PNP must be indepen-
dent of both production and wastewater volume, for a particular
waste stream. Mass of metal, number of pieces, surface area, and
mass of process chemicals used were considered as possible PNP's.
An evaluation of these alternatives follows.
Mass of Metal Processed. The nonferrous metals forming category
typically maintains production records of the pounds of metal
processed. Availability of these production data and lack of
data for other production parameters, such as number of pieces
produced, makes this the most convenient parameter to use. The
nonferrous metals forming dcp requested three production values:
the capacity production rate for specific unit operations, the
average production rate for 1981 in off-lbs/hr, and the total
off-pounds of final product formed in 1981. A PNP based on mass
of metal processed would use the average production rates
reported in the dcp.
Number of Pieces Processed. The number of pieces processed by a
given plant would not account for the variations in size and
shape typical of formed products. Forgings, for instance, are
produced in a wide range of sizes. It would be unreasonable to
expect the quenching of a large forging to use the same amount of
water required for a smaller forged product and yield a constant
mass of pollutant per piece. Therefore, the Agency concluded
that the number of pieces processed is not an appropriate PNP.
Surface Area of Metal Processed. Surface area may be an appro-
priate production normalizing parameter for formed metal which is
rinsed (i.e., the mass of pollutants generated may correlate with
surface area). However, the mass of pollutants generated by
other metal forming operations, such as cooling, is unrelated to
surface area. Hence, surface area might be an adequate PNP for
some processes but would be wholely inappropriate for others. In
addition, records of the area of metal processed are not gen-
erally kept by industry. In some cases, such as forging of
miscellaneous shapes, surface area would be very difficult to
386
-------
determine. In any case, surface area data would be difficult to
collect. For these reasons, surface area is an inappropriate PNP
for the nonferrous metals forming category.
Mass of Process Chemicals Used. The mass of pollutants dis-
charged is more dependent on the processes which the metal under-
goes than on the amount of process chemical used in the process.
Some operations, such as heat treatment with contact cooling
water, generate pollutants but do not use any process chemicals.
In addition, the use of this parameter as the production normal-
izing parameter would tend to discourage regeneration and reuse
of process chemicals. For these reasons, mass of process chemi-
cals used is an inappropriate PNP for the nonferrous metals
forming category.
Selection of the Production Normalizing Parameter
For the reasons outlined above, the Agency has selected mass of
product formed as the most appropriate PNP. The mass of pollu-
tants can be related to the mass of metal processed and most
companies keep production records in terms of mass.
The PNP for nonferrous metals forming is "off-kilograms" or the
kilograms of product removed from a machine at the end of a pro-
cess cycle. For example, in the rolling process, an ingot enters
the mill to be processed. Following one process cycle which may
substantially reduce the ingot's thickness, the metal is removed
from the rolling mill where it may be processed through another
operation, such as annealing, sizing, cleaning, or it may simply
be stored before being brought back to the rolling mill for
another process cycle, further reducing the thickness. The mass
of metal removed from the rolling mill after each process cycle
multiplied by the number of process cycles is the PNP for that
process.
DESCRIPTION OF SUBCATEGORIES
The nonferrous metals forming category was divided into 11 sub-
categories, based on type of metal formed. Five of these sub-
categories cover forming operations for more than one metal.
This subcategorization allows separate limitations to be estab-
lished for groups of metals whose wastewater is similar, are
formed by similar processes, and would be expected to utilize
similar or identical wastewater treatment within the subcategory.
The iron and steel/copper/aluminum metal powder production and
powder metallurgy subcategory covers only metal powder production
and production of iron, copper, and aluminum metal parts from
powder. All other subcategories cover traditional forming opera-
tions (rolling, drawing, extruding, forging), powder metallurgy
387
-------
processes (powder production and compaction), and ancillary oper-
ations integral to the production of formed metal (heat treat-
ment, chemical and mechanical surface treatment, and casting).
Cladding operations are included in the subcategory of the
surface metal of the clad product.
The number of surveyed plants in each subcategory and the number
of plants in each subcategory discharging process wastewater
(directly to surface streams and to a POTW; are listed in Table
IV-1.
Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming. This subcategory includes the pro-
duction of three major products: bullets, made by extrusion and
swaging lead; solder, formed by extrusion and drawing of lead,
tin, and bismuth in various alloy combinations; and insulated
cable, in which lead is extruded over copper cable. Smaller
amounts of lead sheet and pipe are produced by rolling and
extrusion, respectively.
Of the surveyed plants, 63 form lead. Twenty-one of these plants
discharge process wastewater, three directly to surface water and
18 to a POTW.
Nickel/Cobalt Forming. Nickel and cobalt are formed by rolling,
drawing, extrusion, and forging, with extrusion the least common
forming process. The two metals were grouped together because
the metals are formed by identical processes. Also, 15 of the 16
surveyed plants which form cobalt also form nickel.
Of the surveyed plants, 73 form nickel and/or cobalt, making this
the largest subcategory in the category. Forty-two plants dis-
charge process wastewater, 14 directly to surface water, 26 to a
POTW, and two both directly and to a POTW.
Zinc Forming. Zinc is formed by rolling, drawing, and forging.
It is surface treated and cleaned with alkaline detergents
following forming. Ten of the surveyed plants form zinc. Three
plants discharge process wastewater, one directly to surface
water and two to a POTW.
Beryllium Forming. After pressing beryllium powder into bricks,
the metal is sintered, and rolled to sheet between sheets of
stainless steel. Billets and sheets are pickled in acid and
rinsed with water. One surveyed plant forms beryllium amd it
discharges process wastewater directly to surface water.
Precious Metal Forming. This subcategory includes manufacturing
processes used to form gold, silver, platinum, and palladium.
The Agency believes that it would be very difficult to subcate-
gorize by the individual precious metals because most plants in
338
-------
this subcategory form all of the precious metals using the same
equipment and cleaning operations. In addition, the metals are
alloyed with each other in many combinations, some of which have
no one constituent that is greater than 50 percent of the alloy.
As described above, this subcategory also includes production and
forming of clad precious metals.
The most common forming operations are rolling and drawing.
Extrusion and forging are practiced to a much smaller extent.
Fifty of the surveyed plants form precious metals. Thirty-four
of these plants discharge process water, six directly to surface
water, 27 to a POTW, and one both directly and to a POTW.
Iron and Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal Powder Production and Metal
Powder Metallurgy.Thissubcategoryincludesoperationsfor
producing metal powders and metal parts from powder for iron,
steel, copper, and aluminum. Powders are produced by wet or dry
atomization and mechanical grinding. Pressing and sintering, the
major manufacturing processes in powder metallurgy, usually use
no process water. Most of the wastewater from operations in this
subcategory is generated by post-forming surface treatment.
Sixty surveyed plants are engaged in powder production or powder
metallurgy of iron, steel, copper, or aluminum. Twenty-three of
these plants discharge process wastewater, three directly to
surface water and 20 to a POTW.
Titanium Forming. Titanium is formed by rolling, drawing, extru-
sion, and forging. Forging is practiced by many plants, many of
which primarily forge steel. Rolling is the second most common
forming operation, drawing the least. Titanium is often acid
etched to remove a hard surface layer which forms at elevated
temperatures.
Forty-one of the surveyed plants form titanium. Twenty-seven of
these plants discharge process wastewater, 11 directly to surface
streams, 15 to a POTW, and one both directly and to a POTW.
Refractory Metal Forming. This subcategory includes processes
used to form molybdenum, tungsten, vanadium, rhenium, tantalum,
and columbium. The Agency believes that it is unnecessary to
subcategorize by the individual refractory metals. The metals
are processed and fabricated by similar methods because of their
common characteristics. The end product of refining these metals
is metal powder which is consolidated into finished products or
mill shapes. Only production of metal powders, ferrous and non-
ferrous, in operations which do not significantly increase their
purity are included in this category. Production of nonferrous
metals powders in operations which significantly increase their
389
-------
purity is covered by the guidelines for nonferrous metals manu-
facturing, 40 CFR Part 421 (phase I, proposed at 40 CFR 7032,
February 17, 1983, to be promulgated shortly; and phase II,
scheduled for proposal shortly). The powders can also be arc or
electron beam melted and cast into ingots. The mill shapes and
ingots are shaped into finished form by rolling, drawing,
extruding, and forging. A second reason that subcategorization
by individual refractory metal is unnecessary is that most of the
plants which form one refractory metal also form one or more
other refractory metals and waste streams are commonly
commingled.
Fifty-two of the surveyed plants reported forming one or more of
the refractory metals. Thirty-five of these plants discharge
process wastewater, six directly to surface streams, 27 to a
POTW, and two both directly and to a POTW.
Zirconium/Hafnium Forming. Zirconium and hafnium are formed by
rolling, drawing, and extrusion. One common manufacturing
process is tube-reducing (roll-rocking or pilgering), a special
type of cold rolling. Post-forming operations include annealing
and sand blasting (dry), acid and alkaline cleaning, and conver-
sion coating. All of the plants which form hafnium also form
zirconium by similar processes.
Ten of the surveyed plants report forming zirconium. Seven of
these plants discharge process wastewater, three directly to
surface water, three to a POTW, and one both directly and to a
POTW.
Magnesium Forming. Magnesium forming processes consist of forg-
ing, rolling, and extrusion. Water is used in post-extrusion
etching, chromating, and rinsing processes. Eight of the sur-
veyed plants form magnesium. Five plants discharge process
water, three directly to surface streams and two to a POTW.
Uranium Forming. Uranium forming processes consist of forging
and extrusion, both of which use contact cooling water. Water
is also used in post-forming surface treatment steps. Three sur-
veyed plants report forming uranium. One plant discharges
process water directly to a surface stream and one both directly
and to a POTW.
390
-------
Pi
W
H
H
00
Pd
o
i—i co
cd 4J
4-1 C
o co
Hr-H
co
S-i
0)
tb|
j-i
LH cd
o x
CJ
J-i co
0) -H
,0 Q
3 4J
S U
(U
J-I
•H
CO
s£>
0~!
r-.
CM
m
00 ro
00
CN
o
CM
oo
CM
o
CM
CM
CM
M
CD
cd
H
00 pi
P O
O O
PS W
PQ
00
*
CO
0)
CO
o cd
CQ
O
Pi
CJ
00
M
O
00
PH
PH
O
Pi
^ CJ
CU CO
.Q >H
E C
" CJ
QJ
•H
Q
O
CO
i— 1
cd
n
o
CJ
-^
I— 1
0)
^
U
•H
^
i— i
to
C
•H
B
j_i
O
t->
CJ
C
•1-1
M
i— i
to
C
•i-l
B
M
O
P^
B
;3
•i-l
r-H
i— 1
^i
J-I
(U
P3
Forming 7
CO
r-l
cd
4J
C
00
cd
£n
CN
co
C
•H
E
O
B
•rH
C
cd
j_j
P
o
to
OJ
4J
cd
CJ
,0
3
CO
0)
C
o
C
cd
0)
J-I
o
S
C
•H
cd
B
CO
4-1
C
cd
t— i
PH
391
-------
SECTION V
WATER USE AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
This section presents a summary of the analytical data that char-
acterize the raw wastewater in the category. Flow data that
serve as the basis for developing regulatory flow allowances in
the nonferrous metals forming category are also summarized in
this section. The analytical and flow data were obtained from
four sources: information obtained during a telephone survey;
data collection portfolios (dcp's); sampling and analysis pro-
grams; and long-term or historical data. Confidential informa-
tion was handled in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2.
DATA SOURCES
Telephone Survey
As described in Section III of this document, a comprehensive
telephone survey was undertaken in order to determine which
plants should comprise a final dcp mailing list, i.e., whether or
not operations within the scope of this category were present at
the plants contacted. In the telephone survey, the contact at
each plant was asked what metals were formed, the type of forming
operations the plant employed, i.e., rolling, drawing, extruding,
forging, casting, cladding, or powder metallurgy and their asso-
ciated water usage, discharge, and treatment-in-place. The plant
contact was also asked what surface treatment, cleaning, washing,
and/or rinsing operations were utilized and their associated
water usage, discharge, and treatment-in-place. In addition to
the telephone contacts made during the comprehensive survey, many
plants were contacted by telephone to clarify dcp responses.
Data Collection Portfolios
Data collection portfolios (dcp's) are questionnaires which were
developed by the Agency to obtain extensive data from plants in
the nonferrous metals forming category. The dcp's, sent to all
facilities known or believed to be engaged in nonferrous metals
forming, requested information under the authority of Section 308
of the Clean Water Act. The information requested included plant
age, production, number of employees, water usage, manufacturing
processes, raw material and process chemical usage, wastewater
treatment technologies, and the presence (known or believed) of
toxic pollutants in the plant's raw and treated process
wastewaters.
Complete dcp responses supplied the following information for
each operation present at the responding plant: the total
393
-------
production in 1981, the average production rate (Ib/hr), produc-
tion rate at full capacity, and the quantity and rate of waste-
water discharge. As discussed in Section IV, a mass-based
regulation must relate water use and raw waste characteristics to
some production normalizing parameter. The average production
rate is considered to be the parameter most applicable to opera-
tions in this category, and has been used to normalize the water
and wastewater flows discussed in this section.
Two production normalized flows (PNF's) were calculated for each
operation reported in the dcp's. The first is production normal-
ized water use, defined as the volume of water or other fluid
(e.g., emulsions, lubricants) required per mass of metal pro-
cessed through the operation. Water use is based on the sum of
recycle and make-up flows to a given process. The second PNF
calculated for each operation is production normalized water
discharge, defined as the volume of wastewater discharged from a
given process to further treatment, disposal, or discharge per
mass of nonferrous metal processed. Differences between the
water use and wastewater flows associated with a given stream
result from recycle, evaporation, and carryover on the product.
The production values used in calculation correspond to the
production normalizing parameter, PNP, assigned to each stream,
as outlined in Section IV.
The production normalized flows from similar sources were com-
piled and statistically analyzed. Wastewater sources with
similar production normalized flows and physical and chemical
characteristics were grouped together (e.g., spent baths from
acid pickling, acid etching, chromating and phosphating were
grouped together as "surface treatment spent baths."). These
groupings are referred to as "waste streams" in this document.
It should be noted that one nonferrous metals forming or asso-
ciated operation can generate more than one waste stream. Each
distinct waste stream will have different production normalized
flows, physical and chemical characteristics, or both. The pro-
duction normalized flow information for each waste stream is
presented in the administrative record which accompanies this
rulemaking package. An analysis of factors affecting the waste-
water flows is presented in Sections IX, X, XI, and XII where
representative BPT, BAT, NSPS, and pretreatment discharge flow
allowances are selected for use in calculating the effluent
limitations and standards.
Sampling and Analysis Program
The sampling and analysis program was undertaken primarily to
identify pollutants of concern in the industry, with emphasis on
toxic pollutants. Samples were collected at 17 nonferrous metals
forming facilities.
394
-------
This section summarizes the activities undertaken during the sam-
pling trips and identifies the types of sites sampled and param-
eters analyzed. It also presents an overview of sample collec-
tion, preservation, and transportation techniques. Finally, it
describes the pollutant parameters quantified, the methods of
analyses and laboratories used, the detectable concentration of
each pollutant, and the general approach used to ensure the
reliability of the analytical data produced.
Site Selection. Seventeen plants engaged in manufacturing opera-
tions included in this category were sampled. Four of these
plants were sampled in data gathering efforts supporting the
development of guidelines for other industrial categories
(nonferrous metals manufacturing and battery manufacturing).
Information on nonferrous rnetals forming operations was collected
incidentally to the major sampling effort at these plants. Thir-
teen plants were sampled specifically to gather data to support
guidelines and standards for this category. These plants were
selected to be representative of the industry, based on informa-
tion obtained during the telephone survey. Considerations
included how well each facility represented the subcategory as
indicated by available data, potential problems in meeting
technology-based standards, differences in production processes
used, and wastewater treatment-in-place. With the exception of
the uranium forming subcategory, at least one plant in every
subcategory was sampled. Two plants provided data for more than
one subcategory.
As indicated in Table V-l, the plants selected for sampling were
typically plants with multiple forming operations and associated
surface and heat treatment operations. The flow rates and pollu-
tant concentrations in the wastewaters discharged from the manu-
facturing operations at these plants are believed to be repre-
sentative of the flow rates and pollutant concentrations which
would be found in wastewaters generated by similar operations at
any plant in the nonferrous metals forming industry. The 17
sampled plants have a variety of treatment systems in place,
ranging from plants with no treatment to plants using the
advanced technologies considered as the basis for regulation.
Field Sampling. After selection of the plants to be sampled^
each plant was contacted by telephone, and sent a letter notify-
ing the plant when a visit would be expected as authorized by
Section 308 of the Clean Water Act. In most cases, a preliminary
visit was made to the plant to select the sources of wastewater
to be sampled. The sample points included, but were not limited
to, untreated and treated discharges, process wastewater, par-
tially treated wastewater, and intake water. The actual sampling
visit was also scheduled during the preliminary visit.
395
-------
Sample Collection, Preservation, and Transportation. Collection,
preservation,and transportation of samples were accomplished in
accordance with procedures outlined in Appendix III of "Sampling
and Analysis Procedures for Screening of Industrial Effluents for
Priority Pollutants" (published by the Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1977, revised,
April 1977), "Sampling Screening Procedure for the Measurement of
Priority Pollutants" (published by the EPA Effluent Guidelines
Division, Washington, D.C.. October 1976), and in the proposed
304(h) methods (44 FR 69464, December 3, 1979). The procedures
are summarized in the paragraphs that follow.
Whenever practical, samples were taken from mid-channel at mid-
depth in a turbulent, well-mixed portion of the waste stream.
Periodically, the temperature and pH of each waste stream sampled
were measured on-site.
Each large composite (Type 1) sample was collected in a 9-liter,
wide-mouth pickle jar that had been washed with detergent and
water, rinsed with tap water, rinsed with distilled water, and
air dried at room temperature.
Before collection of Type 1 samples, new Tygon® tubing was cut to
minimum lengths and installed on the inlet and outlet (suction
and discharge) fittings of the automatic sampler. Two liters
(2.1 quarts; of blank water, known to be free of organic com-
pounds and brought to the sampling site from the analytical
laboratory, were pumped through the sampler and its attached
tubing; the water was then discarded.
A blank (control sample) was produced by pumping an additional 2
liters of blank water through the sampler and into the original
blank water bottle. The blank sample was sealed with a Teflon®-
lined cap, labeled, and packed in ice in a plastic foam-insulated
chest. This sample was subsequently analyzed to determine any
contamination contributed by the automatic sampler.
During collection of each Type 1 sample, the pickle jar was
packed in ice in a plastic foam-insulated container to cool the
sample. After the complete composite sample had been collected,
it was mixed and a 1-liter aliquot to be used for metals analysis
was dispensed into a plastic bottle. The aliquot was preserved
on-site by the addition of nitric acid to pH less than 2. Metals
samples were stored at room temperature until the end of the
sampling trip at which time they were shipped to the appropriate
laboratory for analysis.
After removal of the 1-liter metals aliquot, the balance of the
composite sample was divided into aliquots to be used for analy-
sis of nonvolatile organics, conventional parameters, and noncon-
ventional parameters. If a portion of the composite sample was
396
-------
requested by a representative of the sampled plant for indepen-
dent analysis, an aliquot was placed in a sample container
supplied by the representative.
Water samples to be analyzed for cyanide, total phenol, oil and
grease, and volatile organics were not obtained from the compos-
ite sample. Water samples for these analyses were taken as
one-time grab samples during the time that the composite sample
was collected.
The cyanide, total phenol, and oil and grease samples were stored
in new bottles which had been iced and labeled, 1-liter (33.8
ounce) plastic bottles for the cyanide sample, 0.95-liter (1
quart) amber glass bottles for the total phenol sample, and
0.95-liter (1 quart) wide-mouth glass bottles with a Teflon® lid
liner for the oil and grease sample. The samples were preserved
as described below.
Sodium hydroxide was added to each sample to be analyzed for
cyanide, until the pH was elevated to 12 or more (as measured
using pH paper). Where the presence of chlorine was suspected,
the sample was tested for chlorine (which would decompose most of
the cyanide) by using potassium iodide/starch paper. If the
paper turned blue (indicating chlorine was present), ascorbic
acid crystals were slowly added and dissolved until a drop of the
sample produced no change in the color of the test paper. An
additional 0.6 gram (0.021 ounce) of ascorbic acid was added, and
the sample bottle was sealed (by a Teflon®-lined cap), labeled,
iced, and shipped for analysis.
Sulfuric acid was added to each sample to be analyzed for total
phenol, until the pH was reduced to 2 or less (as measured using
pH paper). The sample bottle was sealed, labeled, iced, and
shipped for analysis.
Sulfuric acid was added to each sample to be analyzed for oil and
grease, until the pH was reduced to 2 or less (as measured using
pH test paper). The sample bottle was sealed (by a Teflon® lid
liner), labeled, iced, and shipped for analysis.
Each sample to be analyzed for volatile organic pollutants was
stored in a new 125-ml (4.2-ounce) glass bottle that had been
rinsed with tap water and distilled water, heated to 105°C
(221°F) for one hour, and cooled. This method was also used to
prepare the septum and lid for each bottle. When used, each
bottle was filled to overflowing, sealed with a Teflon®-faced
silicone septum (Teflon® side down), capped, labeled, and iced.
Hermetic sealing was verified by inverting and tapping the sealed
container to confirm the absence of air bubbles. (If bubbles
were found, the bottle was opened, a few additional drops of
397
-------
sample were added, and a new seal was installed.) Samples were
maintained hermetically sealed and iced until analyzed.
Sample Analysis. Samples were sent by air to one of the labora-
tories listed in Table V-2. The samples were analyzed for 21
metals, including seven of the priority metal pollutants (beryl-
lium, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc) using
inductively-coupled argon plasma emission spectroscopy (ICAPES)
as proposed in 44 FR 69464, December 3, 1979. The remaining six
priority metal pollutants, with the exception of mercury, were
analyzed by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AA) as described in
40 CFR Part 136. Mercury analysis was performed by automated
cold vapor atomic absorption. Analysis for the seven toxic
metals analyzed by ICAPES was also performed by AA on 10 percent
of the samples to determine test comparability. Because the
results showed no significant differences in detection or quanti-
fication levels, ICAPES data were used for the seven toxic
metals.
Metals Analyzed by ICAP
Calcium Iron
Magnesium Manganese
Sodium Molybdenum
Aluminum *Nickel
Boron *Lead
Barium Tin
*Berylliura Titanium
*Cadmium Vanadium
Cobalt Yttrium
^Chromium *Zinc
^Copper
Metals Analyzed by AA
*Antimony
*Arsenic
*Selenium
^Thallium
*Mercury
^Silver
*Toxic metals.
Analyses for the organic toxic pollutants were performed by
Arthur D. Little, ERGO, IT, S-Cubed, and West Coast Technical
Service. Analyses for the toxic metal pollutants were performed
by CENTEC, Radian, Versar, and NUS. Radian, ARO, and NUS per-
formed analyses for cyanide, conventional and nonconventional
pollutants.
398
-------
EPA did not expect to find any asbestos in nonferrous metals
forming wastewaters because this category only includes metals
that have already been refined from ores that might contain
asbestos. Therefore, analysis for asbestos fibers was not per-
formed.
Pesticide priority pollutants were also not expected to be sig-
nificant in the nonferrous metals forming industry. Samples from
one facility were analyzed for pesticide priority pollutants by
electron capture-gas chromatography by the method specified in 44
FR 69464, December 3, 1979. Pesticides were not detected in
these samples, so no other samples were analyzed for these
pollutants.
Analyses for the remaining organic priority pollutants (volatile
fraction, base/neutral, and acid compounds) were conducted using
an isotope dilution method which is a modification of the analyt-
ical techniques specified in 44 FR 69464, December 3, 1979. The
isotope dilution method has been recently developed to improve
the accuracy and reliability of the analysis. A copy of the
method is in the record of rulemaking for this proposed regula-
tion. However, no standard was used in the analysis of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD, pollutant 129). Instead,
screening for this compound was performed by comparing analytical
results to EPA's gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy (GC/MS)
computer file.
Analysis for cyanide used methods specified in 40 CFR Part 136
and described in "Methods for Chemical Analysis for Water and
Wastes," EPA-600/4-79-020 (March 1979).
Past studies by EPA and others have identified many nontoxic
pollutant parameters useful in characterizing industrial waste-
waters and in evaluating treatment process removal efficiencies.
Some of these pollutants may also be selected as reliable indi-
cators of the presence of specific toxic pollutants. For these
reasons, a number of nontoxic pollutants were studied for the
nonferrous metals forming category. These pollutants may be
divided into two general groups as shown in Table V-3. Analyses
for these pollutants were performed by the methods specified in
40 CFR Part 136 and described in EPA-600/4-79-020.
The analytical quantification levels used in evaluation of the
sampling data reflect the accuracy of the analytical methods
employed. Below these concentrations, the identification of the
individual compounds is possible, but quantification is diffi-
cult. Pesticides and PCB ' s can be analytically quantified at
concentrations above 0.005 mg/1, and other organic toxic levels
above 0.010 mg/1. Levels associated with toxic metals are as
follows: 0.010 mg/1 for antimony; 0.010 mg/1 for arsenic; 1 x
399
-------
107 fibers/1 for asbestos; 0.005 mg/1 for beryllium; 0.020 mg/1
for cadmium; 0.020 mg/1 for chromium; 0.050 mg/1 for copper; 0.02
mg/1 for cyanide; 0.050 mg/1 for lead; 0.0002 mg/1 for mercury;
0.050 mg/1 for nickel; 0.010 mg/1 for selenium; 0.010 mg/1 for
silver; 0.010 mg/1 for thallium; and 0.020 mg/1 for zinc..
The detection limits used were reported with the analytical data
and hence are the appropriate limits to apply to the data.
Detection limit variation can occur as a result of a number of
laboratory-specific, equipment-specific, daily operator-specific,
and pollutant-specific factors. These factors can include
day-to-day differences in machine calibration and variation in
stock solutions, operators, and pollution sample matrices (i.e.,
presence of some chemicals will alter the detection of particular
pollutants).
Quality Control. Quality control measures used in performing all
analysesconducted for this program complied with the guidelines
given in "Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and
Wastewater Laboratories" (published by EPA Environmental Monitor-
ing and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1976). As part of
the daily quality control program, blanks (including sealed
samples of blank water carried to each sampling site and returned
unopened, as well as samples of blank water used in the field),
standards, and spiked samples were routinely analyzed with actual
samples. As part of the overall program, all analytical instru-
ments (such as balances, spectrophotometers, and recorders) were
routinely maintained and calibrated.
Historical Data
A useful source of long-term or historical data available for
nonferrous metals forming plants are the Discharge Monitoring
Reports (DMR's) completed as a part of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and/or State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES). DMR's were obtained
through the EPA regional offices and state regulatory agencies
for the years 1981 through the most recent date available. The
DMR's present a summary of the analytical results from a series
of samples taken during a given month for the pollutants desig-
nated in the plant's permit. In general, minimum, maximum, and
average values, in mg/1 or Ibs/day, are presented for such pollu-
tants as total suspended solids, oil and grease, pH, chromium,
and zinc. The samples were collected from the plant outfall(s),
which represents the discharge(s) from the plant. For facilities
with wastewater treatment, the DMR's provide a measure of the
performance of the treatment system. In theory, these data could
serve as a basis for characterizing treated wastewater from non-
ferrous metals forming plants. However, there is no information
on concentration of pollutants in wastewater prior to treatment
400
-------
and too little information on the performance of the plant at the
time the samples were collected to use these data in evaluating
the performance of various levels of treatment. The data
reported in DMR's could be used to compare the treatment perfor-
mance of actual plants to the treatment effectiveness concentra-
tions presented in Section VII. However, it was not possible to
perform this comparison in the limited time available between
receipt of the DMR's and the Court Ordered deadline for proposal
of this regulation.
The DMR data for uranium forming plants included the toxic metals
cadmium, copper, and nickel. The data were used to select the
pollutants proposed for regulation in the uranium forming
subcategory.
WATER USE AND WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Water use, wastewater discharge, and analytical sampling data for
each subcategory are presented in the administrative record which
accompanies this rulemaking package. These data (listed by waste
stream) were collected from the dcp's and during field sampling.
They include source water concentrations and current recycle
practices.
Analytical sampling data are summarized in Tables V-4 through
V-14. These tables present the concentration range of regulated
pollutants detected in the waste streams sampled in each subcate-
gory. Selection of regulated pollutants is discussed in Section
VI.
As indicated in Table V-l, not every waste stream generated by
nonferrous metals forming operations was sampled during the
screen sampling program. However, in order to evaluate the
applicability of the various treatment technologies to non-
sampled waste streams, the physical and chemical characteristics
of these streams were extrapolated from similar sampled streams.
This extrapolation was also necessary to estimate the costs of
the various treatment technologies, as discussed in Section VIII.
Extrapolation of sampling data from sampled to non-sampled waste
streams was not used to select pollutants for regulation in this
category (see Section VI).
Waste streams generated by similar physical processes using
similar process chemicals will have very similar physical and
chemical characteristics. For example, water used to cool extru-
sions will have low concentrations of all pollutants. This is
demonstrated by the results of the chemical analyses of lead and
nickel extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cool-
ing water (Table V-15). The major difference between these two
waste streams is that the concentration of lead is higher in the
401
-------
lead cooling water (0.13 mg/1 vs. not detected) and the concen-
tration of nickel is higher in the nickel cooling water (0.14
mg/1 vs. 0.007 mg/1). This pattern will be repeated whenever
water, without additives, is used to cool hot metal.
In contrast, spent rolling emulsions have high concentrations of
several pollutants. The results of chemical analyses of lead,
nickel, and precious metals rolling spent emulsions are presented
in Table V-16. All three waste streams have high concentrations
of oil and grease, total suspended and dissolved solids, and
several metals. The lead rolling spent emulsion has a high con-
centration of lead (29.0 mg/1), the nickel rolling spent emulsion
has high concentrations of nickel and chrome (8.95 mg/1 and 1.27
mg/1, respectively), and the precious metals rolling spent emul-
sion has high concentrations of copper, silver, and zinc (25.0
mg/1, 0.13 m^/1, and 6.00 mg/1, respectively). It is not sur-
prising to find chromium in nickel rolling spent emulsions and
copper and zinc in precious metals rolling spent emulsions
because chromium is a common alloy of nickel and copper and zinc
are common alloys of precious metals. Thus, the major difference
between the three waste streams is the presence of the metals
formed in the operation generating the waste stream.
From the discussion above, it follows that refractory metals,
zirconijum, and uranium extrusion press and solution heat treat-
ment contact cooling water will have chemical characteristics
similar to lead and nickel extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water. The major difference between
the waste streams will be the concentration of the metal cooled.
Similarly, zinc and refractory metals rolling spent emulsions
will have chemical characteristics similar to lead, nickel and
precious metals rolling spent emulsions, except for the concen-
tration of the metal rolled. However, because zinc and lead are
rolled at lower temperatures than nickel and refractory metals,
zinc rolling spent emulsions may be more like lead rolling spent
emulsions and refractory metals rolling spent emulsions may be
more like nickel rolling spent emulsions.
Arguments analogous to those presented above were used to esti-
mate the physical and chemical characteristics of all non-sampled
waste streams. These estimations, and summaries of sampling
data, are presented below.
Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsionsare used as coolants and lubricants. Rolling
emulsions are typically recycled using in-line filtration and
periodically batch discharged when spent.
402
-------
One sample of rolling spent emulsions was collected at one plant.
Elevated concentrations of lead (29 mg/1), zinc (1.4 mg/1), oil
and grease (270 mg/1), and TSS (480 mg/1) v/ere detected in the
sample.
Rolling Spent _Soajp__Solutions_. As discussed in Section III, soap
solutions can be used as lubricants and coolants in rolling. Of
the plants surveyed, only one plant reported the use of soap
solutions in rolling.
No samples of rolling spent soap solutions were collected during
the sceen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
alkaline cleaning rinsewater in this subcategory. Spent soap
solutions contain the same process chemicals as alkaline cleaning
baths, at mass loadings (rag/kkg) similar to the concentrations
found in alkaline cleaning rinses. Therefore, the pollutants
present and the mass loadings of pollutants present, in rolling
spent soap solutions and alkaline cleaning rinses are expected to
be similar.
Drawing Spent Neat: OJ_l_s_. As discussed in Section III, oil-based
lubricants may be used in drawing operations to ensure uniform
drawing temperatures and avoid excessive wear on dies and man-
drels. Drawing oils are usually recycled until their lubricant
properties are exhausted and are then contract hauled.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the draw-
ing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
Drawing Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section 111, oil-in-
water emulsions can~Hb~e used as drawing lubricants. The drawing
emulsions are frequently recycled and batch discharged periodi-
cally after their lubricating properties are exhausted.
No samples of drawing spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
spent emulsions in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated from similar physical processes which use similar pro-
cess chemicals. Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste
stream and the mass loading (mg/kkg product) at which they are
present should be similar.
Drawing Spent jSoajj_ SoJ.irti.ons. As discussed in Section ill, soap
solutions can be used as drawing lubricants. The drawing soap
solutions are frequently recycled and batch discharged periodi-
cally after their lubricating properties are exhausted.
403
-------
No samples of drawing spent soap solutions were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to alka-
line cleaning rinsewater in this subcategory. Spent soap solu-
tions contain the same process chemicals as alkaline cleaning
baths, at concentrations similar to the concentrations found in
alkaline cleaning rinses. Therefore, the pollutants present and
the mass loadings at which they are present in drawing spent soap
solutions and alkaline cleaning rinses are expected to be
similar.
Extrusion Press and Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling
Water. As discussed in Section III, heat treatment of lead/tin/
bismuth products frequently involves the use of a water quench in
order to achieve desired metallic properties. Eleven plants
reported 16 extrusion press and solution heat treatment processes
that involve water quenching either by spraying water onto the
metal as it emerges from the die or press or by direct quenching
into a contact water bath.
One sample of extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact
cooling water was collected at one plant. Elevated concentra-
tions of chromium (4.6 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Extrusion Press Hydraulic Fluid Leakage. As discussed in Section
III,due to thelargeforce applied by a hydraulic extrusion
press, hydraulic fluid leakage is unavoidable.
No samples of extrusion press hydraulic fluid leakage were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to press hydraulic fluid leakage in the nickel/cobalt
subcategory. The pollutants present in these two waste streams
are attributable to the hydraulic fluid used, not the metal
formed. Therefore, the pollutants present and the concentration
(mg/1) at which they are present should be similar.
Continuous Strip Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in
Section III, in continuous casting, no restrictions are placed on
the length of the casting and it is not necessary to interrupt
production to remove the cast product. Although the use of con-
tinuous casting techniques has been found to significantly reduce
or eliminate the use of contact cooling water and oil lubricants,
five plants reported the use of continuous strip contact cooling
water.
One sample of continuous strip casting contact cooling water was
collected at one plant. Elevated concentrations of lead (1.2
mg/1) and zinc (3.1 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
404
-------
Semi-Continuous Ingot Casting Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III,semi-continuous ingot casting may require
the use of contact cooling water in order to achieve the desired
physical properties of the metal.
Two samples of semi-continuous ingot casting contact cooling
water were collected from one stream at one plant. Elevated con-
centrations of lead (1.10 mg/1) and TSS (80 mg/1) were detected
in the samples.
Shot Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
contact cooling water is required to cool the cast lead shot so
that it will not reconsolidate as well as to achieve the desired
metallic properties.
Three samples of shot casting contact cooling water were col-
lected from one stream at one plant. Elevated concentrations of
lead (52.2 mg/1), antimony (3.30 mg/1), tin (10.5 rag/1), oil and
grease (22 mg/1), and TSS (420 mg/1) were detected in the
samples.
Shot-Forming Wet Air Pollution Controj. Blowdown. As discussed in
Section III, shot-forming may require wet air pollution control
in order to meet air quality standards. Of the plants surveyed,
only one reported the use of wet air pollution control on a
shot-forming operation.
No samples of shot-forming wet air pollution control blowdown
were collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to shot casting contact cooling water in this
subcategory. The pollutants in each of these waste streams
derive from contact of the water with particles of metal, so the
pollutants present are expected to be similar. However, because
the air pollution control device is designed to capture small
particles (dust), the mass loading of total suspended solids is
expected to be higher in shot-forming wet air pollution control
blowdown than in shot casting contact cooling water.
Swaging Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions can be used as swaging lubricants. The swaging
emulsions are frequently recycled and batch discharged periodi-
cally after their lubricating properties are exhausted.
No samples of swaging spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
spent emulsions in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated from operations using similar process chemicals (oil-
in-water emulsions) for similar purposes (lubrication). There-
fore, the pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass
405
-------
loading (mg/kkg product) at which they are present should be
similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaning iscommonly used to clean lead/tin/bismuth sur-
faces. Products can be cleaned with an alkaline solution either
by immersion or spray.
One sample of an alkaline cleaning spent bath was collected at
one plant. Elevated concentrations of lead (183 mg/1), antimony
(7.30 mg/1), oil and grease (600 mg/1), and TSS (560 mg/1) were
detected in the sample.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing, usually with warm water, should follow the alkaline cleaning
process to prevent the solution from drying on the product.
Four samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected from
two streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of lead (40.8
mg/1), antimony (1.10 mg/1), and TSS (260 mg/1) were detected in
the samples.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degrasing, spray-vapor degreas-
ing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent degreasing,
and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Miscellaneous Nondescript Wastewater Sources. Several low volume
sourcesof wastewater were reported on the dcp's and observed
during the site and sampling visits. These sources are mainte-
nance and cleanup, autoclave contact cooling water, final product
lubrication, and product degreasing rinsewater. Because they
generally represent low volume periodic discharges applicable to
most plants, the Agency is including an allowance for all of
406
-------
these streams under the miscellaneous nondescript wastewater
sources waste stream.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater either because they are dry or because they use
noncontact cooling water only:
Continuous Wheel Casting
Continuous Sheet Casting
Stationary Casting
Shot Pressing
Forging
Stamping
Pointing
Punching
Shot Blasting
Slug Forming
Powder Metallurgy Operations (Pressing, Sintering, Sizing)
Powder Tumbling
Melting
Solder Cream Making
Annealing
Tumble Cleaning
Slitting
Sawing
Coiling, Spooling
Trimming
Nickel/Cobalt Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Neat Oils. As described in Section III, the
rolling of nickel/cobalt products typically requires the use of
mineral oil lubricants. The oils are usually recycled with
in-line filtration and periodically disposed of by sale to an oil
reclaimer or by incineration. Because discharge of this stream
is not practiced, limited flow data were available for analysis.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the roll-
ing spent neat oils, no samples of this waste stream were
collected.
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used in rolling operations as coolants and
lubricants. Rolling emulsions are typically recycled using
in-line filtration with periodic batch discharge of the spent
emulsion.
407
-------
Twelve samples of rolling spent emulsions were collected from six
streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of nickel (34.2
mg/1), zinc (6.70 mg/1), oil and grease (7,600 mg/1), and TSS
(6,800 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Rolling Contact Lubricant-Coolant Watery. As discussed in Section
III, it is necessary to use a lubricants-coolant during rolling to
prevent excessive wear on the rolls, to prevent adhesion of metal
to the rolls, and to maintain a suitable and uniform rolling tem-
perature. Water is one type of lubricant-coolant which may be
used.
One sample of rolling contact lubricant-coolant water was col-
lected at one plant. Elevated concentrations of copper (1.3
mg/1), fluoride (2,000 mg/1), oil and grease (22 mg/1), and TSS
(63 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Rolling Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III, solution heat treatment can be used after
most forming operations in order to improve mechanical properties
by maximizing the concentration of hardening contaminants in the
solid metal solution. Solution heat treatment typically involves
significant quantities of contact cooling water.
No samples of rolling solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever', the Agency believes that this stream will nave wastewater
characteristics similar to extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water in this subcategory. These two
waste streams are generated from operations using water for an
identical purpose: to cool hot metal. In addition, no process
chemicals are added to either type of cooling water. Therefore,
both the pollutants present and the mass loadings of pollutants
present in these two waste streams are expected to be similar.
Tube Reducing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
tube reducing, much like rolling, may require a lubricating com-
pound in order to prevent excessive wear of the tube reducing
rolls, prevent adhesion of metal to the rolls, and to maintain a
suitable and uniform tube reducing temperature.
One sample of tube reducing spent lubricants was collected from
one stream at one plant. Elevated concentrations of nickel (58.0
mg/1), copper (43.5 mg/1), lead (47.6 mg/1), zinc (63.1 mg/1),
and oil and grease (200,000 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
In addition, the sample had elevated concentrations of the toxic
organics 1,1,1-trichloroethane (33 mg/1) and N-nitrosodiphenyl-
amine (28.2 mg/1).
Drawing Spent Neat Oils. As discussed^in Section III, oil-based
lubricants may be required in draws which have a high reduction
408
-------
in diameter. Drawing oils are usually recycled, with in-line
filtration, until their lubricating properties are exhausted.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the draw-
ing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
Drawing Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are often used as coolants and lubricants in
drawing. The drawing emulsions are frequently recycled and batch
discharged periodically after their lubricating properties are
exhausted.
No samples of drawing spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
spent emulsions in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated from operations using similar process chemicals (oil-
in-water emulsions) for similar purposes (lubrication). There-
fore, the pollutants present and the mass loadings of pollutants
present in these two waste streams are expected to be similar.
Extrusion Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, the
extrusion process requires the use of a lubricant to prevent
adhesion of the metal to the die and ingot container walls.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge
values for extrusion spent lubricants, no samples of this waste
stream were collected.
Extrusion Press and Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling
Water.Asdiscussed in Section III,heat treatmentisfrequently
used after extrusion to attain the desired mechanical properties
in the extruded metal. Contact cooling of the extrusion, some-
times called press heat treatment, can be accomplished with a
water spray near the die or by immersion in a water tank adjacent
to the runout table.
One sample of extrusion press heat treatment contact cooling
water was collected at one plant. Elevated concentrations of
chromium (0.130 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Forging, Extrusion, and Isostatic Press Hydraulic Fluid Leakage.
As discussed in Section III, due to the large force applied by a
hydraulic press, hydraulic fluid leakage is unavoidable.
Three samples of extrusion press hydraulic fluid leakage were
collected at one plant and one sample of forging press hydraulic
fluid leakage was collected at another plant. Elevated concen-
trations of nickel (1.30 mg/1), oil and grease (420 mg/1), and
TSS (500 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
409
-------
Forging Equipment Cleaning Wastewater. Forging equipment may be
periodically cleaned in order to prevent the excessive build-up
of oil and grease on the forging die.
No samples of forging equipment cleaning wastewater were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to forging die contact cooling water in this subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated from similar physical
processes (flushing a forging die with water), so the pollutants
present are expected to be similar. However, the water is used
for different purposes, in one case to cool a hot die, in the
other, to remove built-up contaminants. Therefore, the mass
loadings of oil and grease are expected to be higher in forging
equipment cleaning wastewater than in forging die contact cooling
water.
Forging Die Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
forging dies may require cooling to maintain the proper die tem-
perature between forgings, or to cool the dies prior to removal
from the forge hammer.
One sample of forging die contact cooling water was collected at
one plant. Elevated concentrations of nickel (16 mg/1), copper
(3.4 mg/1) and TSS (1,800 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Forging and Swaging Spent Neat Oils. As described in Section
IIl7 an oil medium can be usedfor proper lubrication of forging
and swaging dies. Of the plants surveyed reporting the use of
forging and swaging neat oils, all recycle the oils until their
lubricating properties are exhausted, at which time the oils are
contract hauled.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the forg-
ing and swaging spent neat oils, no samples of this waste stream
were collected.
Stationary and Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water. As
discussed in Section III, contact cooling water is a necessary
part of direct chill casting and is sometimes used in stationary
casting. The cooling water may be contaminated by lubricants
applied to the mold before and during the casting process and by
the cast metal itself.
No samples of stationary and direct chill casting contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to rolling contact lubricant-coolant
water in this subcategory. These two waste streams are generated
from operations using water for similar purposes (to cool hot
410
-------
metal). In addition, no process chemicals are added to either
type of cooling water. Therefore, both the pollutants present
and the mass loadings of pollutants present in the two streams
are expected to be similar.
Vacuum Melting Steam Condensate. As discussed in Section III,
nickel/cobalt may be melted by an operation known as vacuum melt-
ing. The high pressure steam used to create the vacuum condenses
to an extent as it produces the vacuum. Although this water does
not come in contact with the metal product, it may potentially be
contaminated with metal fines or components of lubricant com-
pounds volatilized in the furnace if scrap is being melted.
One sample of vacuum melting steam condensate was collected at
one plant. No pollutants were detected in the sample at elevated
concentrations.
Metal Powder Production Atomization Wastewater. As discussed in
Section III,metal powder iscommonly produced through wet atomi-
zation of a molten metal. Of the plants surveyed, three reported
the use of water in atomization of molten nickel.
One sample of metal powder production atomization wastewater was
collected at one plant. Elevated concentrations of chromium (1.0
mg/1), cobalt (5.2 mg/1), TSS (63 mg/1), and oil and grease (22
mg/1; were detected in the sample.
Annealing Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As
discussed in Section III, solution heat treatment is implemented
after annealing operations to improve mechanical properties by
maximizing the concentration of hardening contaminants in the
solid metal solution. Solution heat treatment typically involves
significant quantities of contact cooling water.
Two samples of solution heat treatment contact cooling water were
collected from two streams at two plants. Elevated concentra-
tions of nickel (6.80 mg/1), copper (2.92 mg/1), oil and grease
(40 mg/1), and TSS (78 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Vet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As discussed in Section III,
wet air pollution control devices^are required to control air
pollution from some operations. Scrubbers are frequently neces.-
sary over pickling operations to control fumes and over shot
blasting operations to control particulates.
Two samples of wet air pollution control blowdown were collected.
Slowdown from a scrubber on a pickling operation was sampled at
one plant and on a shot blasting operation at another plant.
Elevated concentrations of nickel (20.0 mg/1), copper (2.85
mg/1), chromium (1.75 mg/1), and TSS (130 mg/1) were detected in
the samples.
411
-------
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical surface treatments may be applied after the
forming of nickel/cobalt products. Although spent surface treat-
ment baths are often discharged, two out of 22 plants reporting
surface treatment baths have the spent baths contract hauled.
Samples of five spent surface treatment baths were collected at
two plants. Very high concentrations of nickel (193,000 mg/1),
copper (4,800 mg/1), cobalt (4,000 mg/1), chromium (3,600 mg/1),
fluoride (94,000 mg/1), and TSS (5,800 mg/1) were detected in the
samples.
Sjurface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing follows the surface treatment process to prevent the surface
treatment solution from affecting the surface of the metal beyond
the desired amount.
Twenty-three samples of surface treatment rinsewater were col-
lected from eight streams at three plants. Elevated concentra-
tions of nickel (364 mg/1), copper (87.4 mg/1), chromium (18.8
mg/1), cobalt (4.0 mg/1), zinc (2.36 mg/1), oil and grease (130
mg/1), and TSS (760 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Spent solutions are discharged from alkaline clean-
ing processes.
Three samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected
from three streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of
nickel (122 mg/1), copper (39.2 mg/1), zinc (3.9 mg/1), chromium
(3.59 mg/1), oil and grease (49 mg/1), and TSS (4,000 mg/1) were
detected in the samples.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, metal
parts are usually rinsed following alkaline cleaning to remove
the cleaning solution and any solubilized contaminants.
Four samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected from
three streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of nickel
(5.58 mg/1), mg/1), oil and grease (26 mg/1), and TSS (190 mg/1)
were detected in the samples.
Molten Salt Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, molten
salt baths are used to descale nickel and cobalt alloys. Formed
parts to be descaled are immersed in the bath for up to 15
minutes, removed, and water-quenched.
When removed from the heated bath container, the molten salt bath
solution solidifies and is no longer a liquid waste stream. The
solidified spent salt bath is usually discarded as a hazardous
412
-------
waste because it contains high concentrations of hexavalent chro-
mium. Therefore, no samples of molten salt baths were collected.
Molten Salt Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, when molten
salt baths are used to descale nickel and cobalt alloys, they are
generally followed by a water quench/rinse step.
Seven samples of molten salt rinsewater were collected from three
streams at three plants. Elevated concentrations of nickel (14
mg/1), copper (8.05 mg/1), cobalt (2.8 mg/1), chromium (1,100.
mg/1), and TSS (4,200 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Ammonia Rinse Wastewater. As discussed in Section III, an
ammonia rinse may be used after acid pickling of nickel/cobalt
products to neutralize the acid prior to further rinsing. The
ammonia rinse is periodically batch discharged when spent.
One sample of ammonia rinse wastewater was collected at one
plant. Elevated concentrations of nickel (456 mg/1), copper
(54.0 mg/1). chromium (108 mg/1), zinc (32.0 mg/1), and TSS
(9,000 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
Ten samples of sawing/grinding spent lubricants were collected
from 10 streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of nickel
(116 mg/1), copper (16.5 mg/1), cobalt (3.3 mg/1), chromium (24.0
mg/1), oil and grease (16,000 mg/1), and TSS (2,440 mg/1) were
detected in the samples.
Steam Cleaning Condensate. As discussed in Section III, steam
cleaning may be used to remove oil and grease from the surface of
metal. Steam is condensed as it hits the surface of the rela-
tively cooler metal and is then discharged.
No samples of steam cleaning condensate were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
contact lubricant-coolant water in this subcategory. These two
waste streams are generated in processes in which water, without
any added process chemicals, contacts metal. In the case of
contact lubricant-coolant water, the metal is hot and the water
(relatively) cool. In the case of steam cleaning condensate,
the water/steam is hot and the metal (relatively) cool. However,
the pollutants present and the mass loadings of pollutants
present in the two streams are expected to be similar.
413
-------
Hydrostatic Tube Testing Wastewajber. As discussed in Section
III, hydrostatic testing operations are used to check nonferrous
metals parts for surface defects or subsurface imperfections.
Hydrostatic testing operations are sources of wastewater because
the spent water bath or test media must be periodically discarded
due to the transfer into the testing media of oil and grease,
solids, and suspended and dissolved metals from each product
tested.
No samples of hydrostatic tube testing wastewater were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
rolling contact lubricant-coolant water in this subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated in processes in which
water, without any added process chemicals, contacts metal.
Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste stream and the
mass loading (mg/kkg) at which they are present should be
similar.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Miscellaneous Nondescript Wastewater Sources. Several low volume
sources oTT wastewater" were report eT~on~ the Hep and observed dur-
ing the site and sampling visits. These sources are maintenance
and cleanup, final product Uibrication, and product degreasing
rinsewater. Because they generally represent low volume periodic
discharges applicable to most plants, the Agency is including an
allowance for all of these streams under the miscellaneous
nondescript wastewater soitrc.es wast*3 stream.
Operations Which Do Not_l)eo Process 'water. Ihe Agency proposes a
dischargr allowance or zn-.. lor ope-'af Ions vuvLch do not generate
4.U
-------
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, either because they are dry or because they use
noncontact cooling water only:
Powder Metallurgy Operations (Compacting, Sintering, Sizing)
Powder Blending
Powder Ball Milling
Powder Attrition
Powder Extrusion
Hot Isostatic Pressing
Grit, Sand, Shot Blasting
Welding
Plasma Torch Cutting
Gas Cleaning
Coil Buildup, Coiling
Straightening
Electroflux Remelting
Zinc Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Neat Oils. As described in Section III, mineral
oil or kerosene-based lubricants can be used in the rolling of
zinc products. The oils are usually recycled with in-line fil-
tration and periodically disposed of by sale to an oil reclaimer
or by incineration.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the roll-
ing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used in rolling operations as coolants and
lubricants. Rolling emulsions are typically recycled using
in-line filtration treatment, with periodic batch discharge of
the recycled emulsion.
No samples of rolling spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
spent emulsions in the lead/tin/bismuth subcategory. These two
waste streams are generated by identical physical processes which
use similar process chemicals. The only difference should be the
identity of metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zinc in
zinc rolling spent emulsions should be similar to the mass load-
ing of lead in lead rolling spent emulsions, and vice versa. The
other pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass load-
ing at which they are present should be similar.
Rolling Contact Lubricant-Coolant Water. As discussed in Section
III,it is necessary to use a lubricant-coolant during rolling to
prevent excessive wear on the rolls, to prevent adhesion of metal
415
-------
to the rolls, and to maintain a suitable and uniform rolling tem-
perature. Water is one type of lubricant-coolant which may be
used.
No samples of rolling contact lubricant-coolant water were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to casting contact cooling water in the lead/tin/bismuth
subcategory. These two waste streams are generated by using
water, without additives, to cool hot metal. The only difference
between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams should
be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zinc in zinc
rolling contact lubricant-coolant water should be similar to the
mass loading of lead in lead casting contact cooling water, and
vice versa. The other pollutants present in each waste stream
and the mass loading at which they are present should be
similar.
Drawing Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used for many drawing applications in order
to ensure uniform drawing temperatures and avoid excessive wear
on the dies and mandrels used. The drawing emulsions are fre-
quently recycled and batch discharged periodically after their
lubricating properties are exhausted.
No samples of drawing spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to rolling
spent emulsions in the lead/tin/bismuth subcategory. These waste
streams are generated from operations using similar process chem-
icals (oil-in-water emulsions) for similar purposes (lubrica-
tion). The only difference should be the metals present. The
mass loading (mg/kkg) of zinc in zinc drawing spent emulsions
should be similar to the mass loading of lead in lead rolling
spent emulsions, and vice versa. The other pollutants present in
each waste stream and the mass loading at which they are present
should be similar.
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discxissed in Sec-
tion III, contact cooling water is a necessary part of direct
chill casting. The cooling water may be contaminated by lubri-
cants applied to the mold before and during the casting process.
The cooling water may be recycled.
No samples of direct chill casting contact cooling water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to semicontinuous ingot casting contact cooling
water in the lead/tin/bismuth subcategory. These two waste
streams are generated by using water, without additives, to cool
416
-------
cast metal. Since lubricants may be applied to the casting molds
in both processes, both streams may be contaminated by these
lubricants. The only difference between the waste streams should
be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zinc in zinc
direct chill casting contact cooling water should be similar to
the mass loading of lead in lead semicontinuous ingot casting
contact cooling water, and vice versa. The other pollutants
present and the mass loading at which they are present should be
similar.
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, lubricants and cooling water are usually not required
in stationary casting. Since molten metal is poured into the
molds, if contact cooling water is used, it is frequently lost
due to evaporation.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the
stationary casting contact cooling water, no samples were
collected.
Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in
Section III, solution heat treatment is implemented after most
forming operations to improve mechanical properties by maximizing
the concentration of hardening contaminants in solid solution.
Solution heat treatment typically involves significant quantities
of contact cooling water.
No samples of solution heat treatment contact cooling water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to continuous sheet casting contact cooling water
in the lead/tin/bismuth subcategory. These two waste streams
derive from the use of water, without additives, to cool hot
metal. The only difference should be the metals present. The
mass loading (mg/kkg) of zinc in zinc solution heat treatment
contact cooling water should be similar to the mass loading of
lead in lead continuous sheet casting contact cooling water, and
vice versa. The other pollutants present in each waste stream
and the mass loading at which they are present should be
similar.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing follows the surtace treatment process to prevent the solution
from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
One sample of surface treatment rinsewater was collected at one
plant. Elevated concentrations of zinc (42.3 mg/1), chromium
(0.160 mg/1), nickel (8.10 mg/1), and TSS (20 mg/1) were detected
in the sample.
417
-------
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Spent solutions are discharged from alkaline clean-
ing processes after their properties are exhausted.
No samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to alka-
line cleaning rinsewater in this subcategory. As a zinc piece is
removed from an alkaline cleaning bath, it carries a small volume
of the bath with it. The rinsewater used to remove the carried-
over bath solution from the formed piece will contain the same
pollutants as the bath, only diluted. Therefore, the pollutants
present in zinc alkaline cleaning baths are expected to be iden-
tical to the pollutants present in zinc alkaline cleaning rinse-
water, except that the mass loadings of oil and grease and dis-
solved metals are expected to be higher in the spent baths than
in the rinsewater while the mass loading of total suspended
solids is expected to be much higher in the baths than in the
rinsewater.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, fol-
lowing alkaline treating, metal parts are rinsed. Rinses are
discharged from alkaline cleaning processes.
One sample of alkaline cleaning rinsewater was collected at one
plant. Elevated concentrations of zinc (1.12 mg/1), cyanide (1.3
mg/1), oil and grease (23 mg/1), and TSS (90 mg/1) were detected
in the sample.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant: in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
No samples of sawing/grinding spent lubricants were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
sawing/grinding spent lubricants in the nickel/cobalt subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated by identical physi-
cal processes which use similar process chemicals. The only dif-
ference should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg)
of zinc in zinc sawing/grinding spent lubricants should be simi-
lar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel sawing/grinding spent
lubricants, and vice versa. The mass loading of chromium in zinc
sawing/grinding spent lubricants should be insignificant, since
chromium is often alloyed with nickel but not with zinc,, The
other pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass
loading at which they are present should be similar.
418
-------
Degrees ing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, either because they are dry operations or because
they use only noncontact cooling water:
Continuous Casting
Melting
Slitting
Stamping
Sawing
Homogenizing
Printing
Coating
Drying
Metal Powder Production
Beryllium Forming Subcategory
Area Cleaning Wastewater. Due to the toxicity of beryllium, it
is necessary to keepforming areas reasonably clean. After the
operations of a shift, areas need to be hosed down.
No samples of area cleaning wastewater were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to billet
washing wastewater in this subcategory. These two waste streams
are generated in washing/cleaning operations. Therefore, the
pollutants present in beryllium area cleaning wastewater are
419
-------
expected to be identical to the pollutants present in beryllium
billet washing wastewater, except that mass loadings of oil and
grease and total suspended solids are expected to be higher in
the area cleaning wastewater.
Billet Washing Wastewater. Beryllium billets are washed after
vacuum casting and sintering to remove an oxide layer on the
billet formed at the elevated casting and sintering temperatures.
Billets are washed using a high pressure spray nozzle to blast
off the oxide layer. In the plant surveyed, the wastewater is
not recirculated.
Two samples of billet washing wastewater were collected from two
streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of beryllium (82
mg/1), copper (0.75 mg/1), and TSS (160 mg/1) were detected in
the samples.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
nonferrous metals products. Beryllium products are commonly
etched with a nitric acid-hydrofluoric acid solution. The acid
bath is used until its etching properties have been diminished
and fresh chemicals are needed.
One sample of a surface treatment spent bath was collected at one
plant. Elevated concentrations of beryllium (15,000 mg/1),
chromium, (3.0 mg/1), zinc (2.0 mg/1), nickel (2.4 mg/1), fluoride
(79,000 mg/1), and TSS (240 mg/1; were detected in the sample.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, after
a surface treatment bath,tHe nonferrous metal product must be
rinsed in order to stop the surface reaction from proceeding
beyond the desired amount. An overflow rinse tank is used after
the beryllium etching bath in the plant surveyed.
Two samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected from
one stream at one plant. Elevated concentrations of beryllium
(35 mg/1), copper (6.1 mg/1), and TSS (18 mg/1) were detected in
the samples.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
One sample of sawing/grinding spent lubricants was collected at
one plant. Elevated concentrations of beryllium (17 mg/1), zinc
(0.86 mg/1), copper (1.5 mg/1), cyanide (1.1 mg/1), oil and
grease (21,000 mg/1), and TSS (19 mg/1) were detected in the
sample.
420
-------
Inspection/Testing Wastewater. As discussed in Section III,
product testing operations are used to check nonferrous metals
parts for surface defects, subsurface imperfections, and product
density. Product testing operations are usually sources of
wastewater because the spent water bath or test media must be
periodically discarded due to the transfer into the testing media
of oil and grease, solids, and suspended and dissolved metals
from each product tested. Toxic organics may also be present,
originating in the lubricants used in preceding forming opera-
tions. Beryllium products are washed before undergoing density
testing, therefore, no pollutants are expected in this waste
stream. The testing water is used indefinitely at the plant
surveyed.
One sample of inspection/testing wastewater was collected at one
plant. No pollutants were detected at elevated concentrations in
the sample.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
•cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, either because they are dry or because they use only
noncontact cooling water:
Billet Chipping
Powder Metallurgy Operations (Pressing, Sintering)
421
-------
Precious Metals Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used in rolling operations as coolants and
lubricants. Rolling emulsions are typically recycled using
in-line filtration with periodic batch discharge of the recycled
emulsion as it loses its lubricating properties.
One sample of rolling spent emulsions was collected at one plant.
Elevated concentrations of silver (0.130 mg/1), copper (25.0
mg/1), lead (1.00 mg/1), nickel (1.00 mg/1), oil and grease
(1,500 mg/1), and TSS (500 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Rolling Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III,solution heat treatment can be used after
most forming operations in order to improve mechanical properties
by maximizing the concentration of hardening contaminants in
solid solution. Solution heat treatment typically involves
significant quantities of contact cooling water.
No samples of rolling solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to semi-continuous and continuous casting
contact cooling water in this subcategory. These two waste
streams are generated by the use of water, without additives, to
cool hot metal. Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste
stream and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Drawing Spent Neat Oils. As discussed in Section III, oil-based
lubricantsmay be required in draws which have a high reduction
in diameter. Drawing oils are usually recycled until their
lubricating properties are exhausted.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the draw-
ing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
Drawing Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions may be used as coolants and lubricants in draw-
ing. The drawing emulsions are frequently recycled and batch
discharged periodically after their lubricating properties are
exhausted.
One sample of drawing spent emulsions was collected at one plant.
Elevated concentrations of copper (46.4 mg/1), zinc (5.18 mg/1),
lead (1.05 mg/1), and oil and grease (33,000 mg/1) were detected
in the sample.
422
-------
Drawing Spent Soap Solutions. As discussed in Section III, soap
solutions can be used as drawing lubricants. The drawing soap
solutions may be recycled and batch discharged periodically after
their lubricating properties are exhausted.
No samples of drawing spent soap solutions were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to roll-
ing spent emulsions in this subcategory. These two waste streams
are generated from operations using similar process chemicals for
similar purposes (lubrication). Therefore, the pollutants pres-
ent and the mass loading at which they are present should be
similar.
Extrusion Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III, solution heat treatment can be used after
most forming operations in order to improve mechanical properties
by maximizing the concentration of hardening contaminants in
solid solution. Solution heat treatment typically involves
significant quantities of contact cooling water.
No samples of extrusion solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to semi-continuous and continuous contact
cooling water in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated by using water, without additives, to cool hot metal.
Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste stream and the
mass loading at which they are present should be similar.
Semi-Continuous and Continuous Casting Contact Cooling Water. As
discussed in Section III,a number of different continuouscast-
ing processes are currently being used in industry. The use of
continuous casting techniques has been found to significantly
reduce or eliminate the use of contact cooling water and oil
lubricants.
One sample of semi-continuous and continuous casting contact
cooling water was collected at one plant. Elevated concentra-
tions of cyanide (0.50 mg/1) and TSS (43 mg/1) were detected in
the sample.
Stationary Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, stationary casting of metal ingots is practiced at many
nonferrous metals forming plants. Lubricants and cooling water
are usually not required, however, two of the plants surveyed re-
ported the use and discharge of stationary casting contact cool-
ing water.
423
-------
No samples of stationary casting contact cooling water were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to semi-continuous and continuous casting contact cooling
water in this subcategory. These two waste streams are; generated
by using water, without additives, to cool hot metal. Therefore,
the pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass loading
at which they are present should be similar.
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, contact cooling water is a necessary part of direct
chill casting. The cooling water may be contaminated by lubri-
cants applied to the mold before and during the casting process.
No samples of direct chill casting contact cooling water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar^to semi-continuous and continuous casting contact
cooling water in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated by using water, without additives, to cool hot metal.
Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste stream and the
mass loading at which they are present should be similar.
Shot Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
during shot casting,a tank of contact cooling water, either
stagnant or circulating, is necessary for quick quenching of cast
shot.
Two samples of shot casting contact cooling water were collected
from one stream at one plant. Elevated concentrations of cadmium
(9.88 mg/1), copper (0.600 mg/1), zinc (5.66 mg/1), and oil and
grease (54 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Casting Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, casting may require wet air pollution control in order
to meet air quality standards. Of the plants surveyed, two
reported the use of wet air pollution control on a casting
operation.
No samples of casting wet air pollution control blowdown were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to shot casting contact cooling water in this sub-
category. The pollutants in each of these waste streams derive
from the contact of the water with particles of metal, so the
pollutants present are expected to be similar. However, because
the air pollution control device is designed to capture small
particles and gases (dust and fumes) generated during the casting
process, the mass loadings of total suspended solids and total
dissolved solids are expected to be higher in casting wet air
424
-------
pollution control blowdown than in shot casting contact cooling
water.
Metal Powder Production Atomization Wastewater. As discussed in
Section III, metal powder is commonly produced through wet atomi-
zation of a molten metal. Water is removed after the atomization
step, commonly by settling, then discharged.
No samples of metal powder production atomization wastewater were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to shot casting contact cooling water in this
subcategory. These two waste streams are generated by using
water to cool molten metal. Therefore, the pollutants present in
each waste stream and the mass loading (mg/kkg) at which they are
present should be similar.
Metal Powder Production Ball Milling Wastewater. As discussed in
Section III,metal powderscan be produced by milling with water,
most commonly wet ball milling. After the wet milling operation,
excess water is extracted from the metal powder, commonly by set-
tling, and then discharged.
No samples of metal powder production ball milling wastewater
were collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to tumbling wastewater in this subcategory. These
two waste streams are generated from similar physical processes
using water for similar purposes, so the pollutants present are
expected to be similar. However, because process chemicals (rust
inhibitors, detergents) are sometimes added to tumbling water,
the mass of loadings of total dissolved solids are expected to be
higher in tumbling wastewater than in metal powder production
ball milling wastewater.
Pressure Bonding Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section
III,metalscan be bonded together through the use of pressure
applied onto the desired forms. Cooling water may be applied
after the bonding operation to facilitate handling of the bonded
product.
One sample of pressure bonding contact cooling water was col-
lected at one plant. Elevated concentrations of zinc (3.42 mg/1)
and copper (7.85 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Annealing Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
annealing is used by plants in the nonferrous metals forming
category to remove the effects of strain hardening or solution
heat treatment. Once removed from the annealing furnace, it is
essential that the heat-treatable alloys be cooled at a control-
led rate. Contact cooling water may be used for this purpose.
425
-------
No samples of annealing contact cooling water were collected dur-
ing the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
semi-continuous and continuous casting contact cooling water in
this subcategory. These two waste streams are generated by using
water, without additives, to cool hot metal. Therefore, the
pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass loading at
which they are present should be similar.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
precious metals products. The surface treatment baths must be
periodically discharged after their properties are exhausted.
No samples of surface treatment spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to sur-
face treatment rinsewater in this subcategory. As a precious
metal piece is removed from a surface treatment bath, it carries
with it a small volume of the bath. The rinsewater used to
remove the carried-over bath solution from the formed piece will
contain the same pollutants as the bath, only at lower concentra-
tion. Therefore, the pollutants present in precious metals
surface treatment baths are expected to be identical to the
pollutants in precious metals surface treatment rinsewater,
except that the mass loadings of dissolved metals and total
suspended solids are expected to be higher in surface treatment
spent baths than in surface treatment rinsewater.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing followsthe surface treatment process to prevent the solution
from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
Four samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected from
two streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of silver
(6.70 mg/1), zinc (4.66 mg/1), cadmium (11.1 mg/1), copper (60.6
mg/1), and TSS (3,000 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Spent solutions are discharged from alkaline clean-
ing processes after their properties are exhausted.
No samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to alka-
line cleaning spent baths in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by identical physical pro-
cesses which use similar process chemicals. The only difference
426
-------
should be the metals present. The mass loading of precious
metals in precious metals alkaline cleaning spent baths should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel alkaline cleaning
baths, and vice versa. Also, chromium should not be present in
significant amounts. The other pollutants present in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, fol-
1owing alkaline treating, metal parts are rinsed. Rinses are
discharged from alkaline cleaning processes.
No samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to alka-
line cleaning rinsewater in the nickel/cobalt subcategory. These
two waste streams are generated by identical physical processes
which use similar process chemicals. The only difference should
be the metals present. The mass loading of precious metals in
precious metals alkaline cleaning rinsewater should be similar to
the mass loading of nickel in nickel alkaline cleaning rinse-
water, and vice versa. Also, chromium should not be present in
significant amounts. The other pollutants present in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Prebonding Cleaning Wastewater. As discussed in Section III,
prior to bonding, metal surfaces must be cleaned in order to
obtain a good bond. The main source of process water in metal
cladding operations is in cleaning the metal surfaces prior to
bonding. Acid, caustic, or detergent cleaning can be performed
depending on the metal type. For small batch operations, the
cleaning steps can involve dipping the metal into small cleaning
bath tanks and hand rinsing the metal in a sink. For larger con-
tinuous operations, the metal may be cleaned in a power scrubline
In a typical scrubline, the strip passes through a detergent
bath, spray rinse, acid bath, spray rinse, rotating abrasive
scrub brushes, and a final rinse. The metal may then pass
through a heated drying chamber or may air dry.
Eight samples of prebonding cleaning wastewater were collected
from three streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of
silver (0.100 mg/1), zinc (2.32 mg/1), copper (5.95 mg/1),
cyanide (0.28 mg/1), nickel (3.60 mg/1), oil and grease (16
mg/1), and TSS (400 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Tumbling Wastewater. As discussed in Section III, tumbling is a
controlled method of processing parts to remove burrs, scale,
flash, and oxides as well as to improve surface finish of formed
metal parts. Water is commonly added to the tumbling container
and later discharged.
427
-------
Four samples of tumbling wastewater were collected from two
streams at two plants. Elevated concentrations of silver (0.220
mg/1), lead (1.85 mg/1), zinc (3.16 mg/1), iron (7,850 mg/1),
copper (142 mg/1), nickel (3.25 mg/1), chromium (3.18 mg/1), oil
and grease (40 mg/1), and TSS (110 mg/1) were detected in the
samples.
Burnishing Wastewater. As discussed in Section III, burnishing
is the process of finish sizing or smooth finishing a workpiece
(previously machined or ground) by displacement, rather than
removals of minute surface irregularities. Water is commonly
used to aid in this operation.
No samples of burnishing wastewater were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to tumbling
wastewater in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated from similar physical processes which use water for
similar purposes. Therefore, the pollutants present in each
waste stream and the mass loading (mg/kkg) at which they are
present should be similar.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III,
the rolls used in rolling operations obtain surface abrasions
after repeated use. The rolls must be surface ground in order to
obtain a smooth rolling surface. The rolled product will not be
formed properly if the rolls are not adequately smooth. Roll
grinding and other sawing and grinding operations generally
require a lubricant to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
Oil-in-water emulsions are commonly used for this purpose. The
emulsions are typically recycled using in-line filtration and
batch discharged periodically after their lubricating properties
are exhausted.
A sample of roll grinding spent emulsions was collected at one
plant. Elevated concentrations of zinc (0.920 mg/1), chromium
(0.240 mg/1), and oil and grease (500 mg/1) were detected in the
sample.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
428
-------
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, either because they use only noncontact cooling water
or because they use no water at all:
Forging, Swaging
Punching, Stamping
Welding
Soldering
Melting, Screening
Sawing
Slitting
Metal Powder Production
Metal Powder Production and Powder Metallurgy Iron, Copper, and
Aluminum Subcategory
Metal Powder Production Atomization Wastewater. As discussed in
Section III, wet atomization is a method of producing metal
powder in which a stream of water impinges upon a molten metal
stream, breaking it into droplets which solidify as powder par-
ticles. Water atomization is used to produce irregularly shaped
particles, required for powder metallurgy applications in which a
powder is cold pressed into a compact. Because cooling times
play an important role in determining particle configuration, the
atomized metal droplets are sometimes rapidly cooled by falling
into a water bath. Atomization and quench water are separated
from the metal powder by gravity settling or filtration and
discharged.
No samples of iron, copper or aluminum atomization wastewater
were collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to tumbling, burnishing, and cleaning wastewater
in this subcategory. These two waste streams are generated from
operations using water, usually without added process chemicals,
in contact with finely divided metal. The pollutants present in
each waste stream and the mass loading at which they are present
should be similar, except for total suspended solids and oil and
429
-------
grease. Oil and grease, present in high concentrations in clean-
ing wastewater, is not expected to be present in significant
concentrations in metal powder production atomization wastewater.
Because metal powders are more finely divided than the parts
tumbled and in higher concentration than the metal fines produced
during tumbling, the mass loading of total suspended solids is
expected to be higher in metal powder production atomization
wastewater than in tumbling, burnishing, and cleaning wastewater.
Metal Powder Production Milling Wastewater. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, metal powders are also produced by mechanical reduc-
tion. The most common pieces of mechanical reduction equipment
are ball mills, vortex mills, hammer mills, disc mills, and roll
mills.
Water or other liquids may be used to aid in the milling opera-
tion or to facilitate handling after powder is milled.
No samples of metal powder production milling wastewater were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to tumbling, burnishing, and cleaning wastewater
in this subcategory. These two waste streams are generated from
operations using water, usually without added process chemicals,
in contact with finely divided metal. The pollutants present in
each waste stream and the mass loading at which they are present,
should be similar, except for total suspended solids and oil and
grease. Oil and grease, present in high concentrations in clean-
ing wastewater, is not expected to be present in significant
concentrations in metal powder production milling wastewater.
Metal powders are more finely divided than tumbled parts.
Powders are also present in higher concentration than the metal
fines produced during tumbling. Therefore, the mass loading of
total suspended solids is expected to be higher in metal powder
production milling wastewater than in tumbling, burnishing, and
cleaning wastewater.
Metal Powder Production Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As
discussed in Section III, during the production of metal powders,
particulates may become airborne. The use of wet air pollution
control may be necessary in order to meet particulate air quality
standards.
No samples of metal powder production wet air pollution control
blowdown were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to blowdown from air pollution control
scrubbers used to control particulate emissions in the nickel/
cobalt subcategory. The only difference between the wastewater
characteristics of the two streams should be the metals present.
430
-------
The mass loading (mg/kkg) of iron, copper and/or aluminum in
iron, copper and aluminum metal powder production wet air pol-
lution control scrubber blowdown should be similar to the nickel
mass loading in nickel air pollution control scrubber blowdown,
and vice versa. The other pollutants present in each waste
stream and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Sizing/Repressing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
powder metallurgy parts may be sized or repressed after sintering
to increase the density of the part and/or to bring the part
closer to required tolerances. Lubricants, such as turbine oil,
may be used to prevent the adhesion of the part to the sizing
die. Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging
sizing spent lubricants (they are completely consumed in the
process), no samples were collected.
Oil-Resin Impregnation wastewater. As discussed in Section III,
porous parts pressed from metalpowders may be impregnated with
oils or resins. Following impregnation, the parts may be rinsed
with water to remove excess oil or resin and the rinsewater may
be discharged.
No samples of oil-resin impregnation wastewater were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
tumbling, burnishing, and cleaning wastewater in this subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated from similar physi-
cal processes in which water is used to clean formed parts.
Therefore, the pollutants present in each waste stream and the
mass loading (mg/kkg) at which they are present should be
similar.
Steam Treatment Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As discussed
in Section III, steam treatment operations may require the use of
wet air pollution control devices in order to meet air quality
standards.
Three samples of steam treatment wet air pollution control blow-
down were collected from one stream at one plant. Elevated
concentrations of oil and grease (42 mg/1) and TSS (200 mg/1)
were detected in the samples.
Tumbling, Burnishing, and Cleaning Wastewater. As discussed in
Section III,tumblingisan operation in parts pressed from metal
powder are rotated in a barrel with ceramic or metal slugs or
abrasives to remove scale, fins, or burrs. It may be done dry or
with an aqueous solution. Burnishing is a surface finishing pro-
cess in which minute surface irregularities are displaced rather
431
-------
than removed. It also can be done by dry or in an aqueous solu-
tion. Pressed parts can also be cleaned in hot soapy water to
remove excess oil from oil quenching operations.
Six samples of tumbling wastewater were collected from three
streams at one plant. Four samples of cleaning wastewater were
collected from one stream at one plant. Elevated concentrations
of iron (211 mg/1), copper (253 mg/1), aluminum (34.3 mg/1),
cyanide (1.8 mg/1), lead (45.1 mg/1), nickel (3.00 mg/1), zinc
(9.56 mg/1), boron (440 mg/1), tin (15.8 mg/1), titanium (2.50
mg/1), oil and grease (2,100 mg/1), and TSS (3,000 mg/1) were
detected in the samples.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operationsgenerally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
Two samples of sawing/grinding lubricants were collected from two
streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of iron (176
mg/1), copper (1.55 mg/1), aluminum (7.00 mg/1), zinc (3.26
mg/1), boron (166 mg/1), cyanide (2.5 mg/1), oil and grease (720
mg/1), and TSS (120 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of metals during powder metallurgy operations.
Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight vapor degreasing,
immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor degreasing, ultrasonic
vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent degreasing, and cold
cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
432
-------
Powder Metallurgy Operations (Compacting, Sintering)
Sanding
Rolling
Machining
Screening
Blending
Briquetting
Crushing, Pulverizing
Titanium Forming Subcategory
Cold Rolling Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
mineral oil or kerosene-based lubricants are typically used in
cold rolling. However, water soluble lubricants are also used in
titanium cold rolling.
No samples of cold rolling spent lubricants were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to roll-
ing spent emulsions in the nickel/cobalt subcategory. These two
waste streams are generated by identical physical processes which
use similar process chemicals. The only difference should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of titanium in tita-
nium cold rolling spent lubricants should be similar to the mass
loading of nickel in nickel rolling spent emulsions, and vice
versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium should be insignifi-
cant because titanium is seldom alloyed with chromium. The other
pollutants present in each waste stream and the mass loading at
which they are present should be similar.
Hot Rolling Contact Lubricant-Coolant Water. As discussed in
Section III, it is necessary to use a lubricant-coolant during
rolling to prevent excessive wear on the rolls, to prevent adhe-
sion of metal to the rolls, and to maintain a suitable and uni-
form rolling temperature. Water is one type of lubricant-coolant
which may be used.
No samples of hot rolling contact lubricant-coolant water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to rolling contact lubricant-coolant water in the
nickel/cobalt subcategory. These two waste streams are generated
by using water, without additives, to cool and lubricate metal
during the rolling process. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of titanium in
titanium hot rooling contact lubricant-coolant water should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel rolling contact
lubricant-coolant water, and vice versa. The other pollutants
present in each waste stream and the mass loading at which they
are present should be similar.
433
-------
Extrusion Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, the
extrusion process requires the use of a lubricant to prevent
adhesion of the metal to the die and ingot container walls.
No samples of extrusion spent lubricants were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
discharged titanium extrusion lubricants will have wastewater
characteristics similar to rolling spent emulsions in the nickel/
cobalt subcategory. These two waste streams are generated from
operations which use similar process chemicals for similar pur-
poses (lubrication). The only difference between the wastewater
characteristics of the two streams should be the metals present.
The mass loading (mg/kkg) of titanium in titanium extrusion spent
lubricants should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in
nickel rolling spent emulsions, and vice versa. Also, the mass
loading of chromium should be insignificant because titanium is
seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Forging Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, either a
water or oil medium can be sprayed onto forging dies for proper
lubrication.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge
values for forging spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
Forging Die Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
forging dies may require cooling to maintain the proper die tem-
perature between forgings.
No samples of forging contact cooling water were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to forg-
ing die contact cooling water in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by using water, without
additives, to cool forging dies. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of titanium in tita-
nium forging die contact cooling water should be similar to the
mass loading of nickel in nickel forging die contact cooling
water, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium should
be insignificant because titanium is seldom alloyed with chro-
mium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Forging Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, wet air pollution control devices are needed to control
air pollution from some operations. For instance, scrubbers may
be needed over forging operations where partial combustion of
oil-based lubricants may generate particulates and smoke.
434
-------
No samples of forging wet air pollution control blowdown were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to surface treatment wet air pollxition control
blowdown in this subcategory. These two waste streams are
generated by devices designed to control emission of airborne
pollutants. However, because airborne particulates are generated
at higher concentration from forging operations than surface
treatment operations, the mass loading of total suspended solids
is expected to be higher in forging wet air pollution control
blowdown than in surface treatment wet air pollution control
blowdown. The other pollutants present in each waste stream, and
the concentration at which they are present, are expected to be
similar.
Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section
III, heat treatment is used by plants in the nonferrous metals
forming category to give the metal the desired mechanical prop-
erties. After heat treatment, the metals must be cooled at a
controlled rate. Contact cooling water may be used for this
purpose.
No samples of heat treatment contact cooling water were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
annealing contact cooling water in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by using water, without
additives, to cool hot metal. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of titanium in tita-
nium heat treatment contact cooling water should be similar to
the mass loading of nickel in nickel annealing contact cooling
water, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium should
be insignificant because titanium is seldom alloyed with chro-
mium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
titanium products. The surface treatment baths must be period-
ically discharged after their properties are exhausted.
Two samples of surface treatment spent baths were collected from
two streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of titanium
(44,100 mg/1), aluminum (4,170 mg/1), iron (17,020 mg/1),
fluoride (86,000 mg/1), and TSS (1,920 mg/1) were detected in the
samples.
435
-------
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing follows the surface treatment process to prevent the solution
from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
Seven samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected from
three streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of titanium
(55.3 mg/1), iron (124 mg/1), fluoride (85.0 mg/1), and TSS (40
mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Surface Treatment Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As dis-
cussed in Section III, wet air pollution control devices must
accompany some operations in order to meet air quality standards.
One sample of surface treatment wet air pollution control blow-
down was collected. Elevated concentrations of titanium (2.750
mg/1), iron (1.800 mg/1), fluoride (33 mg/1), and TSS (40 mg/1)
were detected in the samples.
Alkaline^ Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III ,
alkalineT cleaning Is commonly used to clean formed metal parts.
Products can be cleaned with an alkaline solution either by
immersion or spray.
No samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
alkaline cleaning spent baths in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated from operations using simi-
lar process chemicals to clean formed metal products. The only
difference between the wastewater characteristics of the two
streams should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg)
of titanium in titanium alkaline cleaning spent baths should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel alkaline cleaning
spent baths, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium
should be insignificant because titanium is seldom alloyed with
chromium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the
mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing followsthe alkaline cleaning process to prevent the solution
from drying on the product.
No samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
alkaline cleaning rinsewater in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated from using water to remove
alkaline cleaning solutions from cleaned metal. The only differ-
ence between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams
436
-------
should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of tita-
nium in titanium alkaline cleaning rinsewater should be similar
to the mass loading of nickel in nickel alkaline cleaning rinse-
water, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium should
be insignificant because titanium is seldom alloyed with chro-
mium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Tumbling Wastewater. As described in Section III, tumbling is an
operation in which forgings are rotated in a barrel with ceramic
or metal slugs or abrasives to remove scale, fins, oxides, or
burrs. It may be done dry, with water, or an aqueous solution
containing cleaning compounds, rust inhibitors or other
additives.
One sample of tumbling wastewater was collected. Elevated
concentrations of titanium (156 mg/1), iron (111 mg/1), aluminum
(182 mg/1), boron (116 mg/1), fluoride (110 mg/1), ammonia (34
mg/1), cyanide (4.0 mg/1), oil and grease (17 mg/1), and TSS
(6,800 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operationsgenerally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
One sample of sawing/grinding spent lubricant was collected.
Elevated concentrations of titanium (6.00 mg/1), iron (17.5
mg/1), aluminum (33.0 mg/1), fluoride (110 mg/1), cyanide (3.8
mg/1), oil and grease (34 mg/1), and TSS (244 mg/1) were detected
in the sample.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
437
-------
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
Casting
Shot Blasting
Grit Blasting
Machining
Torching
Deoxidizing
Straightening
Trimming
Piercing
Shearing
Refractory Metals Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Neat Oils. As discussed in Section III, the roll-
ing of refractory metal products typically requires the use of
mineral oil lubricants. The oils are usually recycled with
in-line filtration and periodically disposed of by sale to an oil
reclaimer or by incineration. Because discharge of this stream
is not practiced, flow data were not available for analysis.
Only one plant surveyed reported using neat oil rolling lubri-
cants, but this plant did not report the quantity of lubricant
used.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the roll-
ing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used in rolling operations as coolants and
lubricants. Rolling emulsions are typically recycled using
in-line filtration treatment and batch discharged periodically
when the lubricating properties of the emulsions are exhausted.
No samples of rolling spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to nickel/
cobalt rolling spent emulsions. These two waste streams are
generated by identical physical processes which use similar
process chemicals. The only difference between the wastewater
characteristics of the two streams should be the metals present.
The mass loading (mg/kkg) of refractory metals rolling spent
emulsions should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in
nickel rolling spent emulsions, and vice versa. In addition, the
mass loading of chromium in refractory metals rolling spent emul-
sions should be insignificant because refractory metals are
seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
438
-------
Drawing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, a wide
variety of drawinglubricants are used in order to ensure uniform
drawing temperatures and avoid excessive wear on the dies and
mandrels. Drawing lubricants are usually recycled until no
longer effective.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the draw-
ing spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
Extrusion Press and Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling
Water.As discussed in Section III, heat treatment isfrequently
used after extrusion to attain the desired mechanical properties.
Heat treated products are primarily cooled by contact with water.
No samples of extrusion heat treatment contact cooling water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to nickel/cobalt press and solution heat treatment
contact cooling water. These two waste streams are generated by
using water, without additives, to cool hot metal. The only dif-
ference between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams
should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of
refractory metals in refractory metals extrusion press and solu-
tion heat treatment contact cooling water should be similar to
the mass loading of nickel in nickel extrusion press and solution
heat treatment contact cooling water, and vice versa. In addi-
tion, the mass loading of chromium in refractory metals extrusion
press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water should be
insignificant because refractory metals are seldom alloyed with
chromium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the
mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Extrusion Press Hydraulic Fluid Leakage. As discussed in Section
III, due to the large force applied by a hydraulic press,
hydraulic fluid leakage is unavoidable.
One sample of extrusion press hydraulic fluid leakage was col-
lected during the screen sampling program. Elevated concentra-
tions of copper (21 mg/1), molybdenum (20 mg/1), oil and grease
(44,000 mg/l), and total suspended solids (19,000 mg/1) were
detected in the sample.
Forging Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, proper
lubrication of the dies is essential in forging refractory
metals. Of the plants surveyed reporting the use of forging
lubricants, both reported total consumption due to evaporation
and drag-out.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the forg-
ing spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
439
-------
Forging Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III, heat treatment isfrequently used after
forging to attain the desired mechanical properties in the forged
metal. Contact cooling water may be used to cool the alloy at a
controlled rate after heat treatment.
No samples of forging solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to nickel/cobalt extrusion press and
solution heat treatment contact cooling water. These two waste
streams are generated by using water, without additives, to cool
hot metal. The only difference between the wastewater character-
istics of the two streams should be the metals present. The mass
loading (mg/kkg) of refractory metals in refractory metals
forging solution heat treatment contact cooling water should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel extrusion press
and solution heat treatment contact cooling water, and vice
versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium should be insignifi-
cant because refractory metals are seldom alloyed with chromium.
The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass loading
at which they are present, should be similar.
Extrusion and Forging Equipment Cleaning Wastewater. As dis-
cussed in Section III,extrusion and forging equipment should be
periodically cleaned in order to prevent the excessive build-up
of oil and grease on the dies.
No samples of extrusion and forging equipment cleaning wastewater
were collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to nickel forging die contact cooling water.
These two waste streams are generated from similar physical
processes (flushing a forging die with water) so the pollutants
present are expected to be similar. However, the water is used
for different purposes, in one case to cool a hot die, in the
other, to remove built-up contaminants. Therefore, the mass
loadings of oil and grease are expected to be higher in forging
equipment cleaning wastewater than in forging die contact cooling
water. In addition, the metals present in the two waste streams
are expected to differ. The only difference between the waste-
water characteristics of the two streams should be the metals
present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of refractory metals in
refractory metals extrusion and forging equipment cleaning waste-
water should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel
forging die contact cooling water, and vice versa. Also, the
mass loading of chromium should be insignificant because refrac-
tory metals are seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollu-
tants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they
are present, should be similar.
440
-------
Met:al Powder Production Wastewater. As discussed in Section III,
refractory metal powders are frequently produced by mechanical
reduction. The most common pieces of mechanical reduction equip-
ment are ball mills, vortex mills, hammer mills, disc mills, and
roll mills. Water or other liquids may be used to aid in the
milling operation or to facilitate handling after powder is
milled. One plant reported discharging wastewater from a ball
milling operation.
No samples of metal powder production milling wastewater were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to tumbling/burnishing wastewater in this subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated from operations
using water, often without added process chemicals, in contact
with finely divided metal. The pollutants present in each waste
stream and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar, except for total suspended solids. Metal powders are
more finely divided than tumbled parts. Powders are also present
in higher concentration than the metal fines produced during
tumbling. Therefore, the mass loading of total suspended solids
is expected to be higher in metal powder production milling
wastewater than in tumbling/burnishing wastewater.
Metal Powder Production Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As
discussed in Section III,particulates may become airborne during
the production of metal powders. Wet air pollution control
equipment may be necessary to capture these particles in order to
meet particulate air quality standards.
No samples of metal powder production wet air pollution control
blowdown were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to blowdown from air pollution control
scrubbers used to control particulates in the nickel/cobalt
subcategory. These two waste streams are generated by air
pollution devices used to remove particulate contaminants from
air. The only difference between the wastewater characteristics
of the two streams should be the metals present. The mass load-
ing (mg/kkg) of refractory metals in refractory metals powder
production wet air pollution control scrubber blowdown should be
similar to the nickel mass loading in nickel shot blaster scrub-
ber blowdown, and vice versa. In addition, the mass loading of
chromium should be insignificant because refractory metals are
seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants present in
each waste stream and the mass loading at which they are present
should be similar.
Metal Powder Pressing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section
III,lubricants may be needed in the fabrication step in which
441
-------
metal powders are compacted in a closed die to produce a final
shape. Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging
metal powder pressing spent lubricants, no samples were
collected.
Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section III,
casting may require the use of contact cooling water in order to
achieve the desired physical properties of the metal. Since the
one plant reporting the use of casting contact cooling water
reported complete evaporation, no samples were collected.
Post-Casting Billet Washwater. Refractory metals billets may be
washed after casting to remove an oxide layer on the billet
formed at the elevated casting temperatures. The one surveyed
plant reporting the use of post-casting washwater did not
recirculate the water.
No samples of post-casting washwater were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to beryllium
billet washing wastewater. These two waste streams are generated
by using water, without additives, to clean a cast billet. The
only difference between the wastewater characteristics of the two
streams should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg)
of refractory metals in refractory metals post-casting billet
washwater should be similar to the mass loading of beryllium in
beryllium billet washing wastewater, and vice versa. The other
pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which
they are present, should be similar.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section IH? a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
refractory metal products. The surface treatment baths must be
periodically discharged after their properties are exhausted.
One sample of surface treatment spent baths was collected. Ele-
vated concentrations of nickel (12.4 mg/1), copper (6.3 mg/1),
silver (6.1 mg/1), and TSS (140 mg/1) were detected in the sam-
ple.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing follows the surface treatment process to prevent the solu-
tion from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
Four samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected from
four streams at three plants. Elevated concentrations of alumi-
num (6.8 mg/1), fluoride (1,018 mg/1), and TSS (80 mg/1) were
detected in the samples.
442
-------
Surface Treatment Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As dis-
cussed in Section 111, wet air pollution control devices are
needed to accompany some operations in order to meet quality
standards.
One sample of surface treatment wet air pollution control blow-
down was collected. Elevated concentrations of fluoride (130
mg/1) and TSS (150 mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Surface Coating Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As discussed
in Section IIl7 wet air pollution control devices are needed to
control air pollution from some operations.
No samples of coating wet air pollution control blowdown were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to surface treatment wet air pollution control
blowdown in this subcategory. These two waste streams derive
from air pollution control operations used to collect and concen-
trate airborne contaminants. The contaminants generated by
surface coating are expected to be similar to the contaminants
generated by other surface treatments. Therefore, the pollutants
present in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they
are present, should be similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Spent solutions are discharged from alkaline clean-
ing processes.
No samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
alkaline cleaning spent baths in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by identical physical pro-
cesses which use similar process chemicals. The only difference
between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams should
be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of refractory
metals in refractory metals alkaline cleaning spent baths should
be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel alkaline
cleaning spent baths, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of
chromium should be insignificant because refractory metals are
seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should i e
similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, fol-
lowing alkaline treating, metal parts are rinsed. Rinses are
discharged from alkaline cleaning processes.
443
-------
No samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
alkaline cleaning rinsewater in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by using water to remove
alkaline cleaning solutions from cleaned metal. The only differ-
ence between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams
should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of
refractory metals in refractory metals alkaline cleaning rinse-
water should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel
alkaline cleaning rinsewater, and vice versa. Also, the mass
loading of chromium should be insignificant because refractory
metals are seldom alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants
in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they are
present, should be similar.
Molten Salt Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, molten
salt baths are used to descale refractory metal alloys. Formed
parts to be descaled are immersed in the bath for up to 15
minutes, removed, and water-quenched. Since none of the plants
surveyed reported discharging the molten salt spent baths, no
samples were collected.
Molten Salt Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, when molten
salt baths are used to descale refractory metal alloys, they are
generally followed by a water quench/rinse step.
Four samples of molten salt rinsewater were collected from two
streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of boron (7.0
mg/1), and TSS (285 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Tumbling/Burnishing Wastewater. As discussed in Section III,
tumbling is a controlled method of processing parts to remove
burrs, scale, flash, and oxides as well as to improve surface
finish. Burnishing is the process of finish sizing or smooth
finishing a workpiece (previously machined or ground) by dis-
placement, rather than removal, of minute surface irregularities.
Water is used to facilitate tumbling and burnishing.
Five samples of tumbling/burnishing wastewater were collected
from three streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of
nickel (35.9 mg/1), copper (4.16 mg/1), aluminum (13.1 mg/1), and
TSS (1,860 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Neat Oils. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations may use mineral-based oils or heavy
grease as the lubricant required to minimize friction and act as
a coolant. Normally, saw oils are not discharged as a wastewater
stream. Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging
the sawing spent neat oils, no samples were collected.
444
-------
Saving/Grinding Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant. Oil-in-water emul-
sions are frequently used to lubricate sawing and grinding
operations. The emulsions are usually recycled with in-line
filtration to remove swarf and batch discharged periodically as
their lubricating properties are exhausted.
No samples of sawing/grinding spent emulsions were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
nickel/cobalt sawing/grinding spent lubricants in this subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated by identical physi-
cal processes which use similar process chemicals. The only
difference between the wastewater characteristics of the two
streams should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg)
of refractory metals in refractory metals sawing/grinding spent
emulsions should be similar to the mass loading of nickel and
cobalt in nickel/cobalt sawing/grinding spent emulsions, and vice
versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium in this waste stream
should be insignificant because refractory metals are seldom
alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Sawing/Grinding Contact Lubricant-Coolant Water. As discussed in
Section III,a lubricant-coolant is frequently needed during
sawing/grinding. Water is one type of lubricant-coolant which
may be used.
Two samples of sawing/grinding contact lubricant-coolant water
were collected from two streams at two plants. Elevated concen-
trations of molybdenum (5,470 mg/1), iron (13.0 mg/1), and TSS
(310 mg/1) were detected in the samples.
Sawing/Grinding Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As discussed
in Section III, wet air pollution control devices are needed to
accompany some operations in order to meet quality standards.
No samples of sawing/grinding wet air pollution control blowdown
were collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to surface treatment wet air pollution control
blowdown in this subcategory. These two waste streams derive
from air pollution control operations used to collect and con-
centrate airborne contaminants. Since sawing/grinding operations
are expected to generate more airborne particulates than surface
treatment, the mass loading of total suspended solids is expected
to be higher in sawing/grinding wet air pollution control blow-
down than in surface treatment wet air pollution control blow-
down. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
445
-------
F o s t - Sawing/Grinding Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III,
the formed metals may be rinsed following sawing/grinding to
remove the lubricants and saw chips for reprocessing.
No samples of post-sawing/grinding rinsewater were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
sawing/grinding contact lubricant-coolant water in this subcate-
gory. Since the pollutants in each of these waste streams are
generated from sawing and grinding operations, the pollutants
present in each waste stream and the mass loading at which they
are present should be similar.
Product Testing Wastewater. As described in Section III, testing
operations are used to check nonferrous metals parts for surface
defects or subsurface imperfections. Testing operations are
sources of wastewater because the spent water bath or test media
must be^periodically discarded due to the transfer into the test-
ing media of oil and grease, solids, and suspended and dissolved
metals from each product tested.
One sample of product testing wastewater was collected during the
screen sampling program. Elevated concentrations of nickel U.6
mg/1), oil and grease (72 mg/1), and total suspended solids (22
mg/1) were detected in the sample.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which J3^_Not__Use Process Water_. The Agency proposes a
discharge alTowance o~F zero "Tor "operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
446
-------
wastewater, because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
Powder Metallurgy Operations (Pressing, Sintering)
Annealing
Soldering
Welding
Screening
Blending
Straightening
Blasting
Zirconium/Hafnium Forming Subcategory
Drawing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, a suita-
blelubricantis required to ensure uniform drawing temperatures
and avoid excessive wear on the dies and mandrels used. A wide
variety of lubricants can be used.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the draw-
ing spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
Extrusion Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, the
extrusion process requires the use of a lubricant to prevent
adhesion of the metal to the die and ingot container walls.
No samples of extrusion spent emulsions were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to nickel/
cobalt rolling spent emulsions. These two waste streams are
generated from operations which use similar process chemicals for
similar purposes (lubrication). The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium
in zirconium/hafnium extrusion spent emulsions should be similar
to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt rolling
spent emulsions, and vice versa. The other pollutants in each
waste stream, and the mass loading at'which they are present,
should be similar.
Extrusion Press Hydraulic Fluid Leakage. As discussed in Section
lYI", due to the large force applied by a hydraulic press,
hydraulic fluid leakage is unavoidable.
No samples of extrusion press hydraulic fluid leakage were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to nickel/cobalt forging, extrusion, and isostatic press
hydraulic fluid leakage. The pollutants present in these two
waste streams are attributable to the hydraulic fluid used, not
447
-------
the metal formed. Therefore, the pollutants present, and the
concentration (mg/1) at which they are present, should be
similar.
Extrusion Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in
Section III, heat treatment is frequently used after extrusion to
attain the desired mechanical properties in the extruded metal.
Contact cooling water may be sprayed onto the metal as it emerges
from the die or press, or be contained in a bath for direct
quenching.
No samples of extrusion heat treatment contact cooling water were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to nickel/cobalt extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water. These two waste streams are
generated by using water, without additives, to cool hot metal.
The only difference between the wastewater characteristics of the
two streams should be the metals present. The mass loading
(mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium in zirconium/hafnium extrusion
press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt
extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling
water, and vice versa. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Tube Reducing Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
tube reducing,much like rolling, may require a lubricating com-
pound in order to prevent excessive wear of the tube reducing
equipment, prevent adhesion of metal to the tube reducing equip-
ment, and maintain a suitable and uniform tube reducing tempera-
ture.
No samples of tube reducing spent lubricants were collected dur-
ing the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
nickel/cobalt tube reducing spent lubricants. These two waste
streams are generated by identical physical processes which use
similar process chemicals. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium
in zirconium/hafnium tube reducing spent lubricants should be
simlar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt tube
reducing spent lubricants, and vice versa. The other pollutants
in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they are
present, should be similar.
Forging Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III,forging diesmay require cooling such that
the proper die temperature is maintained between forg;ings.
448
-------
No samples of forging solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to nickel/cobalt extrusion press and
solution heat treatment contact cooling water. These two waste
streams are generated by using water, without additives, to cool
hot metal. The only difference between the wastewater character-
istics of the two streams should be the metals present. The mass
loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium in zirconium/hafnium
forging solution heat treatment contact cooling water should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt
extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling
water, and vice versa. The other pollutants in each waste
stream, and the mass loading at which they are present, should be
similar.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
zirconium/hafnium products including pickling and coating. The
surface treatment baths must be periodically discharged after
their properties are exhausted.
Two samples of forging surface treatment spent baths were col-
lected from two streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of
antimony (5.5 mg/1), cyanide (0.273 mg/1), chromium (18 mg/1),
fluoride (11,800 mg/1), and ammonia (392.5 mg/1) were detected in
the samples.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ingfollowsthe surface treatment process to prevent the solution
from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
No samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to sur-
face treatment spent baths in this subcategory. As a zirconium
or hafnium piece is removed from a surface treatment bath, it
carries a small volume of the bath with it. The rinsewater used
to remove the carried over bath solution from the formed metal
piece will contain the same pollutants as the bath, only in lower
concentration. Therefore, the pollutants present in zirconium/
hafnium surface treatment rinsewater are expected to be identical
to the pollutants present in zirconium/hafnium surface treatment
baths, except that the mass loadings of the pollutants are
expected to be lower.
Alkaline Cleaning Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III,
alkaline cleaners are formulations of alkaline salts, water, and
surfactants. Spent solutions are discharged from the alkaline
cleaning processes.
449
-------
No samples of alkaline cleaning spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
nickel/cobalt alkaline cleaning spent baths. These two waste
streams are generated by identical physical processes which use
similar process chemicals. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium
in zirconium/hafnium alkaline cleaning spent baths should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt
alkaline cleaning spent baths, and vice versa. The other pollu-
tants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they
are present, should be similar.
Alkaline Cleaning Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III,
following alkaline cleaning, metal parts are rinsed. Rinses are
discharged from alkaline cleaning processes.
No samples of alkaline cleaning rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that
this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
nickel/cobalt alkaline cleaning rinsewater. These two waste
streams are generated by identical physical processes which use
similar process chemicals. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium
in zirconium/hafnium alkaline cleaning rinsewater should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt
alkaline cleaning rinsewater, and vice versa. The other pollu-
tants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they
are present, should be similar.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant.
No samples of sawing/grinding spent lubricants were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
nickel/cobalt sawing/grinding spent lubricants. These two waste
streams are generated by identical physical processes which use
similar process chemicals. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium
in zirconium/hafnium sawing/grinding spent lubricants should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt
sawing/grinding spent lubricants, and vice versa. The other
pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which
they are present, should be similar.
450
-------
Sawing/Grinding Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As discussed
in Section 11J-7 wet air pollution control devices are needed to
control air pollution from some operations. Scrubbers are
frequently necessary over sawing/grinding operations where
particulates are a problem.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the
sawing/grinding wet air pollution control blowdown, no samples
were collected.
Degreasing Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, immersion-
vapor degreasing is used to clean metal parts coated with large
quantities of oil, grease, or hard-to-remove soil. Solvents used
are the same as those used in straight vapor degreasing. Solu-
tions of organic solvent in water are also used for degreasing.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the
degreasing spent baths, no samples were collected.
Degreasing Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, it is some-
times necessary to rinse degreased parts with water to meet cer-
tain product specifications.
No samples of degreasing rinsewater were collected during the
screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes that this
stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to nickel/
cobalt alkaline cleaning rinsewater. These two waste streams are
generated from rinsing formed parts which have been cleaned or
degreased. Each rinsewater will contain the same process chemi-
cals as the bath which it follows, plus contaminants introduced
into the bath by the cleaned or degreased metal piece. Degreas-
ing rinsewater may contain organic pollutants at low mass load-
ing; nickel/cobalt alkaline cleaning rinsewater will not. In
addition, the two waste streams will differ in metals present.
The mass loading (mg/kkg) of zirconium/hafnium in zirconium/haf-
nium degreasing rinesewater should be similar to the mass loading
of nickel/cobalt in nickel/cobalt alkaline cleaning rinsewater,
and vice versa. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and
the mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
Rolling
Casting
Annealing
Shot Blasting
451
-------
Grit Blasting
Bead Blasting
Polishing
Straightening
Cutting, Trimming
Debarring, Sanding
Magnesium Forming Subcategory
Rolling Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III, oil-in-
water emulsions are used in rolling operations as coolants and
lubricants. Rolling emulsions are typically recycled using
in-line filtration treatment.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge
values for rolling spent em Isions, no samples were collected.
Forging Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, either
water, oil,or granulated carbon can be applied to forging dies
for proper lubrication. Since none of the plants surveyed
reported wastewater discharge values for forging spent
lubricants, no samples were collected.
Forging Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Vater. As dis-
cussed in Section III, solution heat treatment is implemented
after forging to improve mechanical properties by maximizing the
concentration of hardening contaminants in solid solution. Solu-
tion heat treatment typically involves significant quantities of
contact cooling water.
No samples of forging solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water in the lead/tin/bismuth subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated by using water,
without additives, to cool hot metal. The only difference
between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams should
be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of magnesium in
magnesium forging solution heat treatment contact cooling water
should be similar to the mass loading of lead in lead/tin/bismuth
extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling
water, and vice versa. Also, there should be no significant mass
loading of antimony in magnesium forging solution heat treatment
contact cooling water because magnesium is not commonly alloyed
with antimony. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and
the mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Forging Wet Air Pollution Control Blowdown. As discussed in
Section III, wet air pollution control devices are needed to
452
-------
control air pollution from some operations. For instance, scrub-
bers may be necessary when particulates and smoke are generated
from the partial combustion of oil-based lubricants as they
contact the hot forging dies.
No samples of forging wet air pollution control blowdown were
collected during the screen sampling program. However, the
Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater character-
istics similar to wet air pollution control blowdown in the
nickel/cobalt forming subcategory. These two waste streams
derive from air pollution control devices used to collect and
concentrate airborne contaminants, both gaseous and particulate.
The only difference between the wastewater characteristics of the
two streams should be the metals present. The mass loading
(mg/kkg) of magnesium in magnesium forging wet air pollution
control blowdown should be similar to the mass loading of nickel
in nickel wet air pollution control blowdown, and vice versa.
The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass loading
at which they are present, should be similar.
Forging Equipment Cleaning Wastewater. As discussed in Section
III, forging equipment should be periodically cleaned in order to
prevent the excessive buildup of oil, grease, and caked-on solid
lubricants on the forging die.
No samples of forging equipment cleaning wastewater were col-
lected during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency
believes that this stream will have wastewater characteristics
similar to alkaline cleaning rinsewater in the lead/tin/bismuth
subcategory. These two waste streams are generated by cleaning
operations which use similar process chemicals. Since granulated
coal and graphite suspensions are frequently used to lubricate
magnesium forging operations, magnesium forging equipment clean-
ing wastewater may contain higher mass loadings of total sus-
pended solids. In addition, the metals present in the two waste
streams should differ. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of magnesium in
magnesium forging equipment cleaning wastewater should be similar
to the mass loading of lead in lead/tin/bismuth alkaline cleaning
rinsewater, and vice versa. Also, there should be no significant
concentration of antimony in magnesium forging equipment cleaning
wastewater because magnesium is not commonly alloyed with anti-
mony. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Direct Chill Casting Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Sec-
tion III, contact cooling water is a necessary part of direct
chill casting. The cooling water may be contaminated by lubri-
cants applied to the mold before and during the casting process.
The one plant reporting the use of direct chill casting contact
cooling water discharges no water, therefore no samples of this
waste stream were collected.
453
-------
Surface Treatment Spent Bathjg. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after the forming of
magnesium products. The surface treatment baths must be period-
ically discharged after their properties are exhausted,,
Three samples of surface treatment spent baths were collected
from three streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of mag-
nesium (9,150 mg/1), chromium (28,000 mg/1), zinc (89.0 mg/1),
aluminum (64 mg/1), ammonia (97 mg/1), oil and grease (47,000
mg/1), and TSS (160 mg/1) were detected in the samples.,
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing follows the surface treatment process to prevent the solution
from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the desired
amount.
Twelve samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected
from eight streams at one plant. Elevated concentrations of mag-
nesium (148 mg/1), zinc (2.1 mg/1), chromium (516 mg/1), ammonia
(81 mg/1), oil and grease (16 mg/1), and TSS (97 mg/1) were
detected in the samples.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operationsgenerally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant. Since none of the
plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge values for
sawing/grinding spent lubricants, no samples of this waste stream
were collected.
Sanding and Repairing Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As
discussed in Section III, wet air pollution control devices are
needed to control air pollution from some operations. For
instance, scrubbers are frequently necessary over sanding and
repairing operations where particulates are a problem.
No samples of sanding and repairing wet air pollution control
blowdown were collected during the screen sampling program.
However, the Agency believes that this stream will have waste-
water characteristics similar to shot blaster wet air pollution
control blowdown in the nickel/cobalt subcategory. These two
waste streams derive from air pollution control devices used to
collect and concentrate airborne particulates. The only differ-
ence between the wastewater characteristics of the two streams
should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of
magnesium in mangesium sanding and repairing wet air pollution
control blowdown should be similar to the mass loading of nickel
in nickel shot blaster wet air pollution control blowdown, and
vice versa. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the
mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
454
-------
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
Extrusion
Shot Blasting
Powder Atomization
Screening
Turning
Uranium Forming Subcategory
Extrusion Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, the
extrusion process requires the use of a lubricant to prevent
adhesion of the metal to the die and ingot container walls.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge
values for extrusion spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
Extrusion Tool Contact Cooling Water. As discussed in Section
III,following an extrusion,the dummy block drops from the press
and is cooled before being used again. Water is sometimes used
to quench the extrusion tools.
No samples of extrusion tool contact cooling water were collected
during the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
455
-------
forging die contact cooling water in the nickel/cobalt subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated by using water,
without added process chemicals, to cool metal forming equipment.
The only difference between the wastewater characteristics of the
two streams should be the metals present. The mass loading
(mg/kkg) of uranium in uranium extrusion tool contact cooling
water should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel/
cobalt forging die contact cooling water, and vice versa. Also,
there should be no significant mass loading of chromium in ura-
nium extrusion tool contact cooling water because uranium is not
commonly alloyed with chromium. The other pollutants in each
waste stream, and the mass loading at which they are present,
should be similar.
Extrusion Press and Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling
Water.As discussed in Section III, heat treatment is frequently
used after extrusion to attain the desired mechanical properties
in the extruded metal. Contact cooling of the extrusion can be
accomplished in one of three ways: with a water spray near the
die, by immersion in a water tank adjacent to the runout table,
or by passing the metal through a water mill.
No samples of extrusion solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, -the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by using water, without
additives, to cool hot metal. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of uranium in uranium
extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water
should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel extru-
sion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water, and
vice versa. Also, there should be no significant mass loading of
chromium in uranium extrusion press and solution heat treatment
contact cooling water because uranium is not commonly alloyed
with chromium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and
the mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Forging Spent Lubricants. As discussed in Section III, proper
lubrication of the dies is essential in forging nonferrous
metals. A colloidal graphite lubricant is commonly sprayed onto
the dies for this purpose.
Since none of the plants surveyed reported wastewater discharge
values for forging spent lubricants, no samples were collected.
Forging Solution Heat Treatment Contact Cooling Water. As dis-
cussed in Section III, forging dies may require cooling to main-
tain the proper die temperature between forgings.
456
-------
No samples of forging solution heat treatment contact cooling
water were collected during the screen sampling program. How-
ever, the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater
characteristics similar to extrusion press and solution heat
treatment contact cooling water in the nickel/cobalt subcategory.
These two waste streams are generated by using water, without
additives, to cool hot metal. The only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of uranium in uranium
extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water
should be similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel extru-
sion press and solution heat treatment contact cooling water, and
vice versa. Also, the mass loading of chromium in uranium
forging solution heat treatment contact cooling water should be
insignificant because uranium is not commonly alloyed with
chromium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the
mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Surface Treatment Spent Baths. As discussed in Section III, a
number of chemical treatments may be applied after forming ura-
nium products. The surface treatment baths must be periodically
discharged after their properties are exhausted.
No samples of surface treatment spent baths were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, one plant supplied a par-
tial analysis of its spent surface treatment baths on its dcp.
Elevated concentrations of uranium (266,162 mg/1), titanium
(3,353 mg/1), magnesium (246 mg/1), fluoride (231 mg/1), and
barium (1,272 mg/1) were reported.
Surface Treatment Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III, rins-
ing shouldfollow the surface treatment process to prevent the
solution from affecting the surface of the metal beyond the
desired amount.
No samples of surface treatment rinsewater were collected during
the screen sampling program. However, one plant supplied a par-
tial analysis of surface treatment rinsewater on its dcp. Ele-
vated concentrations of uranium (1,250 mg/1), titanium (18 mg/1),
and barium (41 mg/1) were reported.
Surface Treatment Wet Air Pollution Control Slowdown. As dis-
cussed in Section III, wet air pollution control devices are
needed to control air emissions from some operations in order to
meet air quality standards. Scrubbers are frequently needed to
control acid fumes from surface treatment operations.
No samples of surface treatment wet air pollution control blow-
down were collected during the screen sampling program. However,
457
-------
the Agency believes that this stream will have wastewater char-
acteristics similar to surface treatment wet air pollution con-
trol blowdown in the titanium forming subcategory. These two
waste streams derive from air pollution control devices used to
collect and concentrate acid fumes. The only difference between
the wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of uranium in uranium
surface treatment wet air pollution control blowdown should be
similar to the mass loading of titanium in titanium surface
treatment wet air pollution control scrubber blowdown, and vice
versa. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the mass
loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Sawing/Grinding Spent Emulsions. As discussed in Section III,
sawing/grinding operations generally require a lubricant in order
to minimize friction and act as a coolant. The emulsions are
typically recirculated, with in-line filtration to remove swarf,
and periodically batch discharged as the lubricating properties
are exhausted.
No samples of sawing/grinding spent emulsions were collected dur-
ing the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
sawing/grinding spent lubricants in the nickel/cobalt subcate-
gory. These two waste streams are generated by identical physi-
cal processes which use similar process chemicals. The only
difference between the wastewater characteristics of the two
streams should be the metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg)
of uranium in uranium sawing/grinding spent emulsions should be
similar to the mass loading of nickel in nickel sawing/grinding
spent emulsions, and vice versa. Also, the mass loading of
chromium in uranium sawing/grinding spent emulsions should be
insignificant because uranium is not commonly alloyed with
chromium. The other pollutants in each waste stream, and the
mass loading at which they are present, should be similar.
Post-Sawing/Grinding Rinsewater. As discussed in Section III,
following the sawing/grinding operations, the lubricant and par-
ticulates occasionally need to be rinsed off the formed metal.
No samples of post-sawing/grinding rinsewater were collected dur-
ing the screen sampling program. However, the Agency believes
that this stream will have wastewater characteristics similar to
sawing/grinding contact lubricant-coolant water in the refractory
metals subcategory. These waste streams are both derived from
sawing/grinding operations, so the only difference between the
wastewater characteristics of the two streams should be the
metals present. The mass loading (mg/kkg) of uranium in uranium
post-sawing/grinding rinsewater should be similar to the mass
loading of refractory metals in refractory metals sawing/grinding
458
-------
contact lubricant-coolant water, and vice versa. The other pol-
lutants in each waste stream, and the mass loading at which they
are present, should be similar.
Degreasing Spent Solvents. As described in Section III, solvent
cleaners are used to remove lubricants (oils and greases) applied
to the surface of nonferrous metals during mechanical forming
operations. Basic solvent cleaning methods include straight
vapor degreasing, immersion-vapor degreasing, spray-vapor
degreasing, ultrasonic vapor degreasing, emulsified solvent
degreasing, and cold cleaning.
Solvents most commonly used for all types of vapor degreasing are
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and various chlorofluorocarbons. Solvent
selection depends on the required process temperature (solvent
boiling point), product dimension, and metal characteristics.
Contaminated vapor degreasing solvents are frequently recovered
by distillation. The sludge residue generated is toxic and may
be flammable, requiring appropriate handling and disposal pro-
cedures .
Since none of the plants surveyed reported discharging the vapor
degreasing spent solvents, no samples were collected.
Operations Which Do Not Use Process Water. The Agency proposes a
discharge allowance of zero for operations which do not generate
process wastewater. The following operations generate no process
wastewater, because they use only noncontact cooling water or
because they use no water at all:
Stationary Casting
Direct Chill Casting
Salt Solution Heat Treatment
459
-------
Table V-l
NUMBER OF SAMPLES PER WASTE STREAM, BY SUBCATEGORY
Waste Stream / / / /
Rolling spent nea t oils
Rolling spent emulsions
Rol 1 ing contact 1 ubr icant-e oo lant water
Rol 1 ing spent soap sol ut ions
Rolling solution nedt treatment contat t cooling water
Drawing spent neat oils
Drawing spent emul s ions
Drawing spent lubricants
Drawing spent soap solutions
Extrusion spent emul sions
Extrusion spent lubricants
Extrusion press and solution heat treatment contact
cooling water
Extrusion and forging press hydraulic fluid leakage
Extrusion tool contact cooling water
Forging, swaging spent neat oils
Forging, swaging spent emu 1 s ions
Forging spent lubricants
Forging solution heat treatment contat t cooling water
Forging die contact cooling water
Forging wet air pol lution control blowdoun
Forging equipment L 1 ean ing wastewater
Press ing spent lubricants
Tube reducing spent lubricants
Metal powder produc t ion wet atomiza t ion wastewa ter
Metal powder production milling wastewate r
Metal powder production wet air pol lution control
blowdown
Metal powder produc t ion wabtewater
Continuous strip casting contact cooling water
Semi-continuous ingot casting contact cool ing water
Direct chill casting contact cooling water
Shot casting contact cooling water
Casting contact cooling water
1
A
A
A
A
1
A
*
1
2
i
*
12
1
*
A
*
*
I
4
A
1
A
1
1
A
A
A
A
A
/ "
1
A
A
1
A
A
A
A
A
2
/ */ / / / / /
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
1
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
0
14
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
5
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
t
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
5
0
460
-------
Table V-l (Continued)
NUMBER OF SAMPLES PER WASTE STREAM, BY SUBGATEGORY
Wa^te SL red m
Pobt-casting bilteL wa.-.hwater
Stationary and diret t chill i,a.-.i ing contac t t ool ing
water
Semi- c on t inuous and eont inuous cast ing con L act
cool ing water
Casting vacuum melting steam eondensate
Cast ing we t air pollut ion control b lowdown
Post-casting washwater
So In t ion heat treatment cont'/
3
1 9
1 £•
•fc
A
X
A
A
A
A
*
/
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
14
53
1
2
0
4
9
8
0
11
20
1
2
14
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
1
461
-------
Table V-l (Continued)
NUMBER OF SAMPLES PER WASTE STREAM, BY SUBCATEGORY
WdbLe Stream
Sizing »penL lubricants
Steam treatment wet air pollution cont rol blowdown
Oil-resin impregnation wastewater
Miscellaneous nondescript wastewater
Wet air pollution control blowdown
/
*
*
3
/
/
/
/ *
-A
3
*
/
/
/
0
3
0
0
0
3
*This waste stream was reported in dcp responses for plants in this subcategory, but no raw wastewater samples
were analyzed.
**Number of samples of this waste stream analyzed.
462
-------
CM
1
>
CD
t— i
r\
(J— i
Cfl
H
CO
W
M
Pd
O
H
s
0
PQ
"
J
<
tJ
rJ
PH
^
13
CD
N
>,
r-l
CO
C
<;
CO
t->
C
cO
4J
3
i— i
r-l
O
PH
t-t
cfl
C
O
-_J
•n
4-1
C
CD
>
C
O
o
c
o
&
r-l
cfl
c
0
•r-l
4J
0)
>
d
o
CJ
CO
I—I
Cfl
4-1
CD
JS
CO
o
_J
r^
c
cfl
60
K
O
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
o
2
H
**
cfl
0
O
cfl
r-i
r-l
3
H
* A
•
O
C
I— 1
«s
§
X
o
c
^
X
H
M
C
•r-l
4J
CO
3
<
• A
&
O
o
c
cfl
•r-l
T3
cfl
Pd
<
CJ
f\
o
60
CO
•H
Q
C
cfl
CO
• M
T3
CD
X5
3
CJ
CO
Inc. ; Springf iel
M
V-i
cfl
CO
h
CD <
> >
ast Technical
o
u
4J
Cfl
CD
13
M
CO
o
4-1
•H
H
M
CD
CJ
• *s
•
O
C
H
A
CD
O
•H
t
0)
CO
PH
xT
60
V4
3
x»
co
4J
4-)
•i-l
IX
• *•»
•
cx
v<
o
CJ
CO
E3
Z
463
-------
Table V-3
NONTOXIC POLLUTANTS
Conventional
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
PH
Nonconventional
acidity
alkalinity
aluminum
ammonia nitrogen
barium
boron
calcium
chemical oxygen demand (COD)
chloride
cobalt
fliaoride
iron
magnesium
manganese
molybdenum
phenolics
phosphate
sodium
sulfate
tin
titanium
total dissolved solids (TDS)
total organic carbon (TOG)
total solids (TS)
vanadium
yttrium
464
-------
H U
CM
co
1—I
•
o
o
o
I
o
in
oo
IN
I
vO
•
in
CO
oo
oo
o
m
oo
•
oo
iH
IPI
CO CO
O O
o o
*
*
o
ON
CM
•
o
o
oo
o
en
O
oo
•
CM
O
CO
o
o
o
CM
ON
O
vO
00
o
CM
•
00
CM
oo
O
CM
•
ON
I
CM
oo
•
00
CO
•
00
o
•
o
.-i
I
i-H
CM
•
ON
cu
rH
,0
cfl
H
H CO
H^
r-3 S
i-4 W
2g
Q «
W H
H p
J CO
P H
O M
r_T "*>,^
s »
H
fH H
O ~»
W <
O W
3
P5
•a —
CU 60
rH T3 0
Cfl (3 ^
4-1 CU
O ft CO
H co -a
3 iH
cyi H
o
CO
O
00
•*
^-s
rH
T3 60
C 0
Cfl v-x
rH CU
•H CO
O Cfl
CU
M
o
O
r~-
CM
CO
00
V
t
rH
V
o
CM
o
IN
CM
CM
ON
O
\O
CM
r-l
V
O
O
CO
r-l
I
O
H
H
W
u
O
cj
Stream
cu
4-1
CO
Cfl
rs
mulsions*
cu
4-J
fi
cu
ft
CO
$
•H
rH
rH
O
tA
and solution
CO
CO
CU
M
ft
C
o
•H
CO
3
M
4J
X
U
t contact cooling
C
cu
0
4-1
Cfl
CU
H
4-1
4-1
Cfl
CU
,e
«
(-1
(U
4-1
Cfl
*
p casting contact
*
•H
M
4-1
CO
CO
3
O
f!
•H
4-J
C
O
o
H
cu
4-1
cfl
is
60
C
•H
!-H
O
O
CJ
60
a
•H
4-1
CO
Cfl
O
4-1
0
2
•H
CO
3
O
3
C
•H
4-1
C3
0
CJ
1
•H
e
cu
CO
(-1
CU
4-1
Cfl
»
0°
•H
rH
O
o
o
4-1
CJ
cfl
4J
C
o
CJ
£
•H
rH
0
O
CJ
4-J
S
4-1
C
o
0
60
a
•H
4-1
CO
cd
o
4-1
O
JZ
CO
M
cu
4-1
cd
>
*
CO
43
4J
5
4-1
cu
ft
CO
%
•H
Cfl
CU
rH
CJ
CU
C
•H
rH
Cfl
M
rH
.
i-H
cfl
(3
cd
O
d
o
P-t
*
•x
465
-------
•s.
*
I
f)
d
O <-*
""! *•*
d
o o
Ov
vO O
• •
•*
d
9
?
8
5 8
58
CO
o
in
oo
vO
Q
S
m
Jn
sO
g
1
•d
to
co
§
W
a
1
3 3
a a
*J M O
§^ «
t, * § 3
§ & $ I
•d a a ^
1^81
-^ 35 o e3
t"8 w cT
B H o
y -H
a* M
•n A
*Q O
rt
SP
"H
*£
^s
•&I
-
a
I
466
-------
•s
f- 00
o o
CM
I
9
OO
CM
d
CM
2
d
•
•
-------
N 0
es
•H rH
C -^
o
O
•
o
co
w
H
CO
e-
O
O
CM
O
•
O
V
o
vO
tJ
P-i
CO
in
in
cs
•
m
O u
fa
o
H
a
I
H
1
2
O
O
N
J
^1
TO
4-1
0
H
•O
01
c
0)
p.
CO
3
co
T3
TO
r-H
O
•^
00
^^
CO
T)
•H
H
O
CO
^N
rH
00
^
flJ
TO
01
M
O
O
en
tsl
*
TO
0>
CO
ti
0
TO
01
4J
CO
01
4J
CO
TO
^
•H
Ul
c1
•1-^
C
TO
0)
rH
O
01
C
•H
•-<
4
0
4-1
TO
0)
p
1 1
0)
u
TO
l-i
CO
fl
TO
r-l
•rt
TO
TO
01
3
TO
CO
0)
C
O
(3
O
•K
468
-------
cd
H
cd
4J
O
H
ded
s Beryllium Copper Cyanide Fluoride
) PH (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
C X) r-l
CU -H "^
^! r^ 00
co o 3
3 W v-^
C/5
•c
C 0) <-x
tS CO i-H
cd ^-
i-H CU 60
•H n e
O O >-<•
oo
vO
1
CM
•
i-l
O
1-1
•
o
1
I-l
o
t
o
V
0
•
o
CM
00
oo
•
m
CO
•
oo
I
vO
•
oo
o
I-l
1
m
m
*
i-i
\/
I-l
cu
4-1
cu
Cd
0)
M
4-1
CO
cu
4J
CO
cd
^f
4-1
CO
cd
3
60
a
•H
43
CO
cd
5
4J
cu
rH
•H
09
•
t-i
i— i
•
i-i
•
r-t
1^
i-l
ON
CO
ON
r-l
o
O
0
«k
1— 1
CM
4-1
e
£
CO
60
•H
XI
d
•H
lJ
60
••»•»..
60
(3
•H
C?
CO
*
CO
4-1
C
cd
o
•H
p
,0
I-l
CM
•
O
CM
O
•
O
V
vO
cn
•
0
0
•
o
oo
m
in
•-I
•-I
\s
A>
4-1
CO
cd
9
9
•H
4-1
CO
cd
01
M
4J
*
cu co
0 43
Cd 4-1
<4-l Cd
ij -0
co
CM
I— 1
1
oo
•
o
o
o
CM
o
I-l
•
vO
1
I-l
oo
•
o
m
I
r-l
VO
CO
•
m
I
i-i
o
•
CM
00
r-l
|
r-l
\/
^-
1
r-l
V
i,
CO
C
•H
VJ
4-1
C
i
4J
cd
cu
b
4-1
0)
o
cd
14-1
3
w
^j
4-1
cd
3
>
tu
cd
01
cu
C
o
o
*
469
-------
K
o
8
CM
8
I I
9*
.
I I
S S
• •
9 °
I
9
o
g
o
S
e
SCO
CM
g g
9
I I
9
9
g
9
CM
O
s
•
o
CM
m
a
in
I
°P
s
•
CM
o
9
8
9
CM
R
00
o
•
9
8
00
o
m
§
f
VJ
2
»ts
•HO) QJ
•g 4J 4-1
(DC &p
3 s 3
8 8 i
8
f
CO
°P
jus S
B.S -a
tf I ti
1^1
o w
Sr^
^ °
15 £?
CO
a
«
i*
a5
V $ |^
a*c ^* 3
3 *H S
CD 3 QJ
q n 8
c2 o to
4^
S
1
ti
ff
ll
§
ff
S
470
-------
s
vO
pg
O
o
Q
q
o
u-i
i S
00
1*
s
8
I
I
I
I
1
q
9
471
-------
LT> O
r-* O
CN vD \O
S S
o
1— 1
1
>
(U
T— |
£*
«
H
w ||
S PL, '***'
Iii 6 ''' 3 3
_; a
^ s.
H
S
20 _ -5
MO Ifi -^
w 3$
co H ^
H <
t~— f •*
*. 3 g g
R . O Q CJ
O "^ V CN
d *
f^ U
< FQ
g S * -1 * * *
*3 V) -H iH ^J * *
j i^JR-5-5^^
^ g II 9 ^ ^ - -
& M
Q S
W O
HP. W
i-3 a ^ „
s s
• ^. ^i 0 0
\£) CN oo c*> in
r*1 o O O O
in 06 s is
r^ _j
30
Or"j
r~i
W Z ^-,
M ^ ^
H 2 ~s
fa M -a Ha.
OH g g. „
w H^a
i 5
25 -o ~a
o 1 J
M rt U
5| S |
g S
^
O « Q -^ Q
^p <*i "3" -3" O
T 1 EN oo
c* S «"
V m ^£>
$11
-S -S -S S i
^ ^ z- * -1
z
w *
y § % 4
3 6 y
Cfi 0)
4J W 4-1 3 4J m
s s i § s a
b b a . * s
60 00 O
OJ OJ OJ C ff
y y y n n >•
TO CO CO ^ ^H rH
i i i i i i
en w oo C5 H
•3
I
472
-------
/~N
iH
N«/
§
O
CM
•
m
£
q
9
8
o
9
o
q
q
9
5
•
o
9
0
£
*^
•s
1
9
o
in
o
•8
PH
CM
CD
S
vo
O
CM
s
CM
I
O
o
•
9
9
S
S
8
o
*
o
00
9
CM
CM
tl
S
CM
o
VD
I-.
m
00
in
•3
tS S-^
d S
£
oo
8
CM
ro
en
?
CM
P!
|
"g J3
w
I
t-l
01
1
I
_ .
41
473
-------
-8
I
o
Q
a
H
^ a -8
4-1 a! T-r
o & H
H 9 £
w
-------
g K
Pn
cfl
£
ts
i—l l-»
1 .
o o
8
a
8
d
00
O
#
•a
S
H
R S
• *
O c^l
<* O
S
i I
475
-------
B •-->
3 rH
'£ ~60|
co e
CM
•ft
1—I
I
01
rH
.0
n)
H
*
en
H
C/3
W
H
to
O
3
S
•H /~>
co H
0) -~~.
C M
60 S
f>
a;
O
o
W
o
Oj
Q O
W S3
!2 a
^3 S
e> o
O Cn
O
W
O
O
I—I
H
H
13
W
O
O
I
S
3
H
CO 6q
n r
CN
oo
en
CO
*
vO
vO
CN
•X
*
Ji
C
cu
(X
CO
fi
g
4-1
CO
0)
(-1
cu
o
CO
3
to
o
m
CN
1-1
0)
4-1
§
cu
CO
c
13
cu
co
cu
a)
o
co
<4-1
M
3
0)
co
cr
o
y
o
o
CJ
01
60
cfl
V-i
0)
*
*
476
-------
Table V-15
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF SAMPLED
LEAD AND NICKEL EXTRUSION PRESS AND SOLUTION HEAT TREATMENT
CONTACT COOLING WATER
Parameter
Oil and grease
TSS
PH
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Acidity
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Ammonia
Fluoride
Iron
Magnesium
Sulfate
Titanium
Total dissolved solids
Lead
(mg/1)
3
5
7.6
—**
0.001
0.005
0.024
0.13
0.007
0.08
170
0.08
0.22
0.023
0.084
Nickel
(mg/D
7
3
7.4
0.05
0.14
0.07
55
0.13
0.83
Treatment
Effectiveness
LS&F Technology
(mg/1)*
10
2.6
0.47
0.34
0.20
0.049
0.07
0.39
0.08
0.22
0.07
0.23
0.047
1.49
32.2
9.67
0.28
*From Table VI1-9.
**—Not detected or not detected above concentration detected in source water.
477
-------
Table V-16
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF SAMPLED
LEAD, NICKEL, AND PRECIOUS METALS ROLLING SPENT EMULSIONS
Parameter
Oil and grease
TSS
pH
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Acidity
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Ammonia
Fluoride
Iron
Magnesium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Chemical oxygen demand
Total organic carbon
Lead
(mg/1)
270
480
7.92
—**
0.25
29.0
0.003
1.4
310
0.35
0.15
0.82
7.3
59
1,020
15,000
1,700
Nickel
(mg/D
1,095
191
6.77
0.006
0.02
1.27
1.17
1.06
8.95
0.002
1.95
0.83
2.70
20.86
2,040
17,584
1.203
Precious
Metals
(mg/D
1,500
500
8.7
0.2
25.0
1.00
1.00
0.13
6.00
20
2,100
0.4
0.29
26.5
8,500
32,000
900
43
Treatment
Effective-
ness LS&F
Technology
(mg/D*
10
2.6
0.47
0.34
0.20
0.049
0.07
0.39
0.08
0.22
0.07
0.23
0.047
1.49
32.2
9.67
0.28
*From Table VII-9.
**—Not detected or not detected above concentration detected in source water.
478
-------
Section VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
The Agency has studied nonferrous metals forming wastewaters to
determine the presence or absence of toxic, conventional, and
selected nonconventional pollutants. The toxic and nonconven-
tional pollutants are subject to BPT and BAT effluent limita-
tions, as well as NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. The conventional
pollutants are subject to BPT and BCT effluent limitations, as
well as NSPS.
One hundred and twenty-nine toxic pollutants (known as the 129
priority pollutants) were studied pursuant to the requirements of
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (CWA). These pollutant parameters,
which are listed in Table VI-1, are members of the 65 pollutants
and classes of toxic pollutants referred to as Table 1 in Section
307(a)(1) of the CWA.
From the original list of 129 pollutants, three pollutants have
been deleted in two separate amendments to 40 CFR Subchapter N,
Part 401. Dichlorodifluoromethane and trichlorofluoromethane
were deleted first (46 FR 2266, January 8, 1981) followed by the
deletion of bis-(chloromethyl) ether (46 FR 10723, February 4,
1981).
Past studies by EPA and others have identified many nontoxic,
nonconventional pollutant parameters useful in characterizing
industrial wastewaters and in evaluating treatment process
removal efficiencies. Certain of these and other parameters may
also be selected as reliable indicators of the presence of
specific toxic pollutants. For these reasons, a number of non-
toxic pollutants were also studied for the nonferrous metals
forming category.
The conventional pollutants considered (total suspended solids,
oil and grease, and pH) traditionally have been studied to char-
acterize industrial wastewaters. These parameters are especially
useful in evaluating the effectiveness of wastewater treatment
processes.
Several nonconventional pollutants were considered. As discussed
in Section V, raw wastewater samples were analyzed for the fol-
lowing: acidity, alkalinity, aluminum, ammonia nitrogen, barium,
boron, calcium, chemical oxygen demand (COD), chloride, cobalt,
fluoride, iron, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, total phenols,
phosphate, sodium, sulfate, tin, titanium, total dissolved solids
(TDS), total organic carbon (TOC), total solids (TS), vanadium,
479
-------
and yttrium. Several other nonconventional pollutants were also
considered for limitation in particular subcategories where they
would be expected to be found at significant concentrations,
although no raw waste data were available for them prior to
proposal. These pollutants include columbium, hafnium, radium,
tantalum, tungsten, uranium, and zirconium.
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Exclusion of Toxic Pollutants
The Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources Defense Council,
Inc. vs. Train, 8 ERG 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified 12 ERG 1833
(D.D.C. 1979), modified by orders of October 26, 1982, August 2,
1983, and January 6,T98A, which preceded the Clean Water Act,
contains provisions authorizing the exclusion from regulation in
certain instances of particular pollutants, categories, and
subcategories.
Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Settlement Agreement allows the Admin-
istrator to exclude from regulation toxic pollutants not detecta-
ble by Section 304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-
art methods. Pollutants that were never detected, or that were
never found above their analytical quantification level, are pro-
posed for exclusion. The analytical quantification level for a
pollutant is the minimum concentration at which that pollutant
can be reliably measured. For the toxic pollutants in this
study, the analytical quantification levels are: 0.005 mg/1 for
pesticides, PCB's, and beryllium; 0.010 mg/1 for antimony,
arsenic, selenium, silver, thallium, and the remaining organic
toxic pollutants; 0.020 mg/1 for cadmium, chromium, cyanide, and
zinc; 0.050 mg/1 for copper, lead, and nickel; and 0.0002 mg/1
for mercury.
Since there was no reason to expect TCDD (2 ,3 ,7,8-tetrachlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin) in nonferrous metals forming process water, EPA
decided that maintenance of a TCDD standard in analytical labora-
tories was too hazardous. Consequently, TCDD. was analyzed by
GC/MS screening, and compared to EPA's GC/MS computer file.
Samples collected by the Agency's contractor were not analyzed
for asbestos. Asbestos is not expected to be a part of nonfer-
rous metals forming wastewater since the category only includes
metals that have already been refined from any ores that might
contain asbestos. In addition, asbestos is not known to be
present in any process chemicals used in any forming operations.
Paragraph 8(a)(iii) also allows the Administrator to exclude from
regulation toxic pollutants detected in amounts too small to be
effectively reduced by technologies known to the Administrator.
Pollutants which were detected below levels considered to be
480
-------
achievable by specific available treatment methods are proposed
for exclusion. For the toxic metals, the chemical precipitation,
sedimentation, and filtration technology treatment effectiveness
values, which are presented in Section VII were used. For the
toxic organic pollutants detected above their analytical quanti-
fication level, treatment effectiveness values for activated
carbon technology were used. These treatment effectiveness
values represent the most stringent treatment options considered
for pollutant removal. This allows for the most conservative
exclusion for pollutants detected below treatable levels.
In addition to the provisions outlined above, Paragraph 8(a)(iii)
of the Settlement Agreement (1) allows the Administrator to
exclude from regulation toxic pollutants detectable in the
effluent from only a small number of sources within the subcate-
gory because they are uniquely related to those sources, and
(2) allows the Administrator to exclude from regulation toxic
pollutants which will be effectively controlled by the technolo-
gies upon which are based other effluent limitations and guide-
lines, or by pretreatment standards. Such compounds are proposed
for exclusion.
The toxic pollutants proposed for regulation are those found at
the highest concentration in untreated wastewater in each sub-
category. The lime and settle and lime, settle, filter technol-
ogies were selected as the bases for BPT and BAT because they
control these pollutants. Because the lime and settle and lime,
settle, filter technologies will also control toxic pollutants
found at lower concentrations, those pollutants are not specifi-
cally regulated. The description of the pollutant selection for
each subcategory, below, lists the toxic metals found at highest
cocentrations and which are, thus, regulated. The toxic metals
found at lower concentrations are also listed. These toxic
metals were not regulated because adequate control of the regu-
lated pollutants will also control the toxic metals found in
lower concentrations.
Waste streams in the nonferrous metals forming category have been
grouped together by the subcategorization scheme described in
Section IV. The pollutant exclusion procedure was applied for
each of the following subcategories:
(1) Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming
(2) Nickel/Cobalt Forming
(3) Zinc Forming
(4) Beryllium Forming
(5) Precious Metals Forming
481
-------
(6) Iron and Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal Powder Production
and Powder Metallurgy
(7) Titanium Forming
(8) Refractory Metals Forming
(9) Zirconium/Hafnium Forming
(10) Magnesium Forming
Toxic pollutants remaining after the application of the above
exclusion process were selected for specific regulation.
Paragraph 8 criteria were not used in the selection of pollutant
parameters in the uranium forming subcategory. No analyses were
made of wastewater generated by operations in this subcategory
prior to proposal of these guidelines and standards.
Regulation of Nonconventional Pollutants
In each subcategory, the metal present at highest concentration
is the metal being subjected to the forming operations. In
several subcategories the metal present in the greatest amount is
a toxic metal (nickel in the nickel forming subcategory, for
example). In other subcategories the metal present in the
greatest amount is a nonconventional pollutant (titanium in the
titanium forming subcategory, for example). In these cases, the
nonconventional metal was selected for regulation to ensure that
all the toxic metals are adequately removed from the wastewater
by the treatment system. Regulation of only two or three toxic
metals in these subcategories would not ensure adequate control
of all toxic metals because the toxic metals are present at
relatively low concentrations. The Agency believes that control
of the nonconventional metals formed in the magnesium, refractory
metals, titanium, uranium, and zirconium/hafnium forming subcate-
gories is necessary to ensure adequate removal of all toxic
metals, both toxic and nonconventional.
Radium has been selected for regulation in the uranium forming
subcategory, in addition to toxic metals and uranium, because
radium is a contaminant of uranium and would be expected to be
present in uranium forming process wastewater.
In addition, the nonconventional pollutants ammonia and fluoride
were selected for regulation in subcategories where these pollu-
tants are found at treatable levels.
482
-------
DESCRIPTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
A description of the pollutant parameters detected above their
analytical quantification level in any sample of nonferrous
metals forming wastewater is included in the administrative
record which accompanies this rulemaking package. The descrip-
tion of each pollutant provides the following information: the
source of the pollutant; whether it is a naturally occurring
element, processed metal, or manufactured compound; general
physical properties and the form of the pollutant; toxic effects
of the pollutant in humans and other animals; and behavior of the
pollutant in a POTW at concentrations that might be expected from
industrial discharges.
POLLUTANT SELECTION BY SUBCATEGORY
Section V of this development document presented a summary of
data collected during nonferrous metals forming plant sampling
visits and subsequent chemical analyses. This section examines
that data and discusses the selection or exclusion of pollutants
for limitation.
Pollutant Selection for Lead/Tin/Bismuth Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study analyzed samples from the lead/tin/bismuth forming
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional pollutants and pollutant
parameters selected for limitation in this subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
PH
No nonconventional pollutants or pollutant parameters are
selected for limitation in this subcategory. Although these
pollutants are not selected in establishing nationwide limita-
tions, it may be appropriate, on a case-by-case basis, for the
local permitter to specify effluent limitations for bismuth and
tin.
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-2. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-2 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
483
-------
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(ill) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
1. acenaphthene 49.
2. acrolein 50.
3. acrylonitrile 51.
5. benzidene 52.
7. chlorobenzene 53.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 54.
9. hexachlorobenzene 55.
10. 1,2-dichloroethane 56.
12. hexachlorethane 57.
13. 1,1-dichloroethane 58.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 59.
16. chloroethane 60.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 61.
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 62.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 63.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 64.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 67.
24. 2-chlorophenol 68.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 69.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 70.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 71.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 72.
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene 73.
30. 1,2-trans-dlchloroethylene 74.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 75.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 76.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene 77.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 78.
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 79.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 80.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 82.
39. fluoranthene 83.
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether 84.
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether 85.
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 86.
43. bis(2-choroethoxy) methane 87.
44. methylene chloride 88.
45. methyl chloride 89.
46. methyl bromide 90.
47. bromoform 91.
48. dichlorobromomethane 92.
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
M-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo(a)anthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
chrysene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
benzo(ghi)perylene
fluorene
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
ideno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
vinyl chloride
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane
4,4'-DDT
484
-------
93. 4,4'-DDE
94. 4,4'-ODD
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
102. alpha-BHC
103. beta-BHC
104. gamma-BHC
105. delta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108. PCB-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
116. asbestos
129. 2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level .The provision of Paragraph 8(a)~(iii) of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
4. benzene
6. carbon tetrachloride
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
125. selenium
126. silver
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
22. parachlorometa cresol
23. chloroform
38. ethylbenzene
115. arsenic
117. beryllium
118. cadmium
123. mercury
124. nickel
485
-------
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii) allows for the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
65. phenol
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
81. phenanthrene
119. chromium
120. copper
121. cyanide
Although these pollutants are not selected in establishing
nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a case-by-case
basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon. As
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutant
is not selected for limitation on this basis:
128. zinc
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
114. antimony
122. lead
Pollutant Selection for Nickel/Cobalt Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the nickel/cobalt forming sub-
category for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
486
-------
Conventional and Nonconventipnal Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation^The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this subcate-
gory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
PH
fluoride
Although no other nonconventional pollutants are selected in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations for cobalt and iron.
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-3. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-3 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
2. acrolein 26.
3. acrylonitrile 27.
6. carbon tetrachloride 30.
7. chlorobenzene 31.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 32.
9. hexachlorobenzene 33.
10. 1,2-dichloroethane 35.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 38.
15. 1,1,2 ,2-tetrachloroethane 40.
16. chloroethane 41.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 42.
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 45.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 46.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 47.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 48.
24. 2-chlorophenol 49.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 50.
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
1,2 -trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1,2-dichloropropane
1,2-dichloropropylene
2,4-dinitrotoluene
ethylbenzene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
methyl chloride
methyl bromide
bromoform
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
487
-------
51. chlorodibromomethane 98.
52. hexachlorobutadiene 99.
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene 100.
54. isophorone 101.
56. nitrobenzene 102.
59. 2,4-dinltrophenol 103.
74. benzo(b)fluoranthene 104.
79. benzo(ghi)perylene 105.
82. dibenzo (a,h)anthracene 106.
85. tetrachloroethylene 107.
87. trichloroethylene 108.
88. vinyl chloride 109.
89. aldrin 110.
90. dieldrin 111.
91. chlordane 112.
92. 4,4'-DDT 113.
93. 4,4'-DDE 116.
94. 4,4'-DDD 129.
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1242
PCB-1254
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
toxaphene
asbestos
2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic pollu-
tants which are not detectable includes those pollutants whose
concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit. The
toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their ana-
lytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for limi-
tation:
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
43. bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
72. benzo(a)anthracene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
83. indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
488
-------
4. benzene
12. hexachloroethane
23. chloroform
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
86. toluene
123. mercury
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii)allows for the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
1. acenaphthene 64.
5. benzidene 65.
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane 66.
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
22. parachlorometa cresol 67.
28. 3,3'-dichloroenzidine 68.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 73.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 80.
39. fluoranthene 81.
44. methylene chloride 84.
55. -naphthalene 114.
57. 2-nitrophenol 115.
58. 4-nitrophenol 117.
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol 121.
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine 125.
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine 126.
127.
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
benzo(a)pyrene
fluorene
phenanthrene
pyrene
ant imony
arsenic
beryllium
cyanide
selenium
silver
thallium
Although these pollutants are not selected in establishing
nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a case-by-case
basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines are Based Upon. As
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which other effluent limitations and guide-
lines, or pretreatment standards are based. The following
pollutants are not selected for limitation on this basis:
118. cadmium
120. copper
122. lead
128. zinc
489
-------
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
119. chromium
124. nickel
Pollutant Selection for Zinc Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the zinc forming subcategory
for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation"] The conventional pollutants and pollutant
parameters selected for limitation in this subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
No nonconventional pollutants or pollutant parameters are
selected for limitation in this subcategory.
Toxic Pollutants
Raw wastewater samples collected during the sampling program were
analyzed for the acid extractable, base neutral, and volatile
toxic organic pollutants. However, the results of the analysis
for these pollutants were not received prior to proposal. There
is no reason to expect that the presence of organic toxic pollu-
tants in the zinc forming subcategory would be different: than the
presence of organic toxic pollutants in the eight subcategories
for which analytical results have been received. In those eight
subcategories, only insignificant amounts of toxic organic pollu-
tants were found. Therefore, EPA is not selecting organic toxic
pollutants for limitation in the zinc forming subcategory. How-
ever, if the analytical results, when received, show significant,
treatable concentrations of organic toxic pollutants, the Agency
would modify this proposal.
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-4. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-4 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
490
-------
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(ill) of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
114. antimony 122. lead
115. arsenic 123. mercury
117. beryllium 125. selenium
118. cadmium 126. silver
120. copper 127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon. As~
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutant
is not selected for limitation on this basis:
124. nickel
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
119. chromium
121. cyanide
128. zinc
Pollutant Selection for Beryllium Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the beryllium forming subcate-
gory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26 noncon-
ventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
491
-------
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
fluoride
Toxic Pollutants
Raw wastewater samples collected during the sampling program were
analyzed for the acid extractable, base neutral, and volatile
toxic organic pollutants. However, the results of the analysis
for these pollutants were not received prior to proposal. There
is no reason to expect that the presence of organic toxic pollu-
tants in the beryllium forming subcategory would be different
than the presence of organic toxic pollutants in the eight sub-
categories for which analytical results have been received. In
those eight subcategories only insignificant amounts of toxic
organic pollutants were found. Therefore, EPA is not selecting
organic toxic pollutants for limitation in the beryllium forming
subcategory. However, if the analytical results, when received,
show significant, treatable concentrations of organic toxic
pollutants, the Agency would modify this proposal.
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-5. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-5 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
114. antimony
115. arsenic
122. lead
125. selenium
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
492
-------
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
123. mercury
126. silver
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon. As
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
118. cadmium
119. chromium
124. nickel
128. zinc
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
117. beryllium
120. copper
121. cyanide
Pollutant Selection for Precious Metals Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the precious metals forming
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional pollutants and pollutant
parameters selected for limitation in this subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
No nonconventional pollutants or pollutant parameters are
selected for limitation in this subcategory.
493
-------
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-6. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-6 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
1. acenaphthene 40,
2. acrolein
3. acrylonitrile 41,
5. benzidene 42,
6. carbon tetrachloride
7. chlorobenzene 43.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 46.
9. hexachlorobenzene 47.
10. 1,2-dichloroethane 48,
12. hexachlorethane 49.
13. 1,1-dichloroethane 50.
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 51.
16. chloroethane 52.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 53.
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 54.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 55.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 56.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 57.
22. parachlorometa cresol 58,
23. chloroform 59.
24. 2-chlorophenol 60.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 61.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 62.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 63.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 64.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 67.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 68.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene 69.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 70.
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 71.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 72.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 73.
38. ethylbenzene 74.
39. fluoranthene 75.
4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis (2-chloroisopropyl)
ether
bis (2-choroethoxy) methane
methyl bromide
bromoform
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutad iene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2 ,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo(a)anthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
494
-------
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
82. dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
83. indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
84. pyrene
88. vinyl chloride
89. aldrin
90. dieldrin
91. chlordane
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE
94. 4,4'-ODD
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
102. alpha-BHC
103. beta-BHC
104. gamma-BHC
105. delta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108. PCB-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
116. asbestos
129. 2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose'concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
115. arsenic
117. beryllium
125. selenium
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
66. bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
85. tetrachloroethylene
114. antimony
123. mercury
495
-------
Toxic Pollutants Detected In a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(ill) allows for the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
4. benzene
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
44. methylene chloride
45. methyl chloride
65. phenol
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
Although these pollutants are not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon., As
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
119. chromium
122. lead
124. nickel
128. zinc
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
118. cadmium
120. copper
121. cyanide
126. silver
496
-------
Pollutant Selection for Iron and Steel/Copper/Aluminum Metal
Powder Production and Powder Metallurgy
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the iron and steel/copper/
aluminum metal powder production and powder metallurgy subcate-
gory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26 noncon-
ventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation.Theconventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
aluminum
iron
Although no other nonconventional pollutants are selected in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations for boron, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, tin, and
titanium.
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-7. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-7 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
1. acenaphthene
2. acrolein
3. acrylonitrile
5. benzidene
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
9. hexachlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
12. hexachlorethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15. 1,1,2 ,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether
497
-------
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 66.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 67.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 68.
22. parachlorometa cresol 69.
23. chloroform 70.
24. 2-chlorophenol 71.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 72.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 73.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 74.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 75.
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene 76.
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 77.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 78.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 79.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene 80.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 81.
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 82.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 83.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 84.
38. ethylbenzene 85.
39. fluoranthene 87.
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl 88.
ether 89.
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether 90.
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) 91.
ether 92.
43. bis(2-choroethoxy) methane 93.
45. methyl chloride 94.
46. methyl bromide 95.
47. bromoform 96.
48. dichlorobromomethane 97.
49. trichlorofluoromethane 98.
50. dichlorodifluoromethane 99.
51. chlorodibromomethane 100.
52. hexachlorobutadiene 101.
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene 102.
54. isophorone 103.
55. naphthalene 104.
56. nitrobenzene 105.
57. 2-nitrophenol 106.
58. 4-nitrophenol 107.
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol 108.
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol 109.
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine 110.
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine 111.
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine 112.
64. pentachlorophenol 113.
65. phenol 116.
129.
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo(a)anthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(b)fluoranthene
chrysene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
benzo(ghi)perylene
fluorene
phenanthrene
dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
trichloroethylene
vinyl chloride
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDD
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1242
PCB-1254
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
toxaphene
asbestos
2 ,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
498
-------
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
4. benzene
117. beryllium
118. cadmium
123. mercury
125. selenium
126. silver
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
6. carbon tetrachloride
44. methlyene chloride
86. toluene
114. antimony
115. arsenic
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutant is not selected for
limitation on this basis:
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
Although this pollutant is not selected for establishing
nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a case-by-case
basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent limitations.
499
-------
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled By Technologies which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon. As
discussed above, Paragraph 8(a) (ill) allows for the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
119. chromium
124. nickel
128. zinc
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Further Consideration for Limita-
tion. The toxic pollutants listed below are selected for
limitation for this subcategory because they were detected at
treatable concentrations in untreated wastewater:
120. copper
121. cyanide
122. lead
Pollutant Selection for Titanium Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the titanium forming
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
andpollutantparameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pll
ammonia
fluoride
titanium
Although no other nonconventional pollutants are selected in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations for aluminum, boron, cobalt, iron, manganese, molyb-
denum, and vanadium.
500
-------
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-8. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-8 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
1. acenaphthene 36.
2. acrolein 37.
3. acrylonitrile 38.
4. benzene 39.
5. benzidene 40.
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 41.
9. hexachlorobenzene 42.
10. ,1,2-dichloroethane
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane 43.
12. hexachloroethane 45.
13. 1,1-dichloroethane 46.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 47.
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 48.
16. chloroethane 49.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 50.
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 51.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 52.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 53.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 54.
22. parachlorometa cresol 55.
23. chloroform 56.
24. 2-chlorophenol 57.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 58.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 59.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 60.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 61.
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene 62.
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 63.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 64.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 65.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene 66.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 67.
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis (2-chloroisopropyl)
ether
bis(2-choroethoxy) methane
methyl chloride
methyl bromide
bromoform
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis (2 -ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
501
-------
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
72. benzo (a)anthracene
73. benzo (a)pyrene
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
82. dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
83. indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
84. pyrene
85. tetrachloroethylene •
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
89. aldrin
90. dieldrin
91. chlordane
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE
94. 4,4'-DDD
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
102. alpha-BHC
103. beta-BHC
104. gamma-BHC
105. delta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108. PCB-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
114. antimony
115. arsenic
116. asbestos
117. beryllium
118. cadmium
119. chromium
120. copper
121. cyanide
122. lead
123. mercury
124. nickel
125. selenium
126. silver
127. thallium
128. zinc
129. 2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level .The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
6. carbon tetrachloride
44. methylene chloride
117. beryllium
118. cadmium
125. selenium
126. silver
502
-------
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable By
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(ill)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
114. antimony
115. arsenic
123. mercury
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines Are Based Upon. As
discussed above, paragraph 8(a)(iii) allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
119. chromium
120. copper
124. nickel
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
121. cyanide
122. lead
128. zinc
Pollutant Selection for Refractory Metals Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the refractory metals forming
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
503
-------
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
PH
fluoride
molybdenum
vanadium
tungsten
tantalum
columbium
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-9. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-9 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods.
The toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any
wastewater samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not
selected for limitation:
1. acenaphthene 30.
2. acrolein 31.
3. acrylonitrile 32,
4. benzene 35.
5. benzidene 36.
6. carbon tetrachloride 37.
7. chlorobenzene 38,
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 40.
9. hexachlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane 41.
12. hexachloroethane 42.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
16. chloroethane 43,
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 45,
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 46,
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 47.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 48,
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 49.
22. parachlorometa cresol 50,
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 51.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 52,
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 53,
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 54,
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichlorophenol
1,2-dichloropropane
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis(2-chloroisopropyl)
ether
bis(2-choroethoxy) methane
methyl chloride
methyl bromide
bromoform
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
504
-------
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
64. pentachlorophenol
71. dimethyl phthalate
73. benzo (a)pyrene
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
82. dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
83. indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
89. aldrin
90. dieldrin
91. chlordane
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE
94. 4,4'-DDD
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
103. beta-BHC
105. delta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108. PCB-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
116. asbestos
129. 2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion LevelL.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
13. 1,1-dichloroethane 84,
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 95
23. chloroform 102,
24. 2-chlorophenol 104
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene 125,
pyrene
alpha-endosulfan
alpha-BHC
gamma-BHC
selenium
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
505
-------
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
56. nitrobenzene
114. antimony
115. arsenic
117. beryllium
123. mercury
127. thallium
Toxic Pollutants Detected In a Small Number of Sources,. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii) allows for the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
39. fluoranthene
44. methylene chloride
55. naphthalene
57. 2-nitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
65. phenol
66. bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
72. benzo(a)anthracene
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
85. tetrachloroethylene
121. cyanide
122. lead
Although these pollutants are not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines are Based Upon. As
discussed above,Paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively conntrolled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
118.
119.
126.
128.
cadmium
chromium
silver
zinc
506
-------
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
120. copper
124. nickel
Pollutant Selection for Zirconium/Hafnium Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the zirconium/hafnium forming
subcategory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26
nonconventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
ammonia
fluoride
zirconium
hafnium
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-10. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-10 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data,
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
507
-------
1. acenaphthene 60.
3. acrylonitrile 61.
5. benzidene 62.
6. carbon tetrachloride 63.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 64.
9. hexachlorobenzene 65.
12. hexachloroethane 71.
16. chloroethane 72.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 73,
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 74.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 75.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 76.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 77.
22. parachlorometa cresol 79.
24. 2-chlorophenol 80.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 82.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 83.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 89.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 90.
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 91.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 92.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 93.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene 94.
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 95.
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 96.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 97.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 98.
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl 99.
ether 100.
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether 101.
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) 102.
ether 103.
43. bis(2-choroethoxy) methane 104.
45. methyl chloride 105.
46. methyl bromide 106.
47. bromoform 107.
48. dichlorobromomethane 108.
49. trichlorofluoromethane 109.
50. dichlorodifluoromethane 110.
52. hexachlorobutadiene 111.
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene 112.
54. isophorone 113.
55. naphthalene 116.
56. nitrobenzene 129.
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
dimethyl phthalate
benzo (a)anthracene
benzo (a)pyrene
3,4-benzofluoranthene
benzo(k)fluoranthene
chrysene
acenaphthylene
benzo(ghi)perylene
fluorene
dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-ODD
alpha-endosulfan
beta-endosulfan
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC
delta-BHC
PCB-1242
PCB-1254
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
toxaphene
asbestos
2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
508
-------
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(ill)of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
4. benzene 69.
7. chlorobenzene 70.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 78.
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 81.
39. fluoranthene 84.
51. chlorodibromomethane 87.
57. 2-nitrophenol 117.
67. butyl benzyl phthalate 125.
68. di-n-butyl phthalate 126.
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
anthracene
phenanthrene
pyrene
trichloroethylene
beryllium
selenium
silver
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not selected for limitation because they were
not found in any wastewater samples from this subcategory above
concentrations considered achievable by existing or available
treatment technologies:
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
23. chloroform
38. ethylbenzene
86. toluene
123. mercury
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii) allowsfor the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
2. acrolein
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
44. methylene chloride
66. bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
85. tetrachloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
118. cadmium
120. copper
127. thallium
128. zinc
509
-------
Although these pollutants are not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Effectively Controlled by Technologies Which
Other Effluent Limitations and Guidelines are Based Upon. As
discussed above,paragraph 8(a)(iii)allowsfor the exclusion of
a toxic pollutant which will be effectively controlled by the
technologies upon which are based other effluent limitations and
guidelines, or pretreatment standards. The following pollutants
are not selected for limitation on this basis:
114. antimony
115. arsenic
122. lead
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
119. chromium
121. cyanide
124. nickel
Pollutant Selection for Magnesium Forming
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters
This study considered samples from the magnesium forming subcate-
gory for three conventional pollutant parameters and 26 noncon-
ventional pollutant parameters.
Conventional and Nonconventional Pollutant Parameters Selected
for Limitation. The conventional and nonconventional pollutants
and pollutant parameters selected for limitation in this
subcategory are:
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
PH
ammonia
fluoride
magnesium
510
-------
Toxic Pollutants
The frequency of occurrence of the toxic pollutants in the waste-
water samples taken is presented in Table VI-11. These data pro-
vide the basis for the categorization of specific pollutants, as
discussed below. Table VI-11 is based on the raw wastewater
sampling data.
Toxic Pollutants Never Detected. Paragraph 8(a)(iii) of the
Revised Settlement Agreement allows the Administrator to exclude
from regulation those toxic pollutants not detectable by Section
304(h) analytical methods or other state-of-the-art methods. The
toxic pollutants listed below were not detected in any wastewater
samples from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected
for limitation:
1. acenaphthene 35.
2. acrolein 36.
3. acrylonitrile 37.
4. benzene 38.
5. benzidene 39.
6. carbon tetrachloride 40.
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 41.
9. hexachlorobenzene 42.
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane 43.
13. 1,1-dichloroethane 45.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 46.
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 47.
16. chloroethane 48.
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether 49.
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether 50.
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether 51.
20. 2-chloronaphthalene 52.
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 53.
22. parachlorometa cresol 54.
23. chloroform 55.
24. 2-chlorophenol 56.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 58.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 59.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 60.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 61.
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene 62.
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 63.
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol 64.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 66.
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol 67.
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl
ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis(2-chloroisopropyl)
ether
bis(2-choroethoxy) methane
methyl chloride
methyl bromide
bromoform
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
dichlorodifluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
511
-------
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
72. benzo (a)anthracene
73. benzo (a)pyrene
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
82. dibenzo (a,h)anthracene
83. indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
84. pyrene
85. tetrachloroethylene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride
89. aldrin
90. dieldrin
91. chlordane
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE
94. 4,4'-DDD
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
102. alpha-BUG
103. beta-BHC
104. gamma-BHC
105. delta-BHC
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
108. PCB-1221
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
112. PCB-1016
113. toxaphene
116. asbestos
129. 2,3,7,8-tetra chlorodi-
benzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
Toxic Pollutants Never Found Above Their Analytical Quantifica-
tion Level.The provision of Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised
Settlement Agreement excluding from regulation those toxic
pollutants which are not detectable includes those pollutants
whose concentrations fall below EPA's nominal detection limit.
The toxic pollutants listed below were never found above their
analytical quantification concentration in any wastewater samples
from this subcategory; therefore, they are not selected for
limitation:
115.
118.
124.
125.
127.
arsenic
cadmium
nickel
selenium
thallium
Toxic Pollutants Present Below Concentrations Achievable by
Treatment.Paragraph 8(a)(iii)of the Revised Settlement
Agreement also allows the exclusion of toxic pollutants which
were detected in quantities too small to be effectively reduced
by technologies known to the Administrator. The pollutants
listed below are not
512
-------
selected for limitation because they were not found in any waste-
water samples from this subcategory above concentrations consid-
ered achievable by existing or available treatment technologies:
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
57. 2-nitrophenol
65. phenol
114. antimony
120. copper
123. mercury
126. silver
Toxic Pollutants Detected in a Small Number of Sources. Para-
graph 8(a)(iii) allows for the exclusion of a toxic pollutant if
it is detectable in the effluent from only a small number of
sources within the subcategory and it is uniquely related to only
those sources. The following pollutants are not selected for
limitation on this basis:
44. methylene chloride
117. beryllium
121. cyanide
122. lead
Although these pollutants are not selected for consideration in
establishing nationwide limitations, it may be appropriate, on a
case-by-case basis, for the local permitter to specify effluent
limitations.
Toxic Pollutants Selected for Limitation. The toxic pollutants
listed below are selected for limitation for this subcategory
because they were detected at treatable concentrations in
untreated wastewater:
119. chromium
128. zinc
Pollutant Selection for Uranium Forming
No raw wastewater samples were collected from uranium forming
facilities prior to proposal. The Agency intends to obtain data
on toxic pollutants in wastewater at uranium forming plants after
proposal. These data will be added to the record of rulemaking
when they become available and will be considered in promulgating
the final effluent limitations and standards.
However, based on long-term data from DMR's from one direct
discharger and raw wastewater sampling data provided in dcp's,
the following conventional, nonconventional, and toxic pollutants
are selected for limitation in this subcategory:
513
-------
total suspended solids (TSS)
oil and grease
pH
fluoride
radium
uranium
118. cadmium
120. copper
124. nickel
514
-------
Table VI-1
LIST OF 129 TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Compound Name
1. acenaphthene
2. acrolein
3. acrylonitrile
4. benzene
5. benzidene
6. carbon tetrachloride (tetrachloromethane)
Chlorinated benzenes (other than dichlorobenzenes)
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
9. hexachlorobenzene
Chlorinated ethanes (including 1,2-dichloroethane,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, and hexachloroethane)
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
Chloroalkyl ethers (chloromethyl, chloroethyl, and
mixed ethers)
17. bis (chloromethyl) ether
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
Chlorinated naphthalene
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
Chlorinated phenols (other than those listed elsewhere;
includes trichlorophenols and chlorinated cresols)
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlororaeta cresol
23. chloroform (trichloromethane)
24. 2-chlorophenol
515
-------
Table VI-1 (Continued)
LIST OF 129 TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Dlchlorobenzenes
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene
Dichlorobenzidine
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
Dichloroethylenes (1.1-dichloroethylene and
1,2-dichloroethylene)
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol
Dichloropropane and dichloropropene
32. 1,2-dichloropropane
33. 1,2-dichloropropylene (1,3-dichloropropene)
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
Dinitrotoluene
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
38. ethylbenzene
39. fluoranthene
Haloethers (other than those listed elsewhere)
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
43. bis(2-choroethoxy) methane
Halomethanes (other than those listed elsewhere)
44. methylene chloride (dichloromethane)
45. methyl chloride (chlororaethane)
46. methyl bromide (bromomethane)
47. bromoform (tribromomethane)
48. dichlorobromomethane
516
-------
Table VI-1 (Continued)
LIST OF 129 TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Halomethanes (other than those listed elsewhere) (Cont.)
49. trichlorofluoromethane
50. dichlorodifluoromethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. hexachlorobutadiene
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. isophorone
55. naphthalene
56. nitrobenzene
Nitrophenols (including 2,4-dinitrophenol and dinitrocresol)
57. 2-nitrophenol
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Nitrosamines
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
64. pentachlorophenol
65. phenol
Phthalate esters
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
Polynuclear aroma.tic hydrocarbons
72. benzo(a)anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)
73. benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo(k)fluoranthene (11,12-benzofluoranthene)
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene (1,11-benzoperylene)
517
-------
Table VI-1 (Continued)
LIST OF 129 TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (Cont.)
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
82. dibenzo(a,h)anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)
83. indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene (w,e,-o-phenylenepyrene)
84. pyrene
85. tetrachloroethylene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
88. vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
Pesticides and metabolites
89. aldrin
90. dieldrin
91. chlordane (technical mixture and metabolites)
DDT and rngtabqlites
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE(p,p'DDX)
94. 4,4'-DDD(p,plTDE)
Endosulfan and metabolites
95. a-endosulfan-Alpha
96. b-endosulfan-Beta
97. endosulfan sulfate
Endrin and metabolites
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
Heptachlor and metabolies
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
518
-------
Table VI-1 (Continued)
LIST OF 129 TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Hexachlorocyclohexane (all isomers)
102.
103.
104.
105.
a-BHC-Alpha
b-BHC-Beta
r-BHC (lindane) -Gamma
g-BHC-Delta
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's)
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
113.
129.
PCB-1242
PCB-1254
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
Metals and
•*
ant imony
arsenic
asbestos
beryllium
cadmium
chromium
copper
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
Cyanide,
(Fibrous)
(Total)
1242)
1254)
1221)
1232)
1248)
1260)
1016)
and Asbestos
cyanide (Total)
lead
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
thallium
zinc
Other
toxaphene
2,3 ,7,8-tetra chlorodibenzo-p-d
(TCDD)
519
-------
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
OJ
Q)
co
H>H
P Pi
i-l O
.-! O
O W
P-i H
U CJ
M pa
X P
O co
H Pi
O W
O H <
W pi W
CJ O H
IS Lu CO
w <;
Pi H _
u co
O H
PQ
02"
^ Q
W <
W
Pi
0) O
O £
•a:
I
4J
01 Ol
0 H
4J 3
a) o
, U-,
CO 4J
c: c
< CO
3
o-
t-H
CO
t
4)
u
o
o
at
«
c
o
4J
to
0
•H
in
4J
C
CO
3
CX
0)
f— t
CL,
e
CO
C/D
2
P
(U
O
^
c
o
4_(