440/1-75/050
roup II
Development Document for
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards
for the
Paint Formulating and the
Ink Formulating
Point Source Categories
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FEBRUARY 1975
-------
-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
for
PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
and
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
for the
PAINT FORMULATING and the INK FORMULATING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORIES
Russell E. Train
Administrator
James L. Agee
Assistant Administrator for
Water and Hazardous Materials
Thomas Gallagher, Director
National Field Investigations Center
Denver, Colorado
p ** \
W
'-«( PROlt0
Allen Cywin, Director
Effluent Guidelines Division
David Becker, Project Officer
Effluent Guidelines Division
Arthur N. Masse, Project Officer
National Field Investigations Center
Denver, Colorado
February, 1975
Effluent Guidelines Division
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Enviix.:rr.cir';;.l Protection Agency
r:-;:.;o. ': - I 'l,r^ry
2C-'j ;:-:--•-..,. ;>:a\'bor-n Street
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents the findings of a study of the paint
and ink formulation industries for the purpose of developing
effluent limitations guidelines. Federal standards of
performance, and pretreatment standards for the industry to
implement Sections 301, 304 and 306 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (the "Act") .
Effluent limitations guidelines are set forth for the degree
of effluent reduction attainable through the application of
the "Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available, » and the "Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable, « which must be achieved by existing point
sources by July 1, 1977, and July 1, 1983, respectively.
The "Standards of Performance for New Sources" set forth the
degree of effluent reduction which is achievable 'through the
application of the best available demonstrated control
technology, processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives.
The proposed regulations require that, for both the paint
and ink formulation industries, no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters be achieved bv
July 1, 1977.
For the paint and ink formulation industries, the 1983
requirements and new source standards are the same as the
1977 requirements.
Supportive data and rationale for development of the
proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards of
performance are contained in this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
I. CONCLUSIONS 1
PAINT FORMULATING 1
INK FORMULATING 2
II RECOMMENDATIONS 3
PAINT FORMULATING 3
INK FORMULATING
III INTRODUCTION 5
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY 5
Legal Authority 5
Existing Point Sources 5
New Sources 6
Basis of Proposed Effluent Limitations 6
Guidelines for Existing Sources and
Standards of Performance and Pretreatment
Standards for New Sources
General Methodology 6
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY 8
Paint Formulating Industry 8
Ink Formulating Industry 15
DISCUSSION OF DOCUMENT 16
IV INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION 17
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 17
PROFILE OF PRODUCTION PROCESSES 17
CATEGORIZATION 22
Raw Materials and Products 23
Production Methods 23
Size and Age of Production Facilities 23
Wastewater Constituents and Treatability 23
of Wastes
CONCLUSIONS 24
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 25
PROFILE OF PRODUCTION PROCESSES 25
CATEGORIZATION 25
Raw Materials and Products 25
Production Methods 26
Size and Age of Production Facilities 26
Wastewater Constituents and Treatability 26
of Wastes
CONCLUSIONS 26
V WATER USES AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 27
ill
-------
SECTION page
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 27
SPECIFIC WATER USES 27
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 30
INK FORMULATING 39
VI SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS 43
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 43
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 43
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS 43
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (20°C, BOD5) 43
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 44
pH 45
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 46
Oil and Grease 47
Metals 48
Mercury 48
Lead 48
Zinc 48
VII CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 51
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 51
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 55
IDENTIFICATION OF WATER-POLLUTION RELATED 57
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 59
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 60
VIII COST, ENERGY, AND OTHER NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS 63
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 63
OIL-BASE PAINT PRODUCTION 63
WATER-BASE PAINT PRODUCTION 64
Best Practicable Control Technology 64
Currently Available (BPCTCA)
Small Plant 65
Large Plant 65
Best Available Technology Economically 68
Achievable (BATEA) and New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS)
Non-Water Quality Considerations 68
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 71
IX EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION 75
OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE
INTRODUCTION 75
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH APPLICATION 76
OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 76
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY . 76
IV
-------
SECTION
Identification of the Best Practicable 76
Control Technology Currently Available
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 78
Total Cost of Application 78
Size and Age of Equipment 78
Process Employed 78
Engineering Aspects 78
Process Changes 78
Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact 79
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 80
Total Cost of Application 80
Size and Age of Equipment 80
Process Employed 80
Engineering Aspects 80
Process Changes 80
Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact 80
X EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION 83
OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE
INTRODUCTION 83
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE 84
APPLICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 84
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 84
XI NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 85
INTRODUCTION 85
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE FOR NEW SOURCE 85
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 85
INK FORMULATNG INDUSTRY 86
XII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 87
XIII REFERENCES 89
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY 89
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY 91
XIV GLOSSARY 93
Definitions 93
Symbols 95
v
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
Page
III-l INDUSTRIES IN PAINT AND INK FORMULATION 5
AND PRINTING CATEGORY BY SIC NUMBER
HI-2 DISTRIBUTION OF PAINT PLANTS BY SIZE 9
IH-3 U. S. SHIPMENTS OF TRADE SALES PAINTS, 13
VARNISHES, AND LACQUERS BY END USE 1971
HI-4 U. S. SHIPMENTS OF INDUSTRIAL FINISHES 14
BY END USE 1971
HI-5 PRINCIPAL RAW MATERIALS USED IN THE 15
MANUFACTURE OF PAINTS, 1970
IV-1 COMPOSITION OF COMMON WATER-BASE PAINTS 21
V-l DISPOSITION OF WASTEWATER IN PAINT PLANTS 28
V-2 AVERAGE VOLUME OF CLEANUP WATER DISCHARGED 29
FROM PLANTS OF VARIOUS SIZES
V-3 MAJOR CONTAMINANTS IN WASTEWATER DISCHARGE 30
V-4 DAILY RAW WASTE LOADING FROM PAINT PLANTS 31
V-5 CONSTITUENTS OF PAINT MANUFACTURING PLANT 34
(SIC 2851) WASTES IN EAST BAY MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES DISTRICT
V-6 WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS OF A WATER-BASE 35
PAINT PLANT, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
V-7 AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM LARGE LATEX PAINT 36
PLANT BASED ON 3-DAY COMPOSITION SAMPLING
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)
V-8 AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM SMALL LATEX 37
PAINT PLANT WITH LOW WATER USE BASED ON
3-DAY SAMPLING PROGRAM (OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)
V-9 AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM SMALL LATEX 38
PAINT PLANT BASED ON 3-DAY SAMPLING PROGRAM
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)
VI
-------
Table No. Page
V-10 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION FROM AN INK TUB 40
WASHER THAT RECYCLES THE WASH WATER
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)
V-ll CONSTITUENTS OF INK MANUFACTURING PLANT 41
(SIC 2893) WASTES IN EAST BAY MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES DISTRICT
VII-1 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY IDENTIFIED IN THE 52
PAINT FORMULATING INDUSTRY
VII-2 EXTENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT PRACTICED 53
IN PAINT PLANTS
VII-3 WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS EMPLOYED IN 56
THE PAINT INDUSTRY
VII-4 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY DETERMINED IN THE 61
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY
VII1-1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A SMALL PAINT 67
MANUFACTURING PLANT (1973 DOLLARS)
VIII-2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A LARGE PAINT 69
MANUFACTURING PLANT (1973 DOLLARS)
VIII-3 WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A SMALL INK 72
MANUFACTURING PLANT
VII1-4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A LARGE INK 73
MANUFACTURING PLANT
XTV-1 METRIC UNITS CONVERSION TABLE 96
Vll
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure_Np.
1 U.S. SHIPMENTS OF PAINTS AND ALLIED 10
PRODUCTS BY STATE 1967
II I- 2 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED GROWTH OF 11
COATING PRODUCTS, 1955 to 1980
IV~1 FLOW DIAGRAM OF MANUFACTURING PROCESS 18
FOR OIL- BASE PAINTS
IV~2 FLOW DIAGRAM OF MANUFACTURING PROCESS 20
FOR WATER- BASE PAINTS
VIII-1 PAINT WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR 66
A RECYCLING TUB WASHER
VIII-2 INK WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR 74
A RECYCLING TUB WASHER
Vlll
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
For the purposes of establishing Effluent Limitation
Guidelines and Standards of Performance for New Sources, the
"Paint and Ink Formulation Industry" point source categories
were divided into two categories (paint and ink) and four
subcategories. The subcategories are: (1) Oil-Base Paint
Manufacture; (2) Water-Base Paint Manufacture; (3) Oil-Base
Ink Manufacture; and (4) Water-Base Ink Manufacture. The
Paint and Ink Manufacturing industries were found to use
similar raw materials and manufacturing processes but were
separated principally on the basis of the end use of the
product and on treatment technology employed. The major
conclusions in each of these categories are discussed in the
following paragraphs.
PAINT FORMULATING
The major conclusion for this industry was that the vast
majority of paint formulating plants discharge their process
wastewaters to municipal systems. The initial survey turned
up seven manufacturers discharging process wastewaters to
surface streams. A more recent check of the NPDS permit
files shows twenty-seven company locations direct
discharging wastewater to surface streams. There may be
several other plants that were not detected but the
magnitude of the problem, as far as direct pollution of
surface streams is concerned, is essentially negligible.
Many of the paint manufacturing plants located on municipal
sewer systems have elected to dispose of their process waste
by shipping it to a landfill or by recycling and reusing it
within the plant. It became obvious early in the study that
a limitation of "no discharge of wastewater pollutants" to
surface streams met the definition of "Best Practicable
Control Technology Currently Available".
It was anticipated that mercury, lead, and other metals
would be a significant problem in the industry, but this has
not proven to be the case. Many of the manufacturers have,
in recent years, switched to non-mercury-containing
preservatives because of the mercury pollution problem a few
years ago. The "Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act
of 1973," which reduces the allowable concentration of lead
in a dry paint film to 0.5 percent, has significantly
decreased the magnitude of the lead problem. Chromium and
other heavy metals used in tinting agents during paint
manufacture have also been significantly reduced because of
-------
the current trend in tinting paints at the retail store.
The heavy metal-containing tinting agents are, for the most
part, manufactured by the pigment industry and shipped
directly to the retail stores. Their manufacture is not
covered in this document.
The major pollutant parameters for the paint manufacturing
industry are BODj>, TSSr pH and selected metals. The volumes
of wastewater discharged are, from a pollution control
standpoint, very small.
INK FORMULATING
The ink formulating industry bears many resemblances to the
paint formulating industry, although it. is considerably
smaller. A check of the NPDS Permit, applications and
consultation with industrial representatives led to the
conclusion that there are less than 8 manufacturing plants
in the country discharging process wastes directly to
surface streams.
Again, as in the paint industry, many of the plants that are
on municipal systems practice no discharge of wastewater
pollutants. Ink process wastewaters are either sent to
sanitary landfills for disposal or the wastewaters are
recycled and reused within the plant. A limitation of "no
discharge of wastewater pollutants" directly to surface
streams would have little, if any, effect on the industry.
The major pollutant parameters for the ink manufacturing
industry are BOD5, TSS, pH, and selected metals. As with
the paint industry, the volumes of wastewater discharged are
very small.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
PAINT FORMULATING
The effluent limitations for process wastes for the paint
formulating industry have been set as no discharge of
EE2ces§ wastewater B2iiaJ&lIi£§ to surface waters. This
limitation has been defined as (1) Best Practicable Control
Technology Currently Available to be achieved no later than
July 1, 1977; (2) Best Available Treatment Economically
Achievable to be achieved no later than July 1, 1983; and
(3) New Source Performance Standards to be achieved upon
start-up of the new source. Pretreatment before discharge
to publicly-owned treatment works for new sources has been
set as that treatment necessary to meet the conditions of
EPA Federal Regulation 40 CFR 128.
INK FORMULATING
The recommendations for the ink formulating industry are
identical to those for the paint formulating industry set
forth above.
-------
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
gURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
Legal Authority
Existing Point Sources — Section 301(b) of the Act requires
the achievement, by not later than July 1, 1977, of effluent
limitations for point sources, other than publicly-owned
treatment works, which require the application of the best
practicable control technology currently available as
defined by the Administrator pursuant to section 304(b) of
the Act. Section 301(b) also requires the achievement, by
not later than July 1, 1983, of effluent limitations for
point sources, other than publicly-owned treatment works,
which require 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, as determined
in accordance with regulations issued by the Administrator
pursuant to section 304(b) of the Act.
Section 304 (b) of the Act requires the Adminstrator to
publish regulations providing guidelines for effluent
limitations setting forth the degree of effluent reduction
attainable through the application of the best practicable
control technology currently available and the degree of
effluent reducton attainable through the application of the
best control measures and practices achievable including
treatment techniques, process and procedure innovations,
operating methods and other alternatives. The regulations
proposed herein set forth effluent limitations guidelines,
pursuant to section 304(b) of the Act, for the paint and ink
formulation industries. The specific industries for which
limitations are proposed are listed in Table III-l by
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code number (1).
TABLE III-l
INDUSTRIES IN PAINT AND INK FORMULATION CATEGORY
BY SIC NUMBER
PAINT FORMULATION
2851 - Paints, Varnishes, Lacquers, Enamels, and Allied
Products
INK FORMULATION
2893 - Printing Ink
-------
Sources — Section 306 of the Act requires the
achievement from new sources of a Federal Standard of
Performance providing for the control of the discharge of
pollutants which reflects the greatest degree of effluent
reduction which the Administrator determines to be achiev-
able through application of the best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives, including, where practicable, a standard
permitting no discharge of pollutants.
Section 307 (c) of the Act requires the Administrator to
promulgate pretreatment standards for new sources at the
same time that standards of performance for new sources are
promulgated pursuant to section 306.
Section 304 (c) of the Act requires the Administrator to
issue to the States and appropriate water pollution control
agencies information on the processes, procedures or
operating methods which result in the elimination or
reduction of the discharge of pollutants to implement
standards of performance under section 306 of the Act. This
Development Document provides, pursuant to section 304 (c) of
the Act, information on such processes, procedures or
operating methods.
Basis of Proposed Ef fluent Limitations Guidelines for
Sources and Standards of Performance and
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
General Methodology — The effluent limitations guidelines
and standards of performance proposed herein were developed
in the following manner. The point source category was
first studied for the purpose of determining whether
separate limitations and standards are appropriate for
different segments within the category. This analysis
included a determination of whether differences in raw
material used, product produced, manufacturing process
employed, age, size, wastewater constituents and other
factors require development of separate limitations and
standards for different segments of the point source
category. The raw waste characteristics for each such
segment were then identified. This included an analysis of
(1) the source, flow and volume of water used in the process
employed and the sources of waste and wastewaters in the
operation, and (2) the constituents of all wastewaters. The
constituents of the wastewaters which should be subject to
-------
effluent limitations guidelines and standards of performance
were identified.
The control and treatment technologies existing within each
segment were identified. This included an identification of
each distinct control and treatment technology, including
both in-plant and end-of-process technologies, which are
existing or capable of being designed for each segment. It
also included an identification, in terms of the amount of
constituents and the chemical, physical and biological
characteristics of pollutants, of the effluent level
resulting from the application of each of the technologies.
The problems, limitations and reliability of each treatment
and control technology were also identified. In addition,
the non-water quality environmental impacts, such as the
effects of the application of such technologies upon other
pollution problems, including air, solid waste, noise and
radiation, were identified. The energy requirements of each
control and treatment technology were determined as well as
the cost of the application of such technologies.
The information, as outlined above, was then evaluated in
order to determine what levels of technology constitute the
"best practicable control technology currently available",
the "best available technology economically achievable" and
the "best available demonstrated control technology,
processes, operating methods, or other alternatives." In
identifying such technologies, various factors were
considered. These included the total cost of application of
technology in relation to the effluent reduction benefits to
be achieved from such application, the age of equipment and
facilities involved, the process employed, the engineering
aspects of the application of various types of control
techniques, process changes, non-water quality environmental
impact (including energy requirements) and other factors.
The data upon which the above analysis was performed was
derived from a number of sources. These sources are listed
as references and/or are included in Supplement B. The
Refuse Act Permit Program Applications were of limited value
because they were too few in number and provided incomplete
information. The Southern Research Institute (1) report on
the paint industry and the materials provided by the
National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers, the
National Paint and Coatings Association and the Federation
of Societies for Paint Technology were quite helpful.
Detailed telephone and personal conversations with
representatives of the trade and technical associations and
with individual members of the industries were invaluable.
The cooperation of the East Bay Municipal Utilities District
-------
(Oakland, California) in opening their files and in
assisting in the sampling of waste streams from paint and
ink manufacturers in the areas is appreciated, as is the
cooperation of all of those industries visited and sampled.
The Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago also
supplied information from their files. Twelve paint
manufacturing plants and six ink manufacturing plants were
visited. Composite 3-day sampling was conducted at four
paint plants and one ink plant. A record of all visits and
conversations is included in Supplement B.
The pretreatment standards for new sources proposed herein
are intended to be complementary to the pretreatment
standards proposed for .existing sources under 40 CFR Part
128. The bases for such standards are set forth in the
Federal Register of July 19, 1973, 38 FR 19236.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
Division of these industries into four subcategories (water-
base and oil-base paint, water-base and oil-base ink) was
made. The paint manufacturing and ink manufacturing indus-
tries share many of the same characteristics. The raw
materials, processes and wastewater charcteristics are quite
similar. The two industries are distinct, however, both
because of the product manufactured and the end use of that
product. For these reasons, and the fact that the paint and
ink manufacturing industries utilize distinct and separate
trade and technical associations, the decision was made to
treat them separately in this document.
The rationale for further subdivision within each of the
subcategories discussed above is given in Section IV of each
subcategory.
Paint Formulating Industry
Paint manufacturing is essentially a product formulation in-
dustry; that is, few, if any, of the raw materials are
manufactured on site. In practice, several of the larger
manufacturers make resins on the site for their own use and
for sale, but resin manufacture is not included in this
document. Effluent limitations for resin manufacturing are
covered in the proposed guidelines for the Plastics and
Synthetics Industry.(4)
The paint industry (SIC Group 2851) consists of about 1,500
companies operating almost 1,700 plants. In 1971, total
industry empolyment was nearly 63,000. Because of the
relatively simple technology and low capital investment
required, the industry contains many small companies. About
-------
42 percent of the companies have fewer than 10 employees.
These small companies accounted for less than 5 percent of
the industry sales in 1967, whereas the four largest
companies (Sherwin-Williams, DuPont, PPG Industries,
Glidden-Durkee) accounted for about 22 pecent of sales and
the largest 50 accounted for 61 percent. A distribution of
plants by size is given in Table III-2.
TABLE III-2
DISTRIBUTION OF PAINT PLANTS BY SIZE(3)
Size of plant (total Number of Total number of
number of,_employees) plants production workers
Fewer than 10 710 1,700
10 to 19 311 2,500
20 to 49 350 6,100
50 to 99 171 6,700
100 to 249 133 9,200
250 to more 46 10,100
Although the industry is spread over a wide geographical
area, it is concentrated in heavily industrialized areas.
Ten states accounted for about 80 percent of the value of
shipments in 1967. A map illustrating the economic
concentration of the industry is given in Figure III-l.
The major products of the industry consist of trade-sale
ESiHts* which are primarily off-the-shelf exterior and
interior paints for houses and buildings, and industrial
finishes sold to manufacturers of such products as
automobiles, aircraft, appliances, furniture, machinery, and
metal containers.
In 1971, the value of trade-sale paints amounted to $1.56
billion and that of industrial finshes was $1.27 billion.
The volume of these products is expected to increase at an
annual rate of 7.5 percent until 1980. The historical and
projected growth of these products is illustrated in Figure
III-2.
The industry produces paints, varnishes, and lacquers, which
consist of film-forming binders (resins or drying oils)
dissolved in volatile solvents or dispersed in water. In
addition, all paints and most lacquers contain pigments and
extenders (calcium carbonate, clays and silicates). The
industry also produces such products as putty, caulking
compounds, sealants, paint and varnish removers, and thin-
ner s. The quantity and value of shipments of trade sale
-------
Source: ) 967 Census of Monufacfures.
Figure III-l. U. S. Shipments of Paints and Allied Products by State 1967
2/
-------
co co
•U VJ
C CO
-i
> -H
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.1
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
en »-N
w co
C C
a) o
e
a
•H
CO
c
O
C i-H
CD -H
3 6
'
700
600
500
400
300
200
1955
1960
1965
YEAR
1970
1975
1980
Figure III-2. Historical and Projected Growth of
Coating Products, 1955 to 198o!/
11
-------
products in 1971 are shown in Table III--3. Table III-U
shows similar information for industrial finishes.
The principal raw materials consumed by the industry are
oils, resins, pigments, and solvents. Drying oils, such as
linseed oil, are used as the film-forming binder in some
oil-base paints. Semi-drying oils, such as soybean oil, are
used in the manufacture of alkyd resins, which are the
principal binders in other oil-base paints. Acylic resins
are used in the manufacture of water-base (latex) paints.
Some industrial water-base paints contain a third type of
resin, the water-soluble alkyd resins.
Pigments are used to impart opacity and color to the
coatings. The pigment particles are finely divided to
provide good dispersion in the oil or water medium and to
provide good coverage. The four basic types of pigments
are: 1) prime white pigments, such as titanium dioxide and
zinc oxide, 2) colored inorganic and organic pigments, 3)
filler and extender pigments, and 4) metallic powders. The
paint industry is the largest consumer of titanium dioxide
and inorganic pigments.
The paint industry is also a large consumer of solvents,
which are used as the volatile vehicles in all coatings
except water-base paints. The major solvents used are
mineral spirits, toluene, xylene, naphtha, ketones, esters,
alcohols, and glycols.
Consumption of the principal raw materials used by the
industry is shown in Table III-5. In addition, the industry
consumes a wide variety of other additives such as driers,
bactericides and fungicides, defoamers, antisettling agents
and thickeners.
12
-------
TABLE 111-3
U.S. SHIPMENTS OF TRADE SALES PAINTS, VARNISHES,
AND LACQUERS BY END USE 19 7L?/
Million Million Million
Liters Gallons Dollars
Interior finishes
House paints
Water emulsion
Flat 49 2 130 $ 420
Semi gloss 76 20 70
Oil and Alkyd
Flat 57 15 55
Semitfloss 76 20 80
High-gloss 57 15 75
Primers, sealers, other 38 10 30
Miscellaneous-^/ 95 25 95
Total, interior 891 235 R25
Exterior finishes
House paints
Water emulsion 265 70 240
Oil and alkyd paints 114 30 130
Enamels 57 15 60
Primers, sealers, other 38 10 35
Miscellaneous^/ 38 10 50
Total, exterior 512 135 515
Other trade sales products
Automotive refinishes 132 35 160
Traffic paints 76 20 40
22 6 23
Total, other 230 61 223
TOTAL 1633 431 SI, 56 3
a/ Includes stains, varnishes, seamless flooring, and ceramic-like tiles
b_/ Includes barn, roof, and fence coatings, bituminous products, metallic
pigmented paints, stains, and varnishes
£/ Mostly marine shelf goods
13
-------
TABLE
U.S. SHIPMENTS OP INDUSTRIAL FINISHES BY END USE 1971-
2/
Transportation equipment
Motor vehicles
Marine
Railroad, aircraft, and
Industrial maintenance
Furniture
Wood
Metal
Prefinished stock
Metal
Wood
Metal decorating
Packaging
Other
Machinery and equipment-
Appliances
Packaging, exc. metal
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
Million
Liters
246
76
other 57
379
189
189
95
284
95
95
190
151
38
189
132
76
38
201
1678
Million
Gallons
65
20
15
100
50
50
25
75
25
25
50
40
10
50
35
20
10
53
443
Million
Dollars
$ 190
65
45
300
170
90
65
155
100
55
155
100
30
130
100
85
30
143
$1,268
a/ Includes data for insulating varnishes and magnet wire enamels
14
-------
TABLE III-5
PRINCIPAL RAW MATERIALS USED IN THE
MANUFACTURE OF PAINTS, 1970(3)
Thousands of Thousands of
tons metric^tons
Pigments
Prime white
Titanium dioxide 360.8 327.4
Zinc oxide 27.0 24.5
White lead 4.0 3.6
Extenders and fillers 333.0 302.0
Red lead 8.0 7.3
Carbon black 7.1 6.4
Oils in paint 133.9 121.5
Oils in paint resins 76.5 69.4
Natural resins 21.0 19.0
Total Selected solvents* 482.2 437.6
* Includes glycol esters, alcohols, ketones, and esters
The trend in the industry is to assist the customer in
reducing air pollution in the application of industrial
finishes. This is resulting in the development of water-
base paints for industrial finishes and the production of
high-solids and even dry powder paints. These are applied
by new techniques such as electrocoating (electrophoretic
deposition of charged particles of water-base paint),
fluidized bed coating and electrostatic spraying (both of
the latter use dry powder coatings). This trend will result
in a decrease in the water pollution potential of the paint
manufacturing industry.
Ink Formulatinc[T Industry
The ink manufacturing industry is similar to the paint
industry in that it is essentially a formulation industry.
Resins are made by some of the major manufacturers but,
again, resin manufacture will not be covered in this
document.
Printing ink production in the United States now exceeds one
billion pounds per year. The major components include
drying oils, resins, varnish, shellac, pigments and many
specialty additives. The industry comprises over 250
printing ink producers. However, seven companies share over
50 percent of the market: Inmont, Sinclair and Valentine,
15
-------
Sun chemical. Cities Service (F. H. Levey), Tenneco
Chemicals (California Ink), Borden, and Flint Ink. Many
large-volume users are captive producers as, for example,
American Can, Reuben H. Donnelly, Bemis Bag and others. (5)
Printing inks can be either water- or oil-base. Many of the
raw materials are the same regardless of the vehicle. The
inks are made with the same type of equipment as in the
paint industry and by the same processes. The waste
charactristics are similar to the paint counterpart.
The largest volume single type of ink is, as one would
expect, that used in the printing of newspapers. This black
ink is produced by mixing finely divided carbon black and
mineral oil. The value of "newsblack" however is
overshadowed by the value of the great number of colored
inks used largely by publishers of newspapers, books and
magazines and by package manufacturers. Most of these
colored inks are mixed on order but many of the pigments
used in them are staple quantity products such as lithol
reds, eosin reds, chrome yellows and peacock and iron blues.
A large number of more specialized inks, which in the
aggregate make up a considerable volume, are also used.
They include vat colors and even fluorscent colors. The
general trend is toward greater use of color in printing.(5)
DISCUSSION OF DOCUMENT
Each section of this document is divided into two parts,
paint formulation and ink formulation. References for each
industry are separated and presented in section XIII. It is
believed that this arrangement will provide clarity and
enhance the report's usefulness.
In all cases, limitations proposed in this document apply
only to process wastewaters - that is, wastewater that has
come in direct contact with raw materials or intermediate or
finished products. The limitations do not apply to once-
through cooling water, cooling tower blow-down, boiler blow-
down or other non-contact wastewaters.
16
-------
SECTION IV
INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION
Paint Formulating Industry
PROFILE OF PRODUCTION PROCESSES
The paint manufacturing industry is very unique in the fact
that an entrepreneur can hire a few men, buy a minimum of
equipment and start producing a respectable quantity of
paint, providing, of course, that he has a good paint
formula. A small plant with less than 30 employees can
produce between 7,600 and 11,400 liters (2,000 and 3,000
gal.) of paint per day.
Paints can be either oil-base or water-base but there is
little difference in the production processes used. The
major production difference is in the carrying agent —' oil-
base paints are dispersed in an oil mixture, while water-
base paints are dispersed in water with a biodegradable
surfactant used as the dispersing agent. The next
significant difference is in the cleanup procedures. As the
water-base paints contain surfactants, it is much easier to
clean up the tubs with water. The tubs used to make oil-
base paint are generally cleaned with an organic solvent,
but cleaning with a strong caustic solution is also a common
practice (1,2).
All paints are generally made in batches. The major
difference in the size of a paint plant is in the size of
the batches. A small paint plant will make up batches of
from 400 to 1,900 liters (100 to 500 gal.) while a large
plant will manufacture batches of up to 23,000 liters (6,000
gal.). There are generally too many color formulations to
make a continuous process feasible.
There are three major steps in the oil-base paint
manufacturing process: (1) mixing and grinding of raw
materials, (2) tinting and thinning, and (3) filling
operations. The flow diagram in Figure IV-1 illustrates
these steps.
At most plants, the mixing and grinding of raw materials for
oil-base paints are accomplished in one production step.
For high gloss paints, the pigments and a portion of the
binder and vehicle are mixed into a paste of a specified
consistency. This paste is fed to a grinder, which
disperses the pigments by breaking down particle aggregates
rather than by reducing the particle size. Two types of
grinders are ordinarily used for this purpose: pebble or
17
-------
PIGMENTS
OILS
RESINS
M IXING
TANK
TINTS AND
THINNERS
STONE
OR
ROLLER
MILL
PEBBLE
OR
BALL M ILL
DISPERSING
TANK
THINNING
AND
TINTING
TANK
FILLING
PACKAGING
AND
SHIPMENT
Figure IV-1. Flow Diagram of Manufacturing Process for Oil-Base Paint:
18
-------
steel ball mills, or roll-type mills. Other paints are
mixed and dispersed in a mixer using a saw-toothed
dispersing blade.
In the next stage of production, the paint is transferred to
tinting and thinning tanks, occasionally by means of
portable transfer tanks but more commonly by gravity feed or
pumping. Here, the remaining binder and liquid, as well as
various additives and tinting colors, are incorporated. The
paint is then analyzed and the composition is adjusted as
necessary to obtain the correct formulation for the type of
paint being produced. The finished product is then trans-
ferred to a filling operation where it is filtered, packaged
and labeled (1,2). In a large plant, these operations are
usually mechanized. In a small plant, the operation may
entail the use of an overhead crane to lift the tub onto a
platform where an employee fills various-sized cans from a
spigot on the bottom of the tub while other employees hammer
lids on the can and paste on labels.
The paint remaining on the sides of the tubs or tanks may be
allowed to drain naturally and the "cleavage", as it is
called, wasted or the sides may be cleaned with a squeegee
during the filling operation until only a small quantity of
paint remains. The final cleanup of the tubs generally
consists of flushing with an oil-base solvent until clean.
The dirty solvent is treated in one of three ways: (1) it is
used in the next paint batch as a part of the formulation;
(2) it is placed in drums that are sold to a company where
it is redistilled and resold; or (3) it is collected in
drums with the cleaner solvent being decanted for subsequent
tank cleaning and returned to the drums until only sludge
remains in the drum. The drum of sludge is then sent to a
landfill for disposal (1,2,3).
Water-base paints are produced in a slightly different
method than oil-base paints. The pigments and extending
agents are usually received in proper particle size, and the
dispersion of the pigment, surfactant and binder into the
vehicle is accomplished with a saw-toothed disperser. In
small plants, the paint is thinned and tinted in the same
tub, while in larger plants the paint is transferred to
special tanks for final thinning and tinting. Once the
formulation is correct, the paint is transferred to a
filling operation where it is filtered, packaged and labeled
in the same manner as for oil-base paints.
The production process for water-base paints is diagrammed
in Figure IV-2. The average composition of common water-
base paints is shown in Table IV-1. This table does not
19
-------
PIGMENTS
RESINS
OILS
SURFACTANTS
WATER
DISPERSING
TANK
TINTING
AND
THINNING
PACKAGING
AND
FILLING
TINTS
Figure IV-2. Flow Diagram of Manufacturing Process for Water-Base Paint
20
-------
include small quantities of preservatives or driers that may
contain trace quantities of heavy metals nor does it include
the organic biocides.
TABLE IV-1.
COMPOSITION OF COMMON WATER-BASE PAINTS (4)
Inqredient
Titanium Dioxide
Calcium carbonate
Zinc Oxide
Silicates
Synthetic Latex
Solids
Acrylic Resin
Plasticizer
Soy Alkyd Resin
Water
Type of
Polyvinyl
Acetate
Percent
10.2
3.4
-
20.4
11.2
-
2.6
-
52.2
Paint
Acrylic
Percent
20.0
"
4.1
13.0
^
15.7
*™
2.5
44.7
Total Percent
by Weight
100.0
100.0
As in the oil-base paint operation, as much product as
possible may be removed from the sides of the tub or tank
before final cleanup starts. Cleanup of the water-base
paint tubs is done simply by washing the sides with a garden
hose or a more sophisticated washing device. The washwater
may be: (1) collected in holding tanks treated before
discharge; (2) collected in drums and taken to a landfill;
(3) discharged directly to a sewer or receiving stream;' (4)
reused in the next paint batch; or (5) reused in the washing
operation.
Some of the larger paint plants manufacture the synthetic
resins used; either the usual alkyd resin, a water-soluble
alkyd resin or an acrylic resin. The manufacture of either
type involves an esterification process in which polybasic
acids and polyhydric alcohols react with various oils or
fatty acids. The raw materials are fed into a large reactor
(kettle) equipped with an agitator. The kettle is then
heated to the specified reaction temperature. Most alkyd
resins are manufactured at around 200°C (392°F). The heated
21
-------
resins are cooled, filtered, and stored for use in paint
production or for sale (1) . Although resin manufacturing
may be associated with a paint formulation, facility, the
guidelines being developed in this document are only for
paint formulation. The production of resins is covered in
the proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards
of Performance and Pretreatment for the Plastics and
Synthetics Industries (5). Discharge permits for plants
producing resins as well as paints will have to be based on
two or more separate effluent limitations guidelines.
Varnish orginally was manufactured by the slow cooking and
polymerization of natural oils and resins. This process is
rapidly being replaced by the manufacture of synthetic
resins (often called varnishes) as described above. The
only water pollution loads possible from these processes
would be from air pollution equipment and from the caustic
cleaning of the cook tubs. Lacquer is produced by
dissolving certain resins in a non-water solvent base with
the desired pigment. No water is used in these processes
and no liquid wastes are discharged.
Allied products manufactured by the paint industry include
putty, caulking compounds, paint and varnish removers,
shellacs, stains, wood fillers and wood sealers. The
manufacturing process for these products does not generally
utilize water, except for some water-base stains and paint
removers. The types of wastes generated in cleanup of
equipment do not greatly differ from those generated in
paint formulation. As these categories are generally low in
water use and are very similar to paints, they will be
considered as being in the same category.
CATEGORIZATION
The following factors were considered in determining if the
paint industry should be divided into subcategories for the
purpose of application of effluent limitations guidelines
and standards of performance:
1. Raw materials
2. Products
3. Production methods
4. Size and age of production facilities
5. Wastewater constituents
6. Treatability of wastes
22
-------
Raw Materials and Products
The use of various oils and resins, extenders (calcium
carbonate, silicates, clays), pigments and dispersing agents
are generally the same for all paints and enamels, except
for the use of oil or water as the dispersing medium.
Water- and oil-base paints are interchangeable in many
applications except that industrial finishes are primarily
oil-base. Even this is changing, however, because of the
air pollution problems generated in the industrial use of
oil-base paints.
Production Methods
As previously mentioned, both oil- and water-base paints are
made in the same factory, use many of the same raw materials
and are produced with, generally, the same equipment. Some
oil-base pigments may be dispersed in roll or ball mills
before blending into the dispersed calcium carbonate, talcs
and clays. Because the production methods for all paints
are quite similar, this is not a logical basis for subcate-
gorization.
Size and Age of Production Facilities
This study showed that the size of a production facility
affects only the quantity of wastes - the characteristics of
the wastes are similar regardless of plant size. Because
the paint manufacturing process equipment has not changed
appreciably over the years, the age of the plant has little
bearing on the waste characteristics.
Wastewater_Constituents and Treatability of Wastes
Oil-base paint waste discharges contain flammable substances
whose entry into most municipal sewer systems or surface
waters is controlled by EPA Regulation 40 CFR 128. Most
cities have waste ordinances that have attempted to deal
with the release of these obviously deleterious substances.
In most paint plants, it would be very difficult for these
substances to get into the sewer system because there is
usually no direct connection. Due to the highly volatile
nature and the odor of these materials, the source of any
substances that do find their way into the sewer system
through accidental spills could quickly be located. The
general practice of the paint industry is to practice no
discharge of oil-base paint wastes to waterways or sewers
23
-------
Latex is a substance that is forbidden from the sewer system
by some municipal ordinances and not by others. Some plants
may find that the municipality, while not prohibiting
discharge of latex wastes to the sewer system, may place the
waste under a surcharge. It has been found that the latex
wastes can build up on the sides of the sewer laterals and
cause blockages. The degree of control and enforcement has
often depended on the problems that the paint plants have
created for the municipality.(4)
Latex materials generally enter the sewer system as a result
of the washing down of batch equipment. When there is no
change of formulation from one batch to the next, as is
found often with small paint manufacturers, little or no
latex enters the sewer system. Generally, the small
manufacturer can recycle most of his washwater into the next
batch, if he is engaged in the manufacture of only one or
two base colors (2). This is both a desirable water
conservation practice and an economic advantage because the
valuable solid materials are thus recovered.
The wastes from latex paint production contain only
biodegradable oils and surfactants mixed with insoluble
inorganic extenders and pigments. The concentration of
preservatives is diluted well below levels of significance
during washing operations. Thus, there is no problem in
treating the wastes using physical and biological treatment
methods.
Although the equipment and raw materials used to make oil-
based and water-based paints are quite similar and could be
classified as one category, the problem of pretreatment
standards and the requirements to control fire and explosive
hazards would dictate that oil- and water-based paints be
treated as separate categories.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of the raw materials used, the products
produced, the production methods, the size and age of
facilities, the wastewater constituents and the treatability
of wastes, it is concluded that the paint formulation
category be subcategorized into (1) oil-based paints and (2)
water-based paints.
24
-------
Ink Formulating Industry
PROFILE,OF PRODUCTION PROCESSES
The ink formulation industry differs only slightly from the
paint industry. Many of the raw materials are the same and
the methods of producing ink are nearly identical to those
for producing paint. Milling is used more frequently in the
ink industry than in the paint industry as a method of
dispersing pigments. There are both large and small ink
formulators, and again, the size of the plant appears to
offer no economic advantage.
As the processes and equipment used by the ink industry are
very similar to the paint industry, there is no need to
discuss the methods of production. The profile of the paint
industry is applicable to inks also. Although resin
manufacturing may be associated with an ink formulation
facility, the guidelines being developed in this document
are only for ink formulation. The production of resins is
covered in the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards
of Performance and Pretreatment for the Plastics and
Synthetics Industries (1). Discharge permits for plants
producing resins as well as inks will have to be based on
two or more separate effluent limitation guidelines.
CATEGORIZATION
With respect to identifying discrete categories, the
following factors were considered in determining whether or
not the ink industry should be divided into subcategories
for the purpose of application of effluent limitations
guidelines and standards of performance:
1. Raw materials
2. Products
3. Production methods
4. Size and age of production facilities
5. Wastewater constituents
6. Treatability of wastes
Raw Materials and Productg
The use of various oils and resins, lacquers, clays,
pigments and dispersing agents are generally the same except
for the use of oil or water as the dispersing medium.
25
-------
Production Methods^
Both oil- and water-base inks can be made in the same
factory. Many of the same raw materials are used and the
inks are produced with, generally, the same equipment. Some
oil-base pigments may be blended into the extenders and
carriers before being dispersed by roll or ball mills.
Because the production methods for all inks are quite
similar, this is not a logical basis for sub-categorization.
size and Age of Production Facilities
Only the quantity of wastes is affected by the plant size.
The chemical composition is generally the same.. Some plants
recycle and conserve water and have a negligible discharge,
while other plants use water lavishly with no regard for
conservation. The age of the plant has no effect on the
quantity or composition of the wastes generated.
wastewater Constituents_and_Treatability of_Wastes
Oil-base ink discharges contain substances whose entry into
most municipal sewer systems or surface waters is controlled
by EPA Regulation 40 CFR 128. As previously mentioned in
the section on paint, most cities have waste ordinances
which have attempted to deal with the release of these
substances.
The wastes from water-base ink formulation have generally
been accepted by municipalities as nearly all ink plants are
connected to municipal sewers. As with paint, the metals in
inks are generally part of the suspended solids. The
organics in water-base inks are generally considered to be
biodegradable as they are basically the same as in paints.
CONCLUSIONS
It is concluded that, based on the constituents and
treatability, the ink manufacturing industry must be
considered as two subcategories -- water-base inks and oil-
base inks.
26
-------
SECTION V
WATER USES AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
Paint Formulating Industry
SPECIFIC^ WATER USES
On the basis of data from the Southern Research Institute
(SRI) report (1) on plants representing 26 percent of the
total industry paint production and 38 percent of the total
industry production employees, the water usage for the
e^le oondUf^ry ±S estimated at 284 to 310 million liters
(75 to 82 million gal.) per day. Cooling is the largest
single use of water, accounting for about 79 percent of the
total usage. Of the other uses for water, all are less than
that used for sanitary purposes, which is about 6 percent
J™ i,,* lljot?}1.process water use for the 1,700 plants is
from 42 to 45 million liters per day (11 to 12 mgd).
A major source of water is municipal or public supply, which
accounts for about 43 percent of the total intake Well
water and surface water account for about 21 and 32 percent
respectively. Only about 4 percent of the total water used
is recycled; however, the reported figures are probably
somewhat low because some plants responding to the SRI
survey did not include the water used in recirculating
cooling systems. In smaller plants, a greater proportion of
the water is used for purposes other than cooling. Very
large plants—those with more than 250 employees—account
for nearly 70 percent of the total industry water usage
while plants with fewer than 100 employees account for about
10 percent (1) .
Disposition of wastewater from the various uses in the paint
industry is shown in Table V-l. since cooling ££2r
normally does not contact the product or raw material, it
should not become contaminated if properly handled. On the
oonJ^i £• Tter USed f°r cleanuP and air pollution
control, which accounts for 4 percent of the total
discharge, necessarily becomes contaminated in use and can
result in the discharge of pollutants. Water used for air
Pvi^100! C°n^0lv, (Wet scrubbers> is associated almost
exclusively with the production of resins and is therfore
not of concern in this document. Dusts and powders removed
T^^W^ pr°ductlon areas are recovered by dry methods.
Table v-1 shows that about 70 percent of the wastewater is
discharged untreated. However, only 0.5 percent is likely
to be contaminated directly from the paint manufacturing
operation. it is worth noting that approximately 25 percent
27
-------
TABLE V-l
I/
DISPOSITION OF WASTEWATER IN PAINT PLANTS-
Discharged
Use
Boiler feed
Cooling
Sanitary
to
CO Cleanup
Air pollution
control
Other
Unaccounted for
Total disposition,
as % of total
wasrewater
as %
of total
3.4
79.0
6.5
1.5
2.5
1.4
5.7
100.0
Untreated
To
sanitary
sewer
34.2
20.5
95.0
47.2
39.1
0.3
0.7
26.9
To surface
receiving
body
39.4
56.7
0
0.3
3.7
2.3
0
46.1
>f use '
Treated
To
sanitary
sewer
0.8
0.1
30.7
19.2
17.0
1.3
Other
0
0.4
0.3
0
0
o
0.3
Evaporated
8.6
0.3
2.9
12.3
0.6
2.6
1.3
4.2
Not discharged
Recycled
14.2
4.1
0
2.5
14.4
0
3.2
11.8
a/
Other—
2.8
17.9
2.1
6.7
23.1
77.7
-2.8
9.4
al Includes landfill, hauling, incineration, septic tanks, etc.
-------
of the industry's wastewater is not discharged, but is
disposed of by evaporation, recycling, or by some other
method. Only larger plants show other wastewater sources,
such as air pollution control or process water from resin
manufacturing (1) .
Most cleanup waste results from cleaning the equipment used
to manufacture water-base paints. The types of equipment
most frequently cleaned are filling machines, tinting and
thinning tanks, and mixers. The average quantity of water
used in cleanup of equipment ranges from 0.02 liters per
liter (gal. /gal.) of paint produced for filling machines to
0.8 liters per liter (gal. /gal.) of paint produced for
tinting and thinning tanks (1,2).
Other sources of wastewater generated in cleanup operations
include the caustic washing of equipment used in the
preparation of solvent-base paints, resins, and other
products. However, the equipment used to prepare these
products is frequently cleaned with solvent which is not
discharged.
The average volume of cleanup water discharged for plants of
various sizes is shown in Table V-2. For small plants —
those with fewer than 50 employees — the volume discharged is
relatively small, less than 1,000 liters (260 gal.) per day.
At plants with more than 250 employees, the average volume
of cleanup water is about 40 times this value, still an
extremely small volume when considering pollution potential.
TABLE V-2
AVERAGE VOLUME OF CLEANUP WATER
DISCHARGED FROM PLANTS OF VARIOUS SIZES(l)
Size of plant Number of
(total number plants _Cleanup water discharged __
reporting liter/day gal. /day
Fewer than 10 24 292 77
10 to 19 30 769 200
20 to 49 34 983 260
50 to 99 21 4,679 l/200
100 to 249 22 11,957 3,200
250 or more 20 40,490 11,000
In addition to routine equipment cleanup, wastewater is
generated through general plant cleanup and spills. It is
not possible to estimate accurately' the volumes of waste-
water arising from these operations. Settling tanks and
other kinds of treatment are used for treating wastewaters
29
-------
from floor drains and spills, while off-specification
batches are recovered and reused or sold (1) .
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
As determined by the Southern Research Institute survey, the
major contaminants of wastewater reported by paint plants
are listed in Table V-3. As would be expected, these
contaminants, except for caustics used in cleaning, are
components of paint. The materials listed most frequently
by plants as major contaminants are pigments and latex. The
presence of one or both of these materials in the wastewater
was reported by about 90 percent of the 71 plants. Over
half of the plants also reported the presence of such
materials as oils, resins, driers, and dispersing agents.
Only four plants reported the presence of solvents as a
major contaminant of the wastewater, five plants reported
metals and six reported fungicides (1).
TABLE V-3
MAJOR CONTAMINANTS IN WASTEWATER DISCHARGE (1)
Number of_piants
19 or 20 to
Number of^ Employees less 9_2.
Greater than
100
Totals
Number of plants
reporting
Major
Contaminants
Pigments
Latex
Driers and
wetting
agents
Oils
Resins
Caustics
Fungicides
(including
mercury)
Metals
(excluding
mercury)
Solvents
26
23
22
71
15
12
3
3
7
1
10
8
H
3
3
0
11
6
8
6
1
7
36
26
15
12
11
8
0
0
1
3
4
1
5
4
Table V-4 summarizes raw waste loadings calculated from
analyses of 22 parameters reported by nine plants. Although
30
-------
TABLE V-4.
DAILY RAW WASTE LOADING FROM PAINT PLANTS-^/
U)
Parameter
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids
Volatile suspended
solids
Acidity/Alkalinity
BOD (acclimated seed)
Chemical oxygen demand
Total organic carbon
Chloride
Oil and Grease
Sulfate
Sulfide
Organic nitrogen
Nitrogen, as N
Ammonia
Phosphorus
Mercury
Lead
Cadmium
Chromium
Zinc
Iron
Titanium
Av
kg/day
220
377
40
17
20
28
15
43
224
14
0.12
0.4
6
2
0.2
0.0002
0.077
0.008
0.112
4.7
2.9
0.933
lerage
(Ib/day)
485
832
88
38
44
62
33
95
494
31
0.26
0.9
13
4
0.4
0.0004
0.170
0.018
0.247
10.4
6.4
2.06
Waste Loadings
Minimum
kg/day /" i K / ,1 «,. "\
9
3
15
2
4
13
6
0.4
0.8
0.4
<0.02
-
0.4
0.02
<0.02
<0.0002
0.024
0.002
0.010
0.028
0.426
0.052
20
7
33
4
9
29
13
0.9
1.8
0.9
<0.04
-
0.9
0.04
<0.04
<0.0004
0.05
0.004
0.022
0.062
0.940
0.115
\f f> 1 A .1 •, t
Kg /day
483
3,233
61
47
77
44
23
125
1,327
40
0.4
-
18
10
0.5
0.0004
0.120
0.120
0.217
10.8
9.6
1.2
Maximum
(Ib/day)
1,065
7,132
135
104
170
97
51
276
2,927
88
0.9
_
40
22
1.1
0.0009
0.265
0.265
0.479
23.8
21.2
2.6
Number of
plants
reporting
7
9
3
5
9
6
2
3
6
3
3
1
4
5
4
5
7
6
3
5
4
4
-------
91 plants (of 153) reported that routine effluent analyses
were conducted by either plant staff or outside
laboratories, only 29 reported data on results of those
analyses. Of the 29, 20 reported data on treated effluent.
No meaningful conclusions could be drawn from the analyses
of treated effluents reported in the survey since too few
plants used the same treatment methods. Almost all of the
nine plants providing information on raw waste
characteristics gave data on the combined plant effluent;
therefore, calculation of the loading in relation to
production of particular products was not possible. The
loadings are therefore, expressed in kg/day rather than the
preferred units of weight per unit of product. The data
show the average, minimum and maximum daily loadings, and
the number of plants reporting (1). The NFIC-D survey of
selected paint plants was made to supplement this data.
As indicated in Table V-t, suspended solids, primarily from
pigments and resin particles, is the most significant
parameter. The high loading of dissolved solids is not
readily explainable in terms of the ingredients used in
paint or the soluble constituents shown in the Table that
would constitute the dissolved solids. Loadings of BOD5 and
COD, principally from biodegradable oils and resins, are not
as high as those of suspended and dissolved solids. While
oil and grease content appears high, it should be noted that
the standard test gives high results for oil and grease in
the effluents from this industry because resin particles
that are present are, at least partially, extracted by the
solvent used in the test. However, the major components
making up these high concentrations are easily biodegradable
and thus are amenable to biological treatment. The
relatively high loadings of zinc, iron and titanium are due
principally to the pigments, drying agents, and
preservatives. Mercury is present in some preservatives,
however, these are rapidly being phased out. The ultimate
fate of the use of mercury by the industry is unknown
pending court appeals. In addition to lead and zinc, shown
in the table, some drying agents also contain cobalt and
manganese. All of the metals shown in the table, and a
number of others, are commonly present in at least trace
quantities in inorganic pigments (1,6,7,8,9).
The information needed to supplement the raw waste data
obtained from the Southern Research Institute report was
developed through a study of the files of the East Bay
Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD) in Oakland, California.
and files of the Greater Chicago Metropolitan Sanitary
District, and by a plant sampling survey in the Oakland-
32
-------
Berkeley, California area by National Field Investigations
Center-Denver (NFIC-D) (2).
The results of a waste discharge survey of paint plants by
the EBMUD are presented in Table V-5. All data were
developed by State certified laboratories.
The typical waste characteristics of effluents from a large
plant are shown in Table V-6. As can be seen, the
concentrations of the pollutants are relatively large. This
data is slightly in error as there is an employee washroom
that drains into the sewer ahead of the EBMUD sampling
point. Subsequent data taken from the NFIC-D survey for
this plant in late 1973 was collected upstream of the
employee washroom. The data, presented in Table V-7,
generally supports the range of data presented by Barrett et
al (1). The wastewater characteristics of two small plants
are shown in Table V-8 and V-9. Table V-8 shows the effects
of reducing pollutant load by removing as much product as
possible from the paint tubs before washing and by using
minimum washwater volume as opposed to a more normal tub-
cleaning process shown by Table V-9.
33
-------
TABLE V-5
CONSTITUENTS OF PAINT MANUFACTURING PLANT (SIC 2851)
WASTES IN EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DISTRICT^'
Values (TOR /I)
Constituent
pH
BOD
Total COD
Dissolved COD
Total Solids
Settleable Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Ammonia
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Oil & Grease
Total Phosphorus
Aluminum
Antimony
Barium
Cobalt
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Silver
Tin
Zinc
Phenols
Surfactants
No. of
Entries
28
12
31
31
1
3
32
3
3
26
3
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
Min.
3.4
60
53
19
-
o£/
38
0
0
4
0.3
2.6
1.1
0.77
0.05
0.4
0.11
3.8
1.14
0.06
0.02
0
0
0.31
0
0.2
Max.
13.2
1,740
99, 99^
78,000
-
2
8,180
1.7
189
999
26.4
74.6
1.1
5.7
0.23
7.5
0.22
37.3
9.99
9.99
0.07
0
0.07
9.3
0.1
7.5
Mean
8.8
481
5,428
4,103
6,887
1
1,039
0.5
64
103
14
29.5
1.1
2.8
0.14
2.8
0.17
15.2
4.99
3.5
0.03
0
0.02
3.8
0.0
2.8
Std.
Dev. Median
3.2 6.7
474 450
17,649 5,145
13,787 4,466
-
-
1,759 612
1.7
-
232 7
26
11.4
-
5.7
-
0.4
0.11
4.6
1.1
0.06
0.02
-
-
1.7
-
7.5
aj All data from East Bay Municipal Utilities District
b_/ Series of 9's indicate number higher then allocated
c/ A zero indicates a value below detectable limits of
files.
space in computer program.
analytical test.
34
-------
TABLE V-6
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS OF A
WATER-BASE PAINT PLANT, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA—
Pollutant
COD
BOD
Total Suspended
Solids
Oil & Grease
OJ
Ui pH (No. of
Occurances)
Barium
Chromium
Titanium
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Copper
No. of
Samples
33
24
51
22
1
2
1
1
1
2
3
3
1
Avg.
mg/1
2,339
536
1,394
90
3-4.9 (6)
1.0
<0.08
1.2
0.01
5.9
0.4
0.3
14.2
0.04
Quantity
gm/day
33,642
7,709
20,050
1,294
5-6.9 (19)
14.4
—
17.3
0.1
85.0
5.8
4.3
204.5
0.58
Ib/day
71.1
17.0
44. k
2.8
7-8.9 (8)
0.03
—
0.04
3 x 10~4
0.19
0.01
9.5 x 10~3
0.45
1.1 x 10~3
kg of Pollutant per
1.000 1 of Product
1.87
0.43
1.11
0.07
9-10.9 (6)
8.0 x 10~4
neglible
9.6 x 10~4
5.6 x 10"6
4.7 x 10~3
3.2 x 10~4
2.4 x 10~4
0.01
3.2 x 10~5
Ib of Pollutant per
1,000 gal. of Product
14.97
3.58
9.30
0.59
11 (10)
6.3 x 10"3
neglible
8.4 x Kf3
6.3 x 10"5
4 x 10"2
2.1 x 10"3
2 x 10~3
9 x 10~2
2.3 x 10~4
100 employees.
(17,978 I/day),
-------
TABLE V-7
AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM LARGE LATEX PAINT PLANT BASED
ON 3-DAY COMPOSITE SAMPT.INR
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)2/
Concentration
Pollutant mg/1
pH
COD
TOC
Total Suspended
Solids
Metals
Barium
Total Chromium
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Titanium
11.5^
8,100
1,200
11,300
1.67
0.93
<0.01
41.70
0.62
52.7
0.40
223
>fercury - Analysis not possible
Average wastewater flows
Average Paint Production-
Average of 100 employees
as gaged 21
26
Quantity Pollutant Load Per Production Unit
ftm/day Ib/day kp/1,000 1
176,000 387 6.64
26, 900 59.2 1.01
247,000 544 9.32
36.4 0.08 14 x 10~4
20.3 0.04 7.6 x 10~4
<0.22 <5 x 10~4 <8 x 10~6
908 2.01 343 x 10~4
13.5 0.03 5.1 x 10~4
1,150 2.53 433 x 10~4
8.72 0.02 3.3 x. 10~4
4,870 10.7 1,840 x 10~4
because of interferences.
,800 I/day (5,760 gpd.).
,500 I/day (7,000 gpd.).
lb/1,000 gal.
55.0
8.46
77.7
114 x 10~4
57 x 10~4
7.1 x 10~5
0.28
42.8 x 10"4
0.36
28.5 x 10~4
1.53
a/ Survey conducted by NFIC-D.
b/ Value reported as standard units.
-------
TABLE V-8
AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM SMALL LATEX PAINT PLANT WITH LOW WATER USE BASED
ON 3-DAY SAMPLING PROGRAM
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)5.'
Pollutant
pH
COD
TOC
Total Suspended
Solids
Metals
Barium
Total Chromium
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Titanium
Concentration
mg/1
8.2^
14,800
1,890
31,500
1.0
0.59
<0.01
139
1.02
2.64
0.14
743
Quantity
gm/day
843
107
1,790
0.06
0.03
<6 x 10~A
7.90
0.06
0.15
7.9 x 10~3
42.2
Ib/day
1.86
0.24
3.94
1.3 x 10~A
7.4 x 10~5
1.3 x 10~6
1.7 x 10"2
1.3 x 10~A
3.3 x 10~A
1.7 x 10~5
9.3 x 10~2
Pollutant Load
Per Production Unit
kg/1,000 1
0.30
0.04
0.63
2.1 x 10~5
1.0 x 10~5
Negligible
2.8 x 10~3
2.1 x 10~5
5.3 x 10~5
2.7 x in'6
-1.5 x 10~2
lb/1,000 gal.
2.48
0.23
5.25
1.7 x 10~5
9.9 x 10"5
1.7 x 10~6
2.3 x 10~2
1.7 x 10~4
4.4 x 10"A
2.3 x 10~5
0.12
Mercury - Analyses not possible because of interferences.
Notes: Small plant made paint in batches. • Samples represented washwater from 5 batches.
Average wastewater flow as gaged 56.8 I/day (15 gpd).
Average Paint Production 2840 I/day (750 gpd) .
Average of 15-20 employees
a/ Survey conducted by NFIC-D.
b/ Value reported as standard units.
-------
TABLE V-9
AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOAD FROM SMALL LATEX PAINT PLANT BASED ON
3-DAY SAMPLING PROGRAM
(OCTOBER 15-18, 1973)-'
Pollutant
pH
COD
TOC
Total Suspended
Solids
Metals
Barium
U)
Total Chromium
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Titanium
Concentration
mg/1
7.7^
16,200
3,100
19,800
0.77
<0.001 4
523^
2.5
77.4
0.09
248
gm/dav
7,500
1,390
8,890
<0.5
0.35
x 10~4
235
1.12
34.8
0.04
111
Quantity
Ib/day
16.5
3.1
19.6
<1 x 10"3
7.7 x 10"4
9.9 x 10"7
0.52
2.4 x 10"3
7.6 x 10"2
8.8 x 10"5
0.24
Pollutant Load
Per Production Unit
kg/1,000 1 lb/1,000 gal.
1.56 13.0
0.29 2.44
1.8 15.44
<1 x 10"4 7.8 x 10"4
7.2 x IO"5 6.0 x 10~4
<8.2 x 10~8 7.8 x 10"7
4.9 x 10"2 0.41
2.3 x 10"4 1.9 x 10"3
7.2 x 10"3 6 x 10~2
8.2 x 10~6 6.9 x 10~5
2.3 x 10~^ 0.19
Mercury - "Analyses not possible because of interferences.
Note: Small plant making paint in batches. Sample represented 5 grab samples
before dumping.
Average wastewater flow as gaged 449 I/day (119 gpd).
Average paint production 4820 I/day (1270 gpd).
Average of 25 employees
a/ Survey conducted by NFIC-D.
b/ Value reported as standard units.
c.1 One value, 2,600 mg/1 iron, from iron pigment.
-------
Ink Formulating Industry
The predominant water use in ink formulation is for non-
contact cooling water for ball or roller mills. The only
process wastewater from ink formulation is the water used
for tub washing and plant cleanup. Some water is used in
water-base ink product formulation but this water is not
discharged except during tub washing.
Because these tubs are identical to those used by paint
formulators, the type of cleanup and quantities of water
used are identical. Reference is made to Section V of the
discussion on paints. Limited information is currently
available on the actual composition of ink wastes. The
composition of wastes from a tub washer that recycles the
cleaning water is shown in Table V-10. These wastewaters
are not discharged. Table V-ll gives the constituents of
several ink manufacturing plant wastes in the Oakland,
California area. There is no information available to
determine the number of plants the data in Table V-ll
covers.
The quantities of water used were very difficult to
determine as data was limited. For systems with no water
reuse, the range was from 4,400 to 8,900 liters/1,000 kg
(500 to 1,000 gals./I,000 Ib) of ink including cooling,
boiler and process waters. In the recycle system of Table
V-10, the sludge was produced at a rate of 113 liters/1,000
kg (13.6 gals./I,000 Ib) of ink. If the sludge were 3
percent solids as indicated in the table, the washwater
discharged would be 110 liters/1,000 kg (13.2 gals./I,000
Ib) of ink.
39
-------
TABLE V-10
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION FROM AN INK TUB WASHER
THAT RECYCLES THE WASH WATER-7
(October 15-18, 1973)
Pollutant
COD
TOC
Total Suspended Solids
pH
Metals
Barium
Total Chromium
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Zinc
Copper
Titanium
1 r • - — • •
Concentration
GnR/1)
59,500
32,000
31,600
11 C'b/
I/ . -1
6.7
150
0.29
134
760
4.9
6.4
-------
TABLE V- 11
CONSTITUENTS OF INK MANUFACTURING PLANT (SIC 2893)
WASTES IN EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DISTRICT-
Constituent
PH^
BOD
Total COD
Dissolved COD
Total Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Oil & Grease
Aluminum
Boron
Cobalt
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Silver
Tin
No. of
Entries
16
12
16
16
2
16
14
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
Values (mg/1)
Min.
5.6
55
310
170
338
13
7
0.5
0.18
0
0.1
0.06
0.6
0.26
0.02
0.01
0
0
Max.
11.6
2,160
3,270
2,980
385
1,230
183
1.8
0.21
0
0.1
0.06
2.2
0.32
0.10
0.01
0
0
Mean Std.
9.4
412
926
742
361
156
57
1.1
0.19
0
0.1
0.06
1.4
0.29
0.06
0.01
0
0
Dev.
1.9
563
693
643
292
49
0
0
0
0
0
0
Median
11.1
490
935
876
-
78
97
-
-
0
-
0.06
-
-
-
0
0
0
a/ All data from East Bay Municipal Utilities District files.
b/ Value reported as standard units.
-------
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Paint Formulating Industry
The major wastewater parameters of significance for the
paint formulation industry are BOD5 (5-day 20°C Biochemical
Oxygen Demand), TSS (Total Suspended Solids), pH, and
selected metals. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) may be used
as a substitute for BOD5_ if a relatively constant COD/BOD5
ratio can be developed for a given plant. On the basis of
the evidence reviewed, there appear to be very small
guantities of potentially hazardous or toxic pollutants
released by the paint formulation inustry. Recycling
washwater and water conservation practices will reduce the
quantity of paint wastes discharged to the sewers or
receiving waters.
Ink Formulating Industry
As most ink formulators do not discharge wastes to water
courses and their wastes are generally considered to be
compatible with municipal treatment, there is little data
available on the waste characteristics. The practices of
recycling wastewater and water conservation can reduce the
guantity of ink waste discharged to the sewers.
The significant parameters for measuring the pollution
potential of ink wastes are BOD5 (5-day), pH, and Total
Suspended Solids. Chemial Oxygen Demand (COD) may be used
as a substitute for BOD5 if a relatively constant BOD5/COD
ratio can be developed for a given plant.
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF POLLUTANT^PARAMETERS
Biochemical Oxygen Demand JBOD5, 20°C)
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is a measure of the oxygen
consuming capabilities of organic matter. The BOD does not
in itself cause direct harm to a water system, but it does
exert an indirect effect by depressing the oxygen content of
the water. Sewage and other organic effluents during their
processes of decomposition exert a BOD, which can have a
catastrophic effect on the ecosystem by depleting the oxygen
supply. Conditions are reached frequently where all of the
oxygen is used and the continuing decay process causes the
production of noxious gases such as hydrogen sulfide and
methane. Water with a high BOD indicates the presence of
43
-------
decomposing organic matter and subsequent high bacterial
counts that degrade its quality and potential uses.
Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a water quality constituent that,
in appropriate concentrations, is essential not only to keep
organisms living but also to sustain species reproduction,
vigor, and the development of populations. Organisms
undergo stress at reduced DO concentrations that make them
less competitive and able to sustain their species within
the aquatic environment. For example, reduced DO
concentrations have been shown to interfere with fish
population through delayed hatching of eggs, reduced size
and vigor of embryos, production of deformities in young,
interference with food digestion, acceleration of blood
clotting, decreased tolerance to certain toxicants, reduced
food efficiency and growth rate, and reduced maximum
sustained swimming speed. Fish food organisms are likewise
affected adversely in conditions with suppressed DO. Since
all aerobic aquatic organisms need a certain amount of
oxygen, the consequences of total lack of dissolved oxygen
due to a high BOD can kill all inhabitants of the affected
area.
If a high BOD is present, the quality of the water is
usually visually degraded by the presence of decomposing
materials and algae blooms due to the uptake of degraded
materials that form the foodstuffs of the algal populations.
It was thought at first that the BOD5 test would be
meaningless because of the action o>f the biological
inhibitors and heavy metals. However, this does not appear
to be the case as the majority of the water-base paints are
not tinted before packaging and the tinting materials
contain most of the troublesome heavy metals. Also the
inhibitor is diluted to the point of ineffectiveness by the
washwater. The oils used in water-base paiint production are
generally easily oxidized (9) . Thus, control of this
parameter will also control oil and grease concentrations.
Chemical Oxyggn Demand
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) provides a measure of the
equivalent oxygen required to oxidize the materials present
in a waste water sample under acid conditions with the aid
of a strong chemical oxidant, such as potassium dischromate,
and a catalyst (silver sulfate) . One major advantage of the
COD test is that the results are available normally in less
than three hours. Thus, the COD test is a faster test by
which to estimate the maximum oxygen exertion demand a waste
can make on a stream. However, one major disadvantage is
44
-------
that the COD rest does not differentiate between
biodegradable and nonbiodegradable organic material. In
addition, the presence of inorganic reducing chemical
(sulfides, reduciable metallic ions, etc.) and chlorides may
interfere with the COD test. As a rough generalization, it
may be said that pollutants which would be measured by the
BOD5 test will also show up under the COD test, but that
additional pollutants which are more resistant to biological
oxidation (refractory) will also be measured as COD.
EH
Acidity and alkalinity are reciprocal terms. Acidity is
produced by substances that yield hydrogen ions upon
hydrolysis and alkalinity is produced by substances that
yield hydroxyl ions. The terms "total acidity" and "total
alkalinity" are often used to express the buffering capacity
of a solution. Acidity in natural waters is caused by
carbon dioxide, mineral acids, weakly dissociated acids, and
the salts of strong acids and weak bases. Alkalinity is
caused by strong bases and the salts of strong alkalies and
weak acids.
The term pH is a logarithmic expression of the concentration
of hydrogen ions. At a pH of 7, the hydrogen and hydroxyl
ion concentrations are essentially equal and the water is
neutral. Lower pH values indicate acidity while higher
values indicate alkalinity. The relationship between pH and
acidity or alkalinity is not necessarily linear or direct.
Waters with a pH below 6.0 are corrosive to water works
structures, distribution lines, and household plumbing
fixtures and can thus add such constituents to drinking
water as iron, copper, zinc, cadmium and lead. The hydrogen
ion concentration can affect the "taste" of the water. At a
low pH water tastes "sour". The bactericidal effect of
chlorine is weakened as the pH increases, and it is
advantageous to keep the pH close to 7. This is very
significant for providing safe drinking water.
Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress
conditions or kill aquatic life outright. Dead fish,
associated algal blooms, and foul stenches are aesthetic
liabilities of any waterway. Even moderate changes from
"acceptable" criteria limits of pH are deleterious to some
species. The relative toxicity to aquatic life of many
materials is increased by changes in the water pH.
Metalocyanide complexes can increase a thousand-fold in
toxicity with a drop of 1.5 pH units. The availability of
45
-------
many nutrient substances varies with the alkalinity and
acidity. Ammonia is more lethal with a higher pH.
The lacrimal fluid of the human eye has a pH of
approximately 7.0 and a deviation of 0.1 pH unit from the
norm may result in eye irritation for the swimmer.
Appreciable irritation will cause severe pain.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
The bulk of the materials used in paint formulations are
nearly insoluble inorganic compounds — titanium dioxide,
clays, calcium carbonate, and silicates — which could
occlude the bottom of the receiving body of waters. The
parameter of suspended solids would measure the efficiency
of removal of these inorganic solids.
The bulk of the materials used in ink formulations are
insoluble inorganic compounds—clays and pigments—which
could occlude the bottom of the receiving body of water.
The parameter of suspended solids would measure the
efficiency of removal of these inorganic solids.
Suspended solids include both organic and inorganic
materials. The inorganic components include sand, silt, and
clay. The organic fraction includes such materials as
grease, oil, tar, animal and vegetable fats, various fibers,
sawdust, hair, and various materials from sewers. These
solids may settle out rapidly and bottom deposits are often
a mixture of both organic and inorganic solids. They
adversely affect fisheries by covering the bottom of the
stream or lake with a blanket of material that destroys the
fish-food bottom fauna or the spawning ground of fish.
Deposits containing organic materials may deplete bottom
oxygen supplies and produce hydrogen sulfide, carbon
dioxide, methane, and other noxious gases.
In raw water sources for domestic use, state and regional
agencies generally specify that suspended solids in streams
shall not be present in sufficient concentration to be
objectionable or to interfere with normal treatment
processes. Suspended solids in water may interfere with
many industrial processes, and cause foaming in boilers, or
encrustations on equipment exposed to water, especially as
the temperature rises. Suspended solids are undesirable in
water for textile industries; paper and pulp; beverages;
dairy products; laundries; dyeing; photography; cooling
systems, and power plants. Suspended particles also serve
as a transport mechanism for pesticides and other substances
which are readily sorbed into or onto clay particles.
46
-------
Solids may be suspended in water for a time, and then settle
to the bed of the stream or lake. These settleable solids
discharged with man's wastes may be inert, slowly
biodegradable materials, or rapidly decomposable substances.
While in suspension, they increase the turbidity of the
water, reduce light penetration and impair the
photosynthetic activity of aquatic plants.
Solids in suspension are aesthetically displeasing. When
they settle to form sludge deposits on the stream or lake
bed, they are often much more damaging to the life in water,
and they retain the capacity to displease the senses.
Solids, when transformed to sludge deposits, may do a
variety of damaging things, including blanketing the stream
or lake bed and thereby destroying the living spaces for
those benthic organisms that would otherwise occupy the
habitat. When of an organic and therefore decomposable
nature, solids use a portion or all of the dissolved oxygen
available in the area. Organic materials also serve as a
seemingly inexhaustible food source for sludgeworms and
associated organisms.
Turbidity is principally a measure of the light absorbing
properties of suspended solids. It is frequently used as a
substitute method of quickly estimating the total suspended
solids when the concentration is relatively low.
Oi 1..and Grease
Oil and grease exhibit an oxygen demand. Oil emulsions may
adhere to the gills of fish or coat and destroy algae or
other plankton. Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments
can serve to exhibit normal benthic growths, thus
interrupting the aquatic food chain. Soluble and emulsified
material ingested by fish may taint the flavor of the fish
flesh. Water soluble components may exert toxic action on
fish. Floating oil may reduce the re-aeration of the water
surface and in conjunction with emulsified oil may interfere
with photosynthesis. Water insoluble components damage the
plumage and costs of water animals and fowls. Oil and
grease in a water can result in the formation of
objectionable surface slicks preventing the full aesthetic
enjoyment of the water.
Oil spills can damage the surface of boats and can destroy
the aesthetic characteristics of beaches and shorelines.
47
-------
Metals
Metals are used in paint formulations as biological
inhibitors, driers, and as pigments (10).
Mercury - Mercury compounds were the predominant biocides
used in the past but recent State and Federal restrictions
on their use have been forcing industry to find other
biocides that are subject to environmental degradation.
Mercury use can be expected to decrease, but until such time
as it ceases to be used, it should be limited.
Lead - Lead compounds have been among the cheapest, most
stable and brightest tinting agents used in yellow and red
paints. Lead is also used in drying agents. However,
recent legislation (Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention
Act of 1973) to reduce lead in paints has forced the search
for suitable replacements. As with mercury, lead usage is
decreasing, but, as it inhibits biological life, it should
be limited.
Zinc - Occurring abundantly in rocks and ores, zinc is
readily refined into a stable pure metal and is used
extensively for galvanizing, in alloys, for electrical
purposes, in printing plates, for dye-manufacture and for
dyeing processes, and for many other industrial purposes.
Zinc salts are used in paint pigments, cosmetics,
Pharmaceuticals, dyes, insecticides, and other products too
numerous to list herein. Many of these salts (e.g., zinc
chloride and zinc sulfate) are highly soluble in water;
hence it is to be expected that zinc might occur in many
industrial wastes. On the other hand, some zinc salts (zinc
carbonate, zinc oxide, zinc sulfide) are insoluble in water
and consequently it is to be expected that some zinc will
precipitate and be removed readily in most natural waters.
In zinc-mining areas, zinc has been found in waters in
concentrations as high as 50 mg/1 and in effluents from
metal-plating works and small-arms ammunition plants it may
occur in significant concentrations. In most surface and
ground waters, it is present only in trace amounts. There
is some evidence that zinc ions are adsorbed strongly and
permanently on silt, resulting in inactivation of the zinc.
Concentrations of zinc in excess of 5 mg/1 in raw water used
for drinking water supplies cause an undesirable taste which
persists through conventional treatment. Zinc can have an
adverse effect on man and animals at high concentrations.
48
-------
In soft water, concentrations of zinc ranging from 0.1 to
1.0 mg/1 have been reported to be lethal to fish. Zinc is
thought to exert its toxic action by forming insoluble
compounds with the mucous that covers the gills, by damage
to the gill epithelium, or possibly by acting as an internal
poison. The sensitivity of fish to zinc varies with
species, age and condition, as well as with the physical and
chemical characteristics of the water. Some acclimatization
to the presence of zinc is possible. It has also been
observed that the effects of zinc poisoning may not become
apparent immediately, so that fish removed from zinc-
contaminated to zinc-free water (after 4-6 hours of exposure
to zinc) may die 48 hours later. The presence of copper in
water may increase the toxicity of zinc to aquatic
organisms, but the presence of calcium or hardness may
decrease the relative toxicity.
Observed values for the distribution of zinc in ocean waters
vary widely. The major concern with zinc compounds in
marine waters is not one of acute toxicity, but rather of
the long-term sub-lethal effects of the metallic compounds
and complexes. From an acute toxicity point of view,
invertebrate marine animals seem to be the most sensitive
organisms tested. The growth of the sea urchin, for
example, has been retarded by as little as 30 ug/1 of zinc.
Zinc sulfate has also been found to be lethal to many
plants, and it could impair agricultural uses.
With the exception of mercury, the metals used in paint
production are generally insoluble and the control of
suspended solids concentrations will give adequate control
of these metals.
There are many different metals used in paints and inks
depending on the color desired. These metals, such as
boron, chromium, cadmium, copper, iron, and titanium should
be considered for control on a case-by-case basis when the
application for a discharge permit is considered. The
plants should be asked for a list of the metals they expect
to discharge.
There are possibly trace quantities of other organic and
metallic compounds as the carriers are polymerized oils and
the pigments and extenders in many cases are processed
natural minerals. These are not in sufficient or
controllable quantities so they are not considered at this
time. This does not preclude reopening the issue if, at a
later time, they are identified as problem compounds.
49
-------
-------
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
Paint Formulating industry
The paint industry consists of about 1,500 companies with
about 1,700 plants. In 1971, total industry employment was
about 63,000. Because of the relatively simple technology
and low capital investment required, the industry contains
many small companies. About 42 percent of the companies
have fewer than 10 employees. These small companies
accounted for less than 5 percent of the industry sales in
1967, whereas the four largest companies accounted for about
22 percent of sales and the largest 50 accounted for 61
percent (1) .
Although the industry is spread over a large geographical
area, paint plants are, in general, located close to the
point of use because of transportation costs. This, then,
places most plants in metropolitan areas; and, as such, most
of the plants discharge to municipal systems. A check of
the Refuse Act Permit Program (RAPP) applications in the ten
EPA regions turned up only seven plants that had process
wastes going to surface water courses in 1971. The findings
of the NFIC-D survey of plants for degree-of-treatment
technology are presented in Table VII-1.
As the vast majority of the paint manufacturing plants
discharge to municipal systems, the degree of sophistication
of treatment is solely a function of the restrictions
applied by the municipal system. In areas where high
surcharges are placed on BOD5 and TSS, there is a trend
toward strict water conservation and reuse and the disposal
of paint wastes to landfills. In areas where no
restrictions are imposed, water use is lavish and there is
little or no treatment before discharge (11,12).
The extent of control and treatment technology reported by
plants of various sizes is shown in Table VII-2. About 20
percent of all plants generate no wastewater on a routine,
daily basis, except for sanitary, non-contact cooling, and
boiler blowdown water. An additional 22 percent of the
plants, while generating some wastewater, do not discharge
wastewater, but control or dispose of it by some non-
discharge method (1).
Of the remaining 58 percent of the plants that discharge
wastewater, 30 percent treat all wastewater, 15 percent
control or treat some of their wastewater, and 13 percent
51
-------
tn
ro
riant
TABLE VII-1
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY IDENTIFIED IN THE PAINT FORMULATION INDUSTRY (SIC2851)
No. of Employees
A* 140
E* 60
C* 80
D* <25
E 13
F* >100
G 45
H 15
I 250
J Unknown (20,000 ,ipd production)
K 100
L 65
M 230
N* 15-20
0* 15-20
P* 25
Q 25
R >100
Solyent_3___(0.il_ Based)
Treatment Technology
Redistilled by commercial plant
Redistilled by commercial plant
Redistilled by commercial plant
Reused in subsequent paint
batches
Unknown
Redistilled
Sent to scavenger
Redistilled
Decanted and reused
sludge to landfill
Reused in shingle stain
Unknovm
Redistilled commercially
—J*-^?]L .^a?£^_5^^1]!5[aJL?J-l
Settled, sludf.e landfilled, liquid
reused
All wastes drummed and landfilled
No water based production
Washwater reused in industrial
coatings
Caustic wash & reuse system.
Sludge is landfilled
Caustic reuse and total recycle
system. There are 16 other plants
in the company using total recycle
of washwater. Sludge is landfilled
Reused, sludge to landfill
Used in product
Sent to scavenger
Reused or sent to scavenger
Sent to scavenger
Sent to scavenger
Sewer
Settling, then to sewer. Sludge
sent to landfill
Settling, then to sewer. Sludge sent
to landfill
Lagoon
Flow equalization to sewers, some
washwaters reused in product
* Plants visited - other plants contacted by phone.
-------
TABLE VII-2
EXTENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT PRACTICED IN PAINT PLANTS-'
I/
en
Number and percentage of plants
(Categorized by number of employees)
Plants generating
no wastewater
Plants not dis-
charging
wastewater
Plants treating all
wastewater
Plants partially
treating or not dis-
charging wastewater
Plants without
treatment
Total plants
in group
Fewer than 10 10 to 19
No. % No. %
7 28 5 17
6 24 9 30
5 20 10 33
2827
JL 20 _3 10
25 16 29 19
20 to 49
No. %
11 33
12 35
5 15
4 11
_2 _6
34 22
50 to 99
No. %
5 23
4 18
5 23
5 18
_3 L4
22 15
100 to 249 250 or more
No. % No. %
29 15
1515
10 45 10 50
6 27 4 20
__3 14 _4 20
22 15 20 13
Total
No.
31
33
45
23
20_
152
%
20
22
30
15
13
100
-------
discharge without using any control or treatment. Thus,
about 87 percent of the plants either do not generate any
wastewater or are treating or controlling at least some of
it.
About a third of the plants report reduction of wastewater
by reycling or by conservation of water through the use of
high-pressure nozzles for cleaning, self-contained tub
washers or other conservation methods. In several small
plants (less than 50 employees) the quantity of cleanup
wastewater was found to range from 0.02 to 0.23
liters/liters (gal./gal.) of paint. Within these plants,
production equipment and cleaning facilities are nearly
identical. The ten-fold differences in washwater volume
generated shows the effect of water conservation practices.
There was no detectable difference in the cleanliness of the
tubs. A comparison of two large plants of nearly equal
capacity showed that one discharges 0.86 liter of waste per
liter (gal./gal.) of product and the second discharges 0.08
liter of waste per liter (gal./gal.) of product (2).
Required conservation of water can be attained by
modification of washing methods, as evidenced by the above
examples.
Another method for water reduction is the reuse of washwater
in products (2). This practice is possible under some
conditions. If the paint formulation for the next batch is
the same or of a darker color, then the tub may be reused
without washing or a minimum of water can be used to remove
the residue from the walls of the tub. Because bacterial
contamination of paint causes reduction of shelf life, some
producers are hesitant to reuse the washwater as they feel
this water would contaminate subsequent batches. In other
words, some manufacturers feel that the replacements for
mercury-based biocides are not dependable. There is not a
consensus by industry members on this point. One manu-
facturer has recently installed equipment to flocculate,
settle and filter washwater. The filtered water is exposed
to ultraviolet radiation to disinfect the water which is
then reused for paint manufacture. Tests are currently
being conducted on a similar system in another paint plant.
One promising method for reducing water usage is the use of
dry pick-up procedures for handling spills of the raw
material and of the product. Several plants have plugged all
floor drains and use vacuums to clean the floor area. This
procedure also cuts down on the accident potential as the
floors are always dry. Spills of oils and paints are
handled by cleaning up with shovels or squeegees followed by
the use of a dry absorbent to pick up the residue.
54
-------
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
A general overview of the methods of treatment and disposal
employed by plants of various sizes is presented in Table
VII-3. Sedimentation is the most common treatment method
employed. This is to be expected in view of the fact that
most plants discharge to municipal systems where some
pretreatment is required. In about half of the plants
employing sedimentation, flocculation is also used to
increase the effectiveness of removing suspended solids.
Neutralization, principally of caustic cleaning solutions,
is employed in at least eight plants. Of the remaining
treatment methods, no one method is widely employed. Off-
site disposal, such as landfill, is the most common disposal
method and is practiced in at least 32 plants. Reuse of
cleanup water in products is practiced in at least 26
plants. At least ten plants evaporate wastewater and three
more plants use incineration to dispose of wastewater (1).
The effectiveness of the treatment methods employed by the
paint industry is difficult to judge on the basis of
available data. However, the most significant constituents
of paint wastes are amenable to treatment by physical-
chemical (P-C)methods combined with biological treatment for
removal of biodegradable organics. As in other industries,
dissolved solids are not treated.
Physical-chemical methods are used by some plants to meet
the pretreatment limitations set by state and local
agencies. Briefly, the plants using P-C treatment collect
the flows in a holding tank until sufficient quantity is
obtained to warrant treatment. If necessary, pH adjustment
is made before a coagulant (lime, alum or iron salts) and/or
a coagulant aid (polymer) is added to the batch which is
then flocculated and settled. The settled sludge is sent to
a landfill and the clarified water goes to the municipal
treatment plant. Another variation of this procedure
utilizes a settling pond to obtain clarification before
discharge. One plant follows the addition of the chemicals
by pressurization followed by atmospheric release into a
combination settling-flotation basin where the oil froth is
skimmed and the solids are settled before the effluent is
discharged. Physical-chemical treatment methods can be
expected to produce an effluent with the following ranges of
characteristics: TSS = 1-150 mg/1; BOD5 = 5-60 mg/1; COD =
18-1,400 mg/1. Metals can be expected to range from 0.01 to
0.1 mg/1 in the treated effluent (13).
Several plants now practice no discharge by utilization of
solids separation and washwater reuse. The washwater is
55
-------
TABLE VII-3
WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS
EMPLOYED IN THE PAINT INDUSTRY!/
ui
o\
Number of Plants
(Categorized by number of employees)
Treatment method
Sedimentation
Flocculation
Neutralization
Flotation
Aerated lagoon
Filtration
Equalization
Odor control
Activated sludge
Chemical treatment
Unspecified or other
Off-site disposal
Reused in product
Evaporation
Incineration
Fewer
than 10
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
A
0
10 to
19
9
3
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
5
8
3
0
20 to
49
5
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
7
A
2
2
50 to
99
3
1
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
9
6
0
0
100 to
249
9
5
3
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
5
1
1
0
250 or
more
8
5
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
3
6
0
1
Total
39
17
8
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
9
32
26
10
3
-------
greatly minimized and collected in a tank where the solids
are settled. The partially clarified water is used as a
first wash of the tubs. This is followed with a clean rinse
at the end to remove any residual solids. The solids are
sent to a landfill operation. Several other plants collect
all washwater and send it to landfill operations in drums.
One plant manufacturing water-base industrial coatings has
no discharge as it reuses all waters in subsequent paint
batches
The current trend by several water-base paint manufacturers
is to give the purchaser of paints for home use a wide range
of paint colors that are mixed in the retail store. It was
estimated by several medium to large sized manufacturers
that they now produce as high as 90 percent of their trade
sale paint in the tint base form, with the tinting added in
the store at the time of sale. This trend is expected to
continue throughout the water-base paint industry. One ' of
the most impressive water reuse systems seen during the
NFIC-D survey was used by one large paint manufacturing
company with a vertical flow plant. It was an application
of a commerical caustic tub washer that allowed the cleaning
of either separate paint tubs or the cleaning in-place of
the piping and equipment on that floor. The caustic was
reused until spent, then more caustic was added. The only
output from the system was a thick sludge with a consistency
of peanut butter. The cleaned tubs and mix tanks had a
light powder (spent caustic) on the surfaces but this caused
no product contamination. The company had plugged all floor
drains and slop sinks within the plant. Also they collected
any excess water, 380-760 liters (100-200 gal.) per week, and
reused it in product. They reported no product
contamination.
IDENTIFICATION OF WATER- POLLUTION RELATED
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS
There are several maintenance and operational problems that
are associated with wastewater treatment. One of the most
visible sources of pollution is leaking pumps. As the
material being pumped in the paint industry is abrasive,
pump seals wear rapidly. In plants where maintenance is
adequate, the quantity of paint lost is minimal.
Spill cleanup techniques can greatly affect the quality and
quantity of the wastewater. Some plants hose the spills
into the floor drains while others use squeegees and shovels
to pick up the waste and place it into containers for
discharge to landfills. Any residual materials left on the
floor are picked up by an absorbing agent. Although for
57
-------
convenicence some plants wash down dry spills, a vacuum type
of pickup would keep the materials out of the sewer.
The general plant cleanup can be accomplished by the use of
vacuums and minimum-water-use floor scrubbers. Several
plants have covered all floor drains and use dry cleanup
techniques to keep from increasing the wastewater load.
There are some plants that conserve water and discharge
either no water or very little water per unit of production.
Generally speaking, the plants using water conservation
methods were as clean as those with lavish uses of water
(15).
58
-------
Ink Formulating Industry
In recent years, there has been a proliferation of inks for
rather specific end uses, such as carbon paper, typewriter
ribbons, textiles, magnetic applications as in bank check
processing, and conductive coatings. Improved pigments
including reactive mixtures and fluorescent dyes have also
been developed. Specialty inks likely account for some 20
percent of the 1971 U.S. market.
However, large volume markets continue to be concentrated in
the four basic classifications: letterpress, lithographic,
rotogravure and flexographic. Newsprint (letterpress) isr
of course, largest in volume, but its low selling price
significantly offsets its dollar volume. These inks,
largely comprised of carbon black and mineral oil, have
undergone very little change over the years.
Lithographic inks used in publications, packaging and
commercial printing now have a substantially larger dollar
volume than letterpress inks. The use of web-offset
equipment in printing newspapers and general publications
has accelerated this growth.
In the solvent-base inks, flexographic inks are increasing
their market share at the expense of letterpress. The inks
dry rapidly, affording efficient operation using continuous
webs. Flexographic inks are used on corrugated boxes,
transparent films, foils and flexible laminates.
Gravure inks, historically used to print the newspapers'
Sunday supplements, are now used to print many decorative
consumer packages such as cereal cartons, frozen food
packaging and soap wrappers. The printing ink industry is a
large consumer of pigments due to the increasing demand for
color over the past few years (2).
The industry is almost exclusively located in metropolitan
areas, where the market exists. Because of the proximity to
metropolitan areas, the wastes are generally discharged to
municipal sewers. A check of the RAPP applications in the
ten EPA regions failed to produce any ink manufacturing
plants that discharge other than cooling water to surface
waters. Contacts with the industry have supported this
finding.
As the ink manufacturing plants discharge only to municipal
systems, there is little sophistication in the treatment
methods. The complexity of the treatment process is a
function of the restrictions applied by the municipality.
59
-------
In areas where high surcharges are placed on BOD5 and TSS,
there is a trend toward strict water conservation, reuse and
disposal of ink solids to landfills. In other areas where
no restrictions are imposed, water use is lavish and there
is little or no treatment before discharge. Treatment con-
sists of sedimentation or coagulation-sedimentation to
remove solids before discharge to sewers. Where the
municipality is very restrictive, plants have gone to no
discharge of process wastewaters. Washwater is recycled and
the solids are sent to landfills. Restrictions on
landfilling are forcing the industry to examine incineration
as a method of reducing the organic content of the sludge.
The installation of a tub washer with reuse of the washwater
is practiced in several plants, and results in no discharge
of process wastewaters (3,4).
Another method of water reduction is in the reuse of
washwater as a raw material. This practice is possible if
the ink formulation for the new batch is the same or of a
darker color. The tub can be reused without washing or with
a minimum of washing, or the washwater can be used to
disperse the raw materials in the new batch. Some plants
have plugged all floor drains and use dry pickup methods to
dispose of spilled ink.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
Sedimentation is a common treatment method employed due to
the large numbers of plants discharging into municipal
sewers with pretreatment requirements. Flocculation is also
used to increase the effectiveness of removing suspended
solids. Neutralization, principally of caustic cleaning
solutions, is employed to some degree. Of the ten plants
shown in Table VII-U, all except two have achieved zero
discharge of process wastewater pollutants. Scavenger
pickup and disposal was the predominant method found. The
most promising as far as water conservation is concerned is
the recycling caustic tub washer where only sludge is
wasted.
One small ink manufacturer redistills all washwater from his
ink process and uses it as boiler feed water. In one plant
the volume of scrub water is greatly minimized and collected
in a tank where the solids are settled. The partially
clarified water is used to initially wash the tubs and a
final clean rinse is used to remove any residual solids.
The sludge (3 percent solids) is sent to a landfill
operation. Several other small plants actually collect all
washwater in drums and send it to landfill operations
(3,4,5).
60
-------
TABLE VII- 4
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY DETERMINED IN
THE INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY (SIC2893)
, Number Treatment Technology
Plant— of Employees Solvent Based Water Based
A
B
C
D
F
G
H
I
J
Drummed and redistilled
Drummed and redistilled
Drummed and recycled
Redistilled
Redistilled
To Sewer
Recycling caustic tub-washer
Drummed and landfilled
Recycling caustic washer, rinse
water to sewer, sludge to landfill
Total recycling caustic washer,
excess water from rinses.
Evaporated with steam. Sludge to
landfill.
Scavenger and redistilled
Scavenger and redistilled
Scavenger and redistilled
Scavenger and redistilled Scavenger picked up
Scavenger and redistilled Scavenger picked up
Scavenger picked up
Scavenger picked up
Scavenger picked up
a/ Plants A, B. C, D, and E visited. Others verified by phone or from Chicago
Metropolitan Sanitary District Board.
61
-------
-------
SECTION VIII
COST, ENERGY, AND OTHER NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Paint Formulating Industry
OIL-BASE PAINT PRODUCTION
Cleanup of oil-base manufacturing paint equipment is
accomplished by the use of solvents or by the use of caustic
solutions. The solvents typically are flammable and
disposal to navigable waters or municipal sewers is usually
prohibited. In addition, the cleaning solvents are costly
and are usually either recovered or sold to a scavenger for
recovery. Caustic solutions are reused until spent.
For those waste materials considered to be non-hazardous
where land disposal is the choice for disposal, practices
similar to proper sanitary land fill technology may be
followed. The principles set forth in the EPA's Land
Disposal of Solid Wastes Guidelines (CFR Title 40, Chapter
1; Part 241) may be used as guidance for acceptable land
disposal techniques.
For those waste materials considered to be hazardous
disposal will require special precautions. In order to
ensure long-term protection of public health and the
environment, special preparation and pretreatment may be
required prior to disposal. If land disposal is to be
practiced, these sites must not allow movement of pollutants
to either ground or surface waters. Sites should be
selected that have natural soil and geological conditions to
prevent such contamination or, if such conditions do not
exist, artidicial means (e.g., liners) must be provided £o
ensure long-term protection of the environment from
hazardous materials. where appropriate, the location of
solid hazardous materials disposal sites should be
permanently recorded in the appropriate office of the legal
jurisdiction in which the site in located.
Best practicable control technology currently available in
oil-base paint manufacturing is no discharge of wastewater
pollutants. If the waste solutions are recovered on site,
the residual sludge must be adequately disposed of in a
landfill.
Treatment levels for Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available (BPCTCA), Best Available Technology
Economically Achievable (BATEA), New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS), and Pretreatment of New and Existing
Sources (NESPS) for the control of process wastes from
63
-------
solvent-base paint production are all defined as no
discharge of wastewater pollutants to surface waters. Good
housekeeping, with control of spills and leaks, will allow
all such waste materials to be collected in sumps, placed in
drums, and periodically disposed of in a landfill.
Since the best practicable level of treatment is already no
discharge of process waste liquids, the added costs of
achieving BPCTCA, BATEA and NSPS are zero. The amount of
plant modification and maintenance required to insure good
housekeeping and prevent leaks and spills from entering
drains and being discharged to surface waters can be
achieved for a negligible cost.
WATER-BASE PAINT PRODUCTION
Best practicable treatment for those water-base plants
discharging to municipal systems is passage of the waste and
rinse waters through a sump to remove the settleable solids
prior to entry to the sewer. Best practicable treatment for
plants discharging to surface waters is assumed to be
settling to remove suspended solids and recycling of
wastewater
In developing the costs, it has been assumed that wash and
rinse waters are generated at a rate of 1 liter per 10
liters of paint produced.
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available (BPCTCA)
The BPCTCA for plants discharging to surface waters is the
same as that for solvent-base paint production, i.e., no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants. There are two
different technologies for achieving this level of control.
The choice of technology to minimize costs is greatly
affected by the size of the plant. Small plants (total wash
and rinse water volume less than 1,000 liters or 250 gal.
per day) can best achieve no discharge by reducing the
amount of wash and rinse water and recyling these waters
through an end-of-pipe treatment system. Larger plants
(total wash and rinse water volumes greater than 1,000
liters or 250 gal. per day) can achieve .no discharge more
cheaply by installation of automatic mechanical cleanup
systems.
Costs of achieving BPCTCA have been estimated for a typical
small plant with a wastewater volume of 750 liters (200
gal.) per day and for a typical large plant with a
wastewater volume of 19,000 liters (5,000 gal.) per day.
64
-------
SlMil Plant — The small plant can purchase on the market a
readymade complete system that is compact and proven for
recycling wash and rinse water. The system consists of
three major elements — a storage tank, pumps and piping, and
a sludge collection tank. Equipment costs for such a system
for the typical small plant would be about $10,000 in 1973
prices. Installation costs would probably run as high as
$7,500. Sludge from such a system would accumulate and be
removed at the rate of about 1 1/2 drums per week. Costs
for drum collection and disposal would be about $12 per drum
or $900 per year. Operation and maintenance of the system
could require at most 2 man days per month or $1,920 per
year. Labor is assumed to be $10 per hour.
According to the equipment manufacturers, additon of
chemical coagulants is unnecessary with such a system. If
coagulants were found to be necessary for a particular
plant, equipment for addition would be easily covered by the
contingency built into the capital cost estimate and the
material costs would be inconsequential, about $700 per
year. Power costs would be no more than $10 per year,
assuming a rate of $0.025/KWH. Table VIII-1 presents a
summary of the costs of BPCTCA for a typical small plant at
1973 prices.
The installation of an automatic tub washer instead of the
system described above would give the capacity to wash up to
25 tubs of 850 liters (220 gal.) capacity per eight hour
shift. The installation cost of this washer is $20,000
based on actual installation. The sludge is collected and
sent to a landfill. There is no liquid discharge from the
system.
Unit costs for this installation are shown in Figure VIII-1
for plants producing from 200-5,000 gpd of paint. The costs
range from $0.027 to 0.084 per gal.
For those companies producing from 760-1,500 liters (200-400
gal.) of paint per day (1 or 2 batches), the recycle system
might not be practicable . In that case, a system to meet
the BPCTCA would be to conserve water by washing with 19-38
liters (5-10 gal.) of water per tub as demonstrated in Table
V-8 and then either reusing it in subsequent paint batches
or drumming the entire washwater flow and sending it to a
scavenger at $12 per drum. The cost per gal. for sending
the wastewater to a scavenger would be from $0.006 to 0.012
per gal. of paint produced.
L^£2€ Plant — Large plants should installing a mechanical
automatic high-pressure spray-cleaning system, rather than
65
-------
orq
CO
PAINT PRODUCTION (100 gal/day)
p
b
ro
1
o-
I
O
I
O-
O
00
O
O
O
CD
*
3
CD
at
so
CD
O
CTQ
p
b
O
b
p
b
o
o
p
b
o
00
o
o
p
'o
o
f> p
O O1
o
b'
o
o-
I
CO
CD
CO
o
-o
— ' i. o-
01 o o-o
PAINT PRODUCTION (100 I/day)
o
o
01
o
O
O
-------
TABLE VIII-1.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
A SMALL PAINT MANUFACTURING PLANT
(1973 DOLLARS)
Treatment or
Control Technology
BPCTCA-
BATEA-/
NSPS-^
NESPS-
INVESTMENT
$17,500
$17,500 $17,500
$ 985
ANNUAL COSTS
Capital 1,750
Depreciation 1,750
Operation & Maintenance 1,920
Energy and Power 1Q
TOTAL COSTS $ 5,430
1,750
1,750
1,920
10
1,750
1,750
1,920
10
100
100
1,400
00
$ 5,430
$ 5,430
$ 1,600
COST PER LITER AT
7,570 I/day PRODUCTION
$0.0027
$0.0027
$0.0027
$0.0008
COST PER GALLON AT
2,000 gpd PRODUCTION
$0.0103
$0.0103
$0.0103
$ 0.003
a/ Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
b/ Best Available Treatment Economically Achievable
c_/ New Source Performance Standards
d/ New and Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
67
-------
installing the settling-recycle system appropriate for the
smaller plant. The size of the storage tank necessary for
such a system would occupy too much space and the operating
costs would be relatively high. The mechanical spray
system, on the other hand, is compact, requires little
maintenance, and typically can achieve a net reduction in
existing operating costs owing to savings on cleaning
agents.
Equipment costs for a mechanical automatic rinse-wash system
including recycle would be about $33,700 and installation
costs would be about $21,300 (1973 dollars). In terms of
cleaning chemicals and water consumption, the mechanical-
recycle system would cost no more than existing practices
and, in almost all cases, would result in an appreciable
savings. It is assumed, therefore, that these portions of
operational costs are zero. In addition, as the maintenance
time required for the system would be more than compensated
for by the reduction in cleaning time, no costs are assigned
to maintenance. The system would be considerably more
energy intensive, consuming about $3,000 per year in
electrical power. Sludge collection and disposal costs are
estimated to be about $9,000 per year. Table VIII-2
presents a summary of the costs of BPCTCA for a typical
large plant at 1973 prices.
Best Available TechnglogY^Economically Achievable (BATEA)
and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
Since BPCTCA is to recycle and have no wastewater discharge,
the same technology applies for BATEA and NSPS. The
incremental cost of these technologies above BPCTCA is zero.
Non Water Quality Considerations
The study found no instance where the proposed guidelines
would significantly increase the noise or radiation levels.
The impact of the paint sludge on landfills would be
minimal. The range is from 0.08 m3 (0.1 yd3) each week for
a plant with 2,800 liters per day (750 gpd) paint to 0.8 m3
(1 yd3) for a plant with 26,000 liters per day (7,000 gpd)
production. Based on the information in Figure III-2 the
total sludge each year to landfills would be between 13,000
and 134,000 m3 (17,000 and 175,000 yd3) if all paint plants
in the United States were to go to a total recycle system.
In reality the increase in sludge disposal to landfills
would be the difference between the quantitiy produced by a
68
-------
TABLE VIII-2.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
A LARGE PAINT MANUFACTURING PLANT
(1973 DOLLARS)
Treatment or
Control Technology
BPCTCA-''
BATEA-
c/
NSPS-
NESPS-
INVESTMENT
$55,000
$55,000
$55,000
$ 3,075
ANNUAL COSTS
Capital 5,500
Depreciation 5,500
Operation & Maintenance 9,000
Energy and Power 3, OOP
TOTAL COSTS $23,000
5,500
5,500
9,000
3,000
5,500
5,500
9,000
3,000
300
300
10,150
00
$23,000
$23,000
$10,750
COST PER LITER AT
18,925 I/day PRODUCTION
COSTS PER GALLON AT
5,000 gpd PRODUCTION
$ 0.005
$ 0.017
$ 0.005
$ 0.017
$ 0.005
$ 0.017
$ 0.002
$ 0.008
a./ Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
b/ Best Available Treatment Economically Achievable
c_/ New Source Performance Standards
d/ New and Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
69
-------
total recycle wash system and that quantity currently
removed in sewage treatment plants.
70
-------
Ink Formulating Industry
The process wastewaters requiring control in the ink
industry are the wash and rinse solutions resulting from
cleanup. The sizes of plants, the volumes and
characteristics of wastewaters, and the control technologies
are basically the same as those in the paint industry. As
the equipment and techniques used by the paint industry are
identical to those used in the ink formulation industry, the
costs for washing a tub are identical. The methods used to
develop the cost estimates are presented in Section VIII of
the Paint Industry. The costs for a small and a large ink
production plant are shown in Tables VIII-3 and VIII-4,
respectively.
The installation of an automatic recycling tub washer
capable of washing up to twenty-five 760-liter (200 gal.)
tubs per day has been costed under the same installation
conditions as shown in the Paint portion of this section.
Installed cost is $20,000, the cost of chemicals is $0.50
per tub wash. The sludge is collected and landfilled.
There is no liquid discharge. The cost curve is presented
in Figure VIII-2. The range is from $0.002 to 0.009 per
pound.
For very small ink plants producing from 800 to 1,600 kg
(1,800 to 3,600 Ib) of ink per day, the recycle system may
be too expensive. In that case, the 19 to 38 liters (5 to
10 gal.) of washwater per tub could be drummed and sent to a
scavenger at a cost of $12 per drum. The cost per pound of
ink would range from $0.0013 to $0.0026.
The study found no instance where the proposed guidelines
would significantly increase the noise or radiation levels.
The impact of ink sludge on landfills would be minimal as
the range is from 1.0 to 3.2 kg of ink solids per 1,000 kg
(lb/1,000 Ib) of product. These quantities could be
increased if flocculants were added. Assuming no use of
flocculants, the weight of sludge produced would vary from
0.1 to 0.32 percent of the weight of ink produced.
71
-------
TABLE VIII- 3
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A
SMALL INK MANUFACTURING PLANT
Treatment or
Control Technology
INVESTMENT
BPCTCA-
$17,500
$17f500
NSPS-
NESPS-
$17,500 $ 985
ANNUAL COSTS
Capital
Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
1,750
1,750
1,920
10
1,750
1,750
1,920
10
1,750
1,750
1,920
10
100
100
1,400
00
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
5,430
5,430
5,430
1,600
COST PER kg AT
8,200 kg/day PRODUCTION
$0.0025
$0.0025
$0.0025 $0.0007
COST PER POUND AT
18,000 Ib/day PRODUCTION
$0.0011
$0.0011
$0.0011 $0.0003
a/ Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
b/ Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
£/ New Source Performance Standards
d/ New and Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
72
-------
TABLE VIII-A
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR A
LARGE INK MANUFACTURING PLANT
INVESTMENT
Technology
BPCTCA-
$55,000
BATEA-
$55,000
NSPS-
$55,000
NESPS-
$ 3,075
ANNUAL COSTS
Capital
Depreciation
Operation and Maintenance
Energy and Power
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
5,500
5,500
9,000
3,000
5,500
5,500
9,000
3,000
5,500
5,500
9,000
SjjOOO
300
300
10,150
00
23,000
23,000
23,000
10,750
COSTS PER kg AT
20,500 kg/day PRODUCTION
$ 0.004
$ 0.004
$ 0.004 $ 0.002
COST PER POUND AT
45,000 Ib/day PRODUCTION
$0.0019
$0.0019
$0.0019 $0.0009
a./ Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
J5/ Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
_£/ New Source Performance Standards
d_/ New and Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
73
-------
CTQ
INK PRODUCTION (1000 Ibs/doy)
CO
V)
*-*
CD
*
co
CO
CTQ
=5
cu
CO
CO
o
o
o
INK PRODUCTION (100 kg/day)
-------
SECTION IX
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1,
1977 are those attainable through the application of the
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
(BPCTCA). Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available is based upon the average of the best existing
performance by plants of various sizes, ages and unit
processes within the industrial category and/or subcategory.
This average is not based on a broad range of plants within
the paint processing industry, but upon performance levels
achieved by exemplary plants.
Consideration must also be given to:
a. The total cost of application of technology in
relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be
achieved from such application;
b. The size and age of equipment and facilities
involved;
c. The processes employed;
d. The engineering aspects of the application of
various types of control techniques;
e. Process changes; and
f. Non-water quality environmental impact (including
energy requirements).
Also, Best Practicable control Technology Currently
Available emphasizes treatment facilities at the end of a
manufacturing process but includes control technologies
within the process itself when the latter are considered to
be normal practice within an industry.
A further consideration is the degree of economic and
engineering reliability which must be established for the
technology to be "currently available." As a result of
demonstration projects, pilot plants and general use, there
must exist a high degree of confidence in the engineering
and economic practicability of the technology at the time of
75
-------
commencement of construction or installation of the control
facilities.
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Paint Formulating Industry
Based on the information contained in Sections III through
VIII of this document, a determination has been made of the
degree of effluent reduction attainable through the
application of the Best Practicabe Control Technology
Currently Available for the paint formulating industry. The
limitations are for no discharge of process
wagtewater pollutants to navigable waters.
Ink Formulating Industry
Based on the information contained in Sections III through
VIII of this document, a determination has been made of the
degree of effluent reduction attainable through the
applicaion of the Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available for the ink manufacturing industry. The
§£fly§2fe limitations are for no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants to navigable waters.
Identification, of _the Best Practicable Control
Technology ^Currently Available
In-plant control measures as well as end-of~pipe treatment
techniques contribute to the best practicable control
technology currently available, although emphasis is on end-
of-pipe treatment. Water recycle and reuse will tend to
reduce the cost of end-of-pipe treatment facilities.
The Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
for the paint formulating industry and the ink formulating
industry is no discharge of process wastewater pollutants to
receiving streams. This can be accomplished in part for
oil-base manufacturers through redistillation and reuse of
solvents utilized in tub washing, with solids disposal to
landfill. Water-base paint and ink formulators can treat
washwaters by sedimentation, with solids disposal to
landfill and recycling of treated effluent to the wash
cycle. Additionally, both types of manufacturers can
implement the following practices:
a. Improved maintenance of pumps to reduce product
loss.
76
-------
b. Utilization of dry or minimum-water-use floor
cleanup procedures for removal of spills and for general
housekeeping.
An alternative technology for both oil- and water-base paint
and ink formulators is the use of an automatic washing
system which consists of utilization of a caustic solution,
solid separation, and reuse of the caustic in the next wash
cycle. Solids disposal is to landfill. This technology is
currently being practiced in at least one plantr (14) (15)
paint] [ (3) (4) ink].
77
-------
Paint Formulating Industry
Total Cost of Application
As there are between 1 and 30 plants that possibly can be
affected by BPCTCA the total capital cost to industry would
range from $17,000-55,000 to a maximum total figure of
$510,000-1,650,000 for varying combinations of large and
small plants (Table VIII-1 and VIII-2).
Size and Age of Equipment
The size of the paint formulating plant would have little
effect on the control technology applied. Since the
equipment used in paint formulating has not changed
appreciably over the years, the age of the equipment is not
a basis for differentiation in the application of the
control technology.
Process^ Employed
There is no essential difference in methods of making water-
and oil-base paints. Larger plants may use gravity flow or
pumping to transfer paints where the small operator
mechanically moves the paint tub from station to station.
The treatment process that appears to be most acceptable is
the use of a caustic washer capable of cleaning all tanks
and pipes in place. The washer is connected to the tanks by
quick connect hose coupling. The paint solids and reacted
caustic are collected in a settling tank and removed
periodically as a thick sludge. The final rinse water makes
up for the water lost in the sludge. For small tub
operations, the washer has attachments that allow the tub to
be cleaned while on the work floor.
Engineering Aspects
The technology required to meet BPCTCA has been demonstrated
by several plants in the industry (15).
Process chancres
No major changes are expected in the formulation of paints.
Any minor changes would reflect water conservation and
possible reuse of wastewater in the product.
78
-------
Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact
There is no evidence that application of this control
technology will result in any unusual air pollution
problems, either in kind or magnitude. The energy required
to apply this control technology represents only a small
increment of the present total energy requirements of the
industry. Solid waste control must be considered. Solid
residue and sludge are potential probelms because of the
need for periodic disposal. Solid waste must be handled
properly to assure that no landfill or associated problems
develop. Best practicable control technology and best
available control technology, as they are known today,
require disposal of the pollutants removed from waste waters
in this industry in the form of solid wastes and liquid
concentrates. In most cases these are non-hazardous
substances requiring only minimal custodial care. However,
some constituents may be hazardous and may require special
consideration. In order to ensure long term protection of
the environment from these hazardous or harmful
constituents, special consideration of disposal sites must
be made. All landfill sites where such hazardous wastes are
disposed should be selected so as to prevent horizontal and
vertical migration of these contaminants to ground or
surface waters. In cases where geologic conditions may not
reasonably ensure this, adequate precautions (e.g.,
impervious liners) should be taken to ensure long term
protection of the environment from hazardous materials.
Where appropriate, the location of solid hazardous materials
disposal sites should be permanently recorded in the
appropriate office of the legal jurisdiction in which the
site is located.
79
-------
Ink Fornvul at ing Industry
Total Cost_of Application
As there are only a few permit applications requesting the
discharge of product wastes, there would appear to be a
minimal economic effect on the industry.
Size^and Age of Equipment
The size of the ink manufacturing plants would have no
effect on the control technology applied. The age of the
equipment is not a basis for differentiation in the
application of the control technology.
Process Employed
Containment of all process wastewaters can be achieved by
the use of automatic washing equipment and the reuse of the
wastewater for washing or for formulating product or, in the
case of small plants, by drumming the wastes and disposing
of them by landfill.
Engineering^Aspects
The technology required to meet BPCTCA has been demonstrated
by several plants in the industry (3,4).
Proce ss mChanges
No major changes are expected in the manufacture of inks.
Any minor changes would reflect water conservation and
possible reuse in the product.
Non-water Quality Environmental Impact
There is no evidence that application of this control
technology will result in any unusual air pollution or solid
waste disposal problems, either in kind or magnitude. The
costs of avoiding problems in these areas are not excessive.
The energy required to apply this control technology
represents no significant increase of the present total
energy requirements of the industry.
Best practicable control technology and best available
control technology require disposal of the pollutants
removed from wastewaters in the form of solids. In most
cases, these are non-hazardous substances requiring only
minimal custodial care. However, some constituents may be
hazardous and may require special consideration. In order
80
-------
to ensure long-term protection of the environment from these
hazardous or harmful constituents, special consideration of
disposal sites must be made. All landfill sites where such
hazardous wastes are disposed should be selected so as to
prevent horizontal and vertical migration of these
contaminants to ground or surface waters.
In cases where geologic conditions may not reasonably ensure
this, adequate precaution (e.g. impervious liners) should be
taken to ensure long-term protection to the environment from
hazardous materials. Where appropriate, the location of
hazardous materials disposal sites should be permanently
recorded in the appropriate office of the legal jurisdiction
in which the site is located.
81
-------
-------
SECTION X
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved no later
than July 1, 1983 are not based on an average of the best
performance within an industrial subcategory, but are
determined by identifying the very best control and
treatment technology employed by a specific point source
within the industrial category or subcategory, or by one
industry where it is readily transferable to another. A
specific finding must be made as to the availability of
control measures and practices to eliminate the discharge of
pollutants, taking into account the cost of such
elimination.
Consideration must also be given to:
a. The age of the equipment and facilities involved;
b. The process employed;
c. The engineering aspects of the application of
various types of control techniques;
d. Process changes;
e. The cost of achieving the effluent reduction
resulting from application of the technology;
f. Non-water quality environmental impact (including
energy requirements).
In addition. Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable emphasizes in-process controls as well as control
or additional treatment techniques employed at the end of
the production process.
This level of technology considers those plant processes and
control technologies which, at the pilot plant, semi-works,
or other level, have demonstrated both technological
performance and economic viability at a level sufficient to
reasonably justify investing in such facilities. It is the
highest degree of control technology that has been achieved
or has been demonstrated to be capable of being designed for
plant scale operation up to and including "no discharge" of
83
-------
pollutants. Although economic factors are; considered in
this development, the costs for this level of control are
intended to be the top-of-the-line of current technology,
subject to limitations imposed by economic and engineering
feasibility. However, there may be some technical risk with
respect to performance and with respect to certainty of
costs. Therefore, some industrially-sponsored development
work may be needed prior to its application.
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
Paint Formulating Industry
The effluent reduction attainable for the paint formulating
industry through the application of the Best Available
Technology Economically Achievable is the same as BPCTCA
which is no discharge of process wastewater pollutants to
navigable waters, as developed in Section IX. There is no
incremental increase in costs of BATEA over BPCTCA.
Ink FormulatingIndustry
The effluent reduction attainable for the ink manufacturing
industry through the application of the Best Available
Technology Economically Achievable is the same as BPCTCA
which is no discharge of process wastewater pollutants to
navigable waters, as developed in Section IX. There is no
incremental cost of BATEA over BPCTCA.
84
-------
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations that must be achieved by new
sources are termed performance standards. The New Source
Performance Standards apply to any source for which
construction starts after the publication of the proposed
regulations for the Standards. The Standards become
effective upon start-up of the new source. The Standards
are determined by adding to the consideration underlying the
identification of the Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available a determination of what higher levels of
pollution control are available through the use of improved
production processes and/or treatment techniques. Thus, in
addition to considering the best in-plant and end-of-process
control technology, New Source Performance Standards are
based on an analysis of how the level of effluent may be
reduced by changing the production process itself.
Alternative processes, operating methods or other
alternatives are considered. However, the end result of the
analysis is to identify effluent standards which reflect
levels of control achievable through the use of improved
production processes (as well as control technology), rather
than prescribing a particular type of process or technology
which must be employed. A further determination made is
whether a standard permitting no discharge of pollutants is
practicable.
Consideration must also be given to:
a. Operating methods;
b. Batch, as opposed to continuous, operations;
c. use of alternative raw materials and mixes of raw
materials;
d. Use of dry rather than wet processes (including
substitution of recoverable solvents for water);
e. Recovery of pollutants as byproducts.
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE FOR NEW SOURCES
Paint Formulating Industry
The effluent reduction attainable for new sources in the
paint formulation industry is the same as BPCTCA which is no
85
-------
discharge of process wast.ewat.er pollutants to navigable
waters, as developed in Section IX.
Ink Formulating^Industry
The effluent reduction attainable for new sources in the ink
formulation industry is the same as BPCTCA which is no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants to navigable
waters, as developed in Section IX.
86
-------
SECTION XII
ACKNOWLEGMENTS
This report was prepared by the Environmental Protection
Agency's XXXX Branch of the National Field Investigations
Center, Denver Colorado, under the Management of Thomas
Gallagher, Director, Art Masse, Project Manager, Lee Reid,
Project Engineer, and Robert King, Project Engineer made
significant contributions to the preparation of this report.
David Becker, Project Officer, Effluent Guidelines Division,
contributed to the overall coordination of this study and
assisted in the preparation of this report.
Allen Cywin, Director, Effluent Guidelines Division, Ernst
P. Hall, Deputy Director, Effluent Guidelines Division,
Walter J. Hunt, Chief, Effluent Guidelines Development
Branch offered guidance and helpful suggestions.
Members of the Working Group/Steering Committee who
coordinated the internal EPA Review are as follows:
Walter J. Hunt, EGD (Chairman)
David Becker, EGD (Project Officer)
Art Masse, NFIC - Denver (Project Manager)
Lee Reid, NFIC - Denver
Robert King, NFIC - Denver
Herbert Shovronek, NERC - Cincinnati (Edison)
Richard Stevenson, OPE
Courtney Riorden, OEGC, Washington
Jules Cohen, NFIC - Denver
William Swithy, OTS, Washington
Carol Wills, OEGC - Denver
Matt Straus, OSWMP - Washington
Irving Dzikowski, Region V - Chicago
Alfred Galli, Region VI - Dallas
John Dale, ESED - Durham
Acknowledgement and appreciation is given to the secretarial
staff for their efforts in the preparation of this report.
Brenda Holmone, Effluent Guidelines Division
Nancy Zrubek, Efffluent Guidelines Division
Marsha O'Connor, NFIC - Denver
Special recognition is due the National Paint and coating
Association, the Federation of Societies for Paint
Technology, the National Association of Printing Ink
87
-------
Manufacturers, the East Bay Municipal Utilities District and
the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago for
their role in facititating contact with representative
segments of the industry and many other contributors.
Appreciation is extended to the following companies that
participated in the study:
Boysen Paints
Celanese Coatings Company
Crosby Forest Products Company
DeSoto Inc.
Dixie - O»Brien Corporation
Exxon Chemical Company
Flecto Corporation
Frank Dunne Company
Inmont Corporation
Morwear Paint Company
Porter Paints
Sherwin Williams Company
Sinclair - Valentine Inks
Sun Chemical Corporation
Tenneco Chemical Inc.
88
-------
SECTION XIII
REFERENCES
Paint Formulating Industry
1. Barrett, W. J., Mooneau, G. A., and Rodig, J. J.,
"Waterborne Wastes of the Paint and Inorganic Pigments
Industries," Southern Research Institute, Birmingham,
Alabama, July, 1973, EPA 670/2-74-030.
2. Environmental Protection Agency, "Field Notes and
Chemical Analyses - Survey of Paint and Ink
Manufacturers in Oakland, California," collected by
National Field Investigations Center, Denver, Colorado,
October, 1973.
3. Hine, W. R., "Disposal of Waste Solvents," Journal of
Paint Technology, U3 (558):75-78, July, 1971.
4. Williams, Rodney, "Latex Wastes and Treatment," Paper
presented at the meeting of the Golden Gate Section,
National Paint and Coatings Association, San Francisco,
California, June, 1972.
5. Environmental Protection Agency, "Development Document
for Proposed Effluent Limitaitons Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Synthetic Resins
Segment of the Plastics and Synthetic Materials
Manufacturing Paint Source Category," Washington, D.C.,
August, 1973.
6. Bruhns, F., "The Paint Industry vs. Water Pollution,"
Paint and Varnishing Production, May, 1971, pp. 35-39.
7. Lederer, S. J. and Goll, M., "The Mercury Problem,"
Paint and Varnish Production^ October, 1972, pp. 4U-49.
8. Mann, A., "Mercury Biocides: Paint's Problem Material,"
Paint and Varnish Production, March, 1971, pp. 26-35.
9. Yazujian, D., "Chemicals in Coatings," Chemical Week^
October, 1971, pp. 35-51.
10. Mann, A., "1972 Review-1973 Forcast," Paint and Varnish
Production, July 1973, pp. 23-36.
89
-------
11. Larsen, D., Kunel, K., "COD Solids Removal Exceeds 905S
in Effluent From Coatings Plant," Chemical Processing,
January, 1971, pp. 16-17.
12. Maas, W., "solid Waste Disposal and Organic Finishing,"
Metal Finishing. March, 1972, pp. 44, 45, 49.
13. Desoto Corporation, Desoto Waste Treatment System for
Latex Paint Wastes, Chicago, Illinois.
14. Reid, L. C., "Memorandum to Record," (Specifying Plants
Attaining No discharge of Process Wastewater to Surface
Waters), National Field Investigations Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, Colorado,
December, 1973 - January, 1974.
15. Reid, L. C., and Masse, A., "Trip Reports," (Paint and
Ink Plants in Chicago, Illinois and Oakland, California
Areas), National Field Investigations Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, Colorado,
December, 1973 - January, 1974.
16. "Water Quality Criteria, 1972," National Academy of
Sciences and National Academy of Engineering for the
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 1972
(U.S. Government Printing Office Stock No. 5501-00520)
90
-------
REFERENCES
INK FORMULATING INDUSTRY
1. Environmental Protection Agency, "Development Document
for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Synthetic Resins
Segment of the Plastics and Synthetic Materials
Manufacturing Point Source Category," Washington, D.C.,
August, 1973.
2. Williams, Alex, "Printing Inks," Noyes Data Corporation,
Parkridge, N.J., 1972.
3. Reid, L. C., "Memorandum to Record," (Specifying Plants
Attaining No Discharge of Process Wastewater to Surface
Waters), National Field Investigations Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, Colorado,
December, 1973 - January, 1974.
U. Reid, L. C., and Masse, A., "Trip Reports," (Paint and
Ink Plants in Chicago, Illinois and Oakland, California
Areas), National Field Investigations Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, Colorado,
December, 1973 - January, 1974.
5. King, Robert, "Trip Report," National Field
Investigations Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Denver, Colorado, November, 1973.
6. "Water Quality Criteria, 1972," National Academy of
Sciences and National Academy of Engineering for the
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 1972,
(U.S. Government Printing Office Stock No. 5501-00520).
91
-------
-------
SECTION XIV
GLOSSARY
DEFINITIONS
Ball Mill — A horizontal mounted cylindrical tank
containing steel or ceramic balls that reduce particle size
of materials when the tank is rotated.
Binder — That component of a coating that contributes
primarily to the adhesive and cohesive properties of the
coating.
liocheinicjii Oxygen Demand (BOD5) — The amount of oxygen
required by microorganisms while stabilizing decomposable
organic matter under aerobic conditions. The level of BOD5
is usually measured as the demand for oxygen over a standard
five-day period. Generally expressed as mg/1.
Biocide — Chemical toxic to biological life.
Biological Inhibitor — Chemical that inhibits or disrupts
biological processes.
Carbon Black — Finely divided carbon obtained by burning a
gas in an oxygen deficient combustion chamber. The carbon
is mixed with oils to produce certain inks.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) — A measure of the amount of
organic matter which can be oxidized to carbon dioxide and
water by a strong oxidizing agent under acidic conditions.
Generally expressed as mg/1.
Cleavage — That quality of paint or ink left on the sides
of production tanks after the product is removed.
pisperser — Mixing machine that acts to disperse the
components of paint or ink.
Dispersing Agent — A reagent that is compatible with the
solvent and holds finely divided matter dispersed in the
solvent.
Esterification — The formation of an ester by elimination
of water between an acid and an alcohol.
Extender — Clays and silicates used to give opacity to a
coating.
93
-------
ZaMicide — Chemical used to inhibit growth of fungus.
Laccjuer — A solution in an organic solvent of a natural or
synthetic resin, a cellulose ester or a cellulose ester
together with modifying agents, such as plasticizers,
resins, waxes, and pigments.
M^ex — Aqueous colloidal disperson of rubber or rubber-
like substances.
Oil-Base — Paints or inks that use oils or resins as the
prime vehicle.
pH — The reciprocal logarithum of the hydrogen ion concen-
tration in wastewater expressed as a standard unit.
Phys ical-Chemical — The method of treating wastewaters
using combinations of the processes of coagulation,
Sedimentation, carbon absorption, electrodialyses or reverse
osmosis.
Picjinent — The colorant used to give paints and inks the
desired hue and color.
Process Wastewater — Any water subsequently discharged
directly or indirectly, as through municipal sewers, to the
environment in a liquid phase which (1) came in direct
contact with raw materials, intermediates or final products
or (2) was utilized in cleanups of the manufacturing
equipment or area.
Resin — Any class of solid or semi-solid organic products
of natural or synthetic origin, generally of high molecular
weight with no definite melting point.
E2ii Mills — Machines with close-tolerance adjustable metal
rolls used to disperse and grind pigments to a certain con-
sistency and size.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) — Solids that eigher float on
the surface of, or are in suspension in, water and which are
largely removable by filtering or sedimentation.
— A fluid that dries in contact with air by
evaporation of its volatile constituents by the oxidation of
its oil and resin ingredients or by both methods to a
continuous protective coating when spread upDn a surface in
a thin film.
94
-------
Water-Base — Paints or inks that use water as the prime
vehicle
SYMBOLS
gal.
gm
gpd
gpm
kg
kg/day
1
1/m
Ib/day
m
m^/day
mgd
mg/1
TOC
volume in gallons = 3.785 liters
weight in grams = 0.03527 ounces
flow rate in gallons per day = 3.785 x
10~3 cubic meters per day
flow rate in gallons per minute = 0.0631
liters per second or 3.785 liters per
minute
weight in kilograms = 2.205 pounds
mass flow rate in kilograms per day
volume in liters = 0.2642 gallons
flow rate in liters per minute
mass flow rate in pounds per day
length in meters = 3.281 feet or 1.094
yards
flow rate in cubic meters per day = 264.2
gallons per day
flow rate in million gallons per day =
3,785 cubic meters per day = 43.7 liters
per second
concentration in milligrams per liter
total organic carbon
95
-------
TABLE XIV-1
METRIC TABLE
CONVERSION TABLE
MULTIPLY (ENGLISH UNITS)
ENGLISH UNIT ABBREVIATION
acre ac
acre - feet ac ft
British Thermal
Unit BTU
British Thermal
Unit/pound BTU/lb
cubic feet/minute cfm
cubic feet/second cfs
cubic feet cu ft
cubic feet cu ft
cubic inches cu in
degree Fahrenheit °F
feet ft
gallon gal
gallon/minute gpm
horsepower hp
inches in
inches of mercury in Hg
pounds Ib
million gallons/day mgd
mile mi
pound/square
inch (gauge) psig
square feet sq ft
square inches sq in
ton (short) ton
yard yd
by TO OBTAIN (METRIC UNITS)
CONVERSION ABBREVIATION METRIC UNIT
0.405
1233.5
0.252
ha
cu m
kg cal
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555(°F-32)*
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
0.7457
2.54
0.03342
0.454
3,785
1.609
kg cal/kg
cu m/nin
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
°C
m
1
I/sec
kw
cm
atm
kg
cu m/day
km
(0.06805 psig +1)* atm
0.0929 sq m
6.452 sq cm
0.907 kkg
0.9144 m
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram - calories
kilogram calories/kilogra
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
liters/second
killowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters/day
kilometer
atmospheres (absolute)
square meters
square centimeters
metric ton (1000 kilograr
meter
Actual conversion, not a multiplier
96
------- |