EPA 440/1-75/060
Group II
Development Document for Interim
Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Proposed New Source Performance
Standards for the
PHARMACEUTICAL
MANUFACTURING
Point Source Category
\
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
DECEMBER 1976
-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
for
INTERIM FINAL
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
and
PROPOSED NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
for the
PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
Russell E. Train
Administrator
Andrew W. Breidenbach, Ph.D.
Assistant Administrator for
Water and Hazardous Materials
Eckardt C. Beck
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Water Planning and Standards
•or
Robert B. Schaffer
Director, Effluent Guidelines Division
Joseph S. Vitalis
Project Officer
and
George M. Jett
Assistant Project Officer
December 1976
Effluent Guidelines Division
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20U60
-------
Section
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents the findings of a study of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category for the
purpose of developing effluent limitations and guidelines
for existing point sources plus standards of performance and
pretreatment standards for existing and new sources, to
implement Sections 301 (b) , 301 (c) , 304 (b) , 304 (c) , 306 (b) ,
306 (c)f 307(b) and 307(c) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, 1311, 1314 (b),
1314 (c), 1316 (b), 1317 (b) and 1317 (c), 86 Stat. 816 et.
seq.) (the "Act") .
Effluent limitations and guidelines contained herein set
forth the degree of effluent reduction attainable through
the application of the Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available (BPT) and the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of the Best
Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) which
must be achieved by existing point sources by July 1, 1977,
and July 1, 1983, respectively. The standards of per-
formance and pretreatment standards for existing and new
sources contained herein 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 development of data and recommendations in the document
relate to the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry, which
is one of eight industrial segments of the miscellaneous
chemicals industry. Effluent limitations were developed for
each subcategory covering the pharmaceutical manufacturing
point source category on the basis of the level of raw waste
load as well as on the degree of treatment achievable by
suggested model systems. These systems include biological
and physical/chemical treatment and systems for reduction in
pollutant loads.
Supporting data and rationale for development of the
proposed effluent limitations, guidelines and standards of
performance are contained in this report.
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page
Abstract
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 7
III Introduction 27
IV Industrial Categorization 53
V Waste Characterization 127
VI Selection of Pollutant Parameters 143
VII Control and Treatment Technologies 161
VIII Cost, Energy and Non-water Quality
Aspects 189
IX Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available (BPT) 237
X Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable (BAT) 247
XI New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 255
XII Pretreatment Guidelines 261
XIII Performance Factors for Treatment Plant
Operations 269
XIV Acknowledgements 277
XV Bibliography 281
XVI Glossary 297
XVII Abbreviations and Symbols 329
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Title Page
III-1 Shipments of Pharmaceutical Prepa-
rations by Census Regions, Divisions,
and States, 1967 37
III-2a, Profile of 45 Major
2b,2c,2d,2e, Pharmaceutical Companies 39
2f,2g,2h,2i,2j
IV-1a Typical Fermentation Process With
Solvent Extraction Refining Steps 65
IV-1b Typical Fermentation Process with
Ion Exchange Refining Steps 67
IV-2 Typical Fermentation Process 69
IV-3 Typical Vaccine Production Process 70
IV-4 Steroid Hormones/Steroidal Synthetics 73
IV-5 Typical Chemical Synthesis Process 75
IV-6 Typical Chemical Synthesis Process
(Antibiotic Manufacture) 76
IV-7 Typical Pharmaceutical Formulation
Processes 78
IV-8 Evaporative Cooling Water System 88
IV-9 Typical Thermal Oxidizer Configuration 92
VII-1 Barometric Condenser 164
VII-2 Activated Carbon Adsorption Schematic 185
VIII-1 BPT Cost Model -
Subcategories A and C 194
VIII-2 BPT Cost Model -
Subcategories B, D, E 195
VIII-3a BAT Cost Model -
Subcategories A & C 206
-------
VIII-3b BAT Cost Model -
Subcategories B, D, E 207
VIII-4 NSPS Cost Model - Subcategories
A, B, C, D, E 208
VIII-5 Variation of BPT Treatment Plant
Capital Cost with Capacity 224
VIII-6 Equalization Basin 225
VIII-7 Primary and Secondary Clarifier
Including Mechanism 226
VIII-8 Neutralization Tanks Including
Mixers 227
VIII-9 Neutralization Lime Chemical Addition
Facilities Including Storage, Feeding,
Slaking, Pumps, Mixers 228
VIII-10 Aeration Basin - Concrete Basins 229
VIII-11 Aeration Basin - Earthen
with Cone. Liner 230
VIII-12 Fixed-Mounted Aerators 231
VIII-13 Floating Aerators 232
VIII-14 Vacuum Filters Including Pumps,
Receivers, Conveyor and Building 233
VIII-15 Multi-Media Filters Including Feed
Well, Pumps and Sump 234
VIII-16 Chlorination Facilities Including
Contact Tank, Feed, Storage,
and Handling 235
VIII-17 Low Lift Pump Station Includes Structure,
Pumps, Piping, Controls, Bar Screens,
Electrical, Heating and Earthwork 236
vi ii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Title Page
II-1a BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products
Subcategory 11
II-1b BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory B - Extraction Products
Subcategory 12
II-1c BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis
Products Subcategory 13
II-id BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation Subcategory 14
II-1e BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E - Research Subcategory 15
II-2a BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A 16
II-2b BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory B 17
II-2c BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C 18
II-2d BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory D 19
II-2e BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E 20
II-3a NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A 21
II-3b NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory B 22
II-3c NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C 23
II-3d NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines 24
ix
-------
Subcategory D
II-3e NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E 25
III-1 Biological Products - SIC 2831 33
III-2 Medicinal Chemicals and Botanical
Products - SIC 2833 34
III-3 Pharmaceutical Products - SIC 2834 35
III-4 Number of Direct Dischargers by EPA
Region Derived from Active NPDES Permits
and Permit Applications 50
III-5 NPDES Permit Status of Direct Discharger
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers 51
IV-1 Flowsheet of Protein Fractionation
of Plasma 72
V-1a,b Raw Waste Loads 132
V-2 Comparison of Raw Waste Load Data
for Pharmaceutical Industry 137
V-3 Summary of Raw Waste Loads 138
V-4a,4b,4c Other Parameter Raw Waste Loads for
Pharmaceutical Subcategories A, B, C,
D and E 140
VI-1 List of Parameters to be Examined 145
VII-1 Treatment Technology Survey 170
VII-2a Summary of Statistical Analysis of
Historical Data - Effluent BOD 172
VII-2b Summary of Statistical Analysis of
Historical Data - Effluent COD 173
VII-2c Summary of Statistical Analysis of
Historical Data - Effluent TSS 174
VII-3a,3b Treatment Plant Performance Data 176
VII-3c Array of Treatment Plant Performance
Data 180
-------
VII-4 Summary of COD Carbon Isotherm Tests
Performed on Biological Treatment
Plant Effluent 182
VII-5 Summary of BODS Carbon Isotherm Tests
Performed on Biological Treatment
Plant Effluent 183
VII-6 Summary of TOC Carbon Isotherm Tests
Performed on Biological Treatment
Plant Effluent 184
VII-7 Results of Studies of Filtration
of Effluent from Secondary
Biological Treatment 187
VIII-1 BPT, NSPS and BAT Waste Treat-
ment Cost Models 192
VIIl-2a,2b, BPT Cost Model Design Summary -
2c,2d Subcategories A, B, C, D and E 196
VIII-3 Typical BPT End of Pipe Waste Treat-
ment Requirements 200
VIII-4 Engineering News Record (ENR) Indices 202
VIII-5 BAT Cost Model Design Summary -
Subcategories Ar B, C, D and E 203
VIII-6 NSPS Cost Model Design Summary -
Subcategories Ar Br C, D and E 204
VIII-7 Wastewater Treatment Costs for BPT,
NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations -
Subcategory A 210
VIII-8 Wastewater Treatment Costs for BPT,
NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations -
Subcategory E 211
VIII-9 Wastewater Treatment Costs for BPT,
NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations -
Subcategory C 212
Vlli-10 (Omitted)
VIII-11 Wastewater Treatment Costs for BPT,
NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations -
Subcategory D 213
x1
-------
VIII-12 Wastewater Treatment Costs for BPT,
NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations -
Subcategory E 214
VIII-13 Capital and Annual Operation and Main-
tenance Costs Per Unit of Flow for the
Pharmaceutical Industry Model Treatment
Plants 215
VIII-14 summary of Capital Costs for BPT Waste-
water Treatment — Sutcategory A 217
VIII-15 Summary of Capital Costs for BPT Waste-
water Treatment — Sutcategory B 218
VIII-16 Summary of Capital Costs for BPT Waste-
water Treatment — Sutcategory C 219
VIII-17 Summary of Capital Costs for BPT Waste-
water Treatment — Sutcategory D 220
VIII-18 Summary of Capital Costs for BPT Waste-
water Treatment — Sutcategory E 221
IX Trial Calculation - Effluent TSS for
Sutcategory A 6 C Exemplary Plants
Without Plant #2 240
IX-1a BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products 241
IX-1b BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory B - Extraction Products 242
IX-1c BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis
Products 243
IX-1d BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation 244
IX-1e BPT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E - Research 245
X-1a BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A 249
X-1b BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
xii
-------
Subcategory B 250
X-1c BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C 251
X-ld BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory D 252
X-1e BAT Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E 253
XI-1a NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory A 256
XI-1b NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory B 257
XI-1c NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory C 258
XI-1d NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory D 259
XI=1e NSPS Effluent Limitations and Guidelines
Subcategory E 260
XII-1 Pretreatment Unit Operations 262
XII-2 Recommended List of Priority Pollutants 264
XIII-1 Exemplary Biological Treatment Plant
Performance 273
XIII-2 Pharmaceutical Industry Average Ratios
of Probabilities of Occurrence 27U
XIII-3 Comparison of Daily and Monthly
C92/Ave. Factors for Pharmaceutical
Plants 275
XVIII Metric Table-Conversion Table 331
xi i i
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
General
The miscellaneous chemicals industry encompasses eight
segments, grouped together for administrative purposes.
This document provides background information for the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category and
represents a revision of a portion of the initial
contractor's draft document issued in February, 1975.
In that document it was stated that the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category differs from the others
in raw materials, manufacturing processes, and final
products. Water usage and subsequent wastewater discharges
also vary considerably from industry to industry.
Consequently, for the purpose of the development of the
effluent limitations guidelines and corresponding BPT (Best
Practicable Control Technology Currently Available), NSPS
(Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology) for new
sources and BAT (Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable) requirements, each category is treated
independently.
Technologies have been identified that are expected to
produce effluents of recommended quality. Cost estimates
have been made for model wastewater treatment plants based
upon these technologies. These costs will be used for
calculating the economic impact of the guidelines. it must
be emphasized that the types of plants identified for this
purpose are not to be considered as required nor are they to
be construed as the only technology capable of meeting the
effluent limitations specified in this development document.
The same results can be accomplished by alternative methods
which may be more suitable under certain circumstances.
These alternative choices include:
1. Various types of end-of-pipe wastewater treatment.
2. Various in-plant modifications and installation of
at-source pollution control equipment.
3. Various combinations of end-of-pipe and in-plant
technologies.
-------
The extent and complexity of this industry dictated the use
of only one treatment model for economic analysis for each
subcategory for each effluent level.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The pharmaceutical industry produces hundreds of medicinal
chemicals by means of many complex manufacturing
technologies. Water usage and subsequent wastewater
discharges are closely related to these products and
production processes. Any rational approach to effluent
limitations and guidelines must recognize these
complexities.
For the purpose of establishing effluent limitations,
guidelines and standards of performance, the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category has been divided on the
basis of manufacturing techniques, product type, raw
materials and wastewater characteristics into five separate
subcategories. Factors such as plant size, plant age,
geographic location and air pollution control equipment were
also considered but did not justify further
subcategorization of the point source category. Each of
these factors and the related impact on subcategorization
are discussed in detail in Section IV. The five
subcategories are:
A. Fermentation Products. Most antibiotics and
steroids are produced in batch fermentation tanks in the
presence of a particular fungus or bacterium and then are
isolated by various chemical processes or are simply
concentrated or dried.
B. Biological and Natural Extraction Products.
Biological and natural extraction products include various
blood fractions, vaccines, serums, animal bile derivatives
and extracts of plant and animal tissues. These products
are usually produced in laboratories on a much smaller scale
than most pharmaceutical products.
C. Chemical Synthesis Products. The production of
chemical synthesis products is very similar to fine
chemicals production. Chemical synthesis reactions
generally are batch types which are followed by solvent
extraction of the product.
Subcategory C was originally divided into C1 and C2, C1
being production by chemical synthesis alone and C2 being
production of an intermediate by fermentation and
modification by chemical synthesis. It was concluded.
-------
however, that this case could be treated as though the two
steps were independent. Hence, the separate C2
classification was abandoned. For consistency in rating the
size of a plant for the purpose of estimating the raw waste
load, the intermediate obtained from the fermentation
process should be counted as a product from the A
subcategory and then the modified material should be counted
again as a product of the C subcategory.
D. Mixing/Compounding and Formulation. The
manufacturing operations for formulation plants may be
either dry or wet. Dry production involves dry mixing,
tableting or capsuling and packaging. Process equipment is
generally vacuum-cleaned to remove dry solids and then
washed down. Wet production includes mixing, filtering and
bottling. Process equipment is washed down between
production batches.
E. Microbiological, Biological and Chemical Research.
Research is another important part of the pharmaceutical
industry. Although such facilities may not produce specific
marketable products, they do generate wastewaters. These
originate primarily from equipment and vessel washings and
small animal cage washwaters. Large-animal research farms
produce significant quantities of manure and urine, which
may justify future subclassification of research facilities.
Pharmaceutical plants operate throughout the year.
Production processes are primarily batch operations with
significant variations in pollutional characteristics over
any typical operating period. The characteristics of
wastewaters vary from plant to plant according to the raw
materials used, the processes used and the products
produced. Depending on the product mix and the
manufacturing process, variations in wastewater volume and
loading may occur as a result of certain batch operations
(filter washing, crystallization, solvent extraction, etc.),
thus adequate equalization of the waste load may be
imperative prior to discharge to a waste treatment system.
Pharmaceutical manufacturing plants use water extensively
both in processing and for cooling. The plant wastewater
collection systems are often segregated to permit separate
collection of process wastewaters and relatively clean non-
contact cooling waters. The process wastewaters are usually
discharged to a common sewage system for treatment and
disposal.
The major sources of wastewaters in the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category are spent broths or
-------
beers from fermentations, residues of reactants and by-
products of chemical syntheses, product washings, extraction
and concentration procedures, ion exchange regeneration
procedures, equipment washdowns and floor washdowns.
Wastewaters generated by this point source category can be
characterized as containing high concentrations of
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand
(COD), volatile and nonvolatile suspended solids and
solvents. Wastewaters from some chemical synthesis and
fermentation operations may contain heavy metals (Fe, Cu,
Ni, Ag, etc.), cyanide, or anti-tacterial constitutents
which may exert a toxic effect on biological waste treatment
processes. In-plant treatment or pretreatment to remove
these constituents may be required at source or before end-
of-pipe treatment.
Existing control and treatment technologies, as practiced by
the industry, include in-plant abatement as well as end-of-
pipe treatment. Recovery and reuse of expensive solvents
and catalysts are widely practiced in the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category for economic reasons.
Current end-of-pipe wastewater treatment technology involves
biological treatment, physical/chemical treatment, thermal
oxidation, or liquid evaporation. Biological treatment
includes activated sludge, trickling filters, biofilters and
aerated lagoon systems.
The effluent limitations and guidelines proposed herein are
based solely on the contaminants in the contact wastewaters
associated with the processes previously discussed in the
subcategory descriptions. No specific limitations are
proposed at this time for pollutants associated with non—
contact wastewaters such as boiler and cooling tower
blowdown and water supply treatment. Effluent limitations
and guidelines for these three streams are being developed
in a separate set of regulations for the steam and non-
contact cooling water industries.
Since both the raw waste loads (RWL) and the related
effluent limitations developed for the pharamceutical
manufacturing point source category are based solely on
contact process wastewater, it follows that other noncontact
wastewaters (including domestic wastes) will not be included
in these effluent limitations.
The effluent limitations and guidelines are presented for
each of the five subcategories. The wastewater parameters
selected are: biochemical oxygen demand (BOD ), chemical
oxygen demand (COD) and total suspended solids (TSS). The
choice of these parameters reflects the fact that organic
-------
oxygen-demanding material is the major contaminant in
wastewaters generated by the pharmaceutical manufacturing
point source category. Ammonia, organic nitrogen, and
phosphorus were also found in significant quantities. The
best approach to control these pollutants appears to be in-
plant measures or at-source treatment in those special cases
where excessive discharge is encountered.
Because of extensive in-plant recovery and recycle
operations, as described in Section VII, metals and other
toxic materials were not found in significant quantities in
pharmaceutical plant wastewaters. Other possible RWL
parameters (phenol, chlorinated hydrocarbons, various
metals, etc.) were considered during the study but were
found to be present in concentrations substantially lower
than those which would require specialized end-of-pipe
treatment for the entire point source category.
It was concluded that the model BPT wastewater treatment
technology for subcategories A, B, C, D and E should consist
of waste load equalization followed by a biological
treatment system with final clarification and sludge
handling and treatment facilities. In addition, the
subcategory C model should include a trickling filter (or
equivalent) and final clarifier following the secondary
biological system. The sludge disposal system would
generally consist of sludge thickening, aerobic digestion,
vacuum filtration and ultimate disposal via landfill, in
addition, effluent diversion basins, effluent polishing
ponds and neutralization facilities following the biological
system would generally be required for those plants falling
in subcategories A and C. The term "polishing pond", as
used here, means a basin providing a one to two day holding
time to permit the maximum removal of suspended solids by
sedimentation, but not long enough to grow algae.
Additional removal of BOD5 and COD would also be expected.
The model BAT treatment facility for subcategory A consists
of BPT technology followed by trickling filtration, final
clarification and multi-media filtration. BAT effluent
limitations guidelines for subcategories B, C, D and E are
based on the addition of multi-media filtration to the
proposed BPT treatment technology. The treatment technology
suggested to meet the proposed new source performance
standards (NSPS) for subcategories A, E, C, D and E consists
of the BPT treatment system plus multi-media filtration.
The data required to develop effluent limitations for
specific cases include the identity of the specific
manufacturing process, average daily waste flow and raw
-------
waste load in terms of BODjj and COD, over a sufficient
period to be representative for the specific case being
evaluated. The mass quantities of influent BODjj and COD are
then multiplied by their respective percent removal
efficiencies and the remainders when multiplied by the
appropriate variability factor are expressed as the maximum
thirty day limitations which may not be exceeded by the
averages computed from daily composite samples taken over a
period of 30 consecutive days. This information is
sufficient to subcategorize the process and subsequently
compute the appropriate effluent limitations.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
General
The recommendations for effluent limitations and guidelines
commensurate with the BPT and end-of-pipe treatment
technology for BPT dre presented in this text for the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category. A
discussion of in-plant and end-of-pipe control technology
required to achieve the recommended effluent limitations,
guidelines and new source performance standards is included.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The effluent limitations and guidelines commensurate with
proposed BPT, BAT and NSPS treatment technologies for each
subcategory of the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category are presented in Tables II-1a to II-1e, II-2a to
II-2e and II-3a to II-3e. The effluent limitations are
based on the average of daily values for 30 consecutive
days. Process wastewaters subject to these limitations
include all contact process water, but do not include non-
contact wastewaters such as boiler and cooling tower
blowdown, water treatment wastes, sanitary and other similar
flows. The term "sanitary", as herein used, refers to
wastewaters from toilets, washrooms, shower baths and food
service facilities.
Implicit in the recommended guidelines for the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category is the
fact that process wastes can be isolated from non-process
wastes such as utility discharges and uncontaminated storm
runoff. Segregation of process from non-process sewers is
therefore recommended to accomplish reduction of pollutant
loadings to levels necessary to meet the proposed
guidelines. Treatment of process wastewaters collected by a
combined process/non-process sewer system may not be cost-
effective due to dilution by the relatively large volume of
nonprocess wastewaters. It is further suggested that
normally uncontaminated waters, such as storm runoff, be
segregated if it flows from outdoor areas where there is
potential for contamination by chemical spills. This could
be accomplished by roofing or curbing potentially
contaminated areas and by collecting and treating runoff
which cannot be isolated from such areas. In-plant
modification which will lead to reductions in wastewater
flow, increased quantity of water used for recycle or reuse
-------
and improvement in raw wastewater quality should be
implemented, provided that these modifications have minimum
impact on processing techniques or product quality. In some
cases, segregation of strong and weak waste streams and
treating them separately is recommended from the standpoint
of cost-effectiveness.
For wastewater containing significant quantities of metals,
cyanide, or anti-bacterial constituents which may exert a
toxic effect on biological treatment processes, pretreatment
at source is recommended. For those wastewaters which
contain significant quantities of cyanide or ammonia,
cyanide destruction or ammonia removal at source is
recommended. Ammonia stripping is well demonstrated
technology. Other in-plant measures, such as solvent
recovery and incineration (of still bottoms and of solvent
streams that are too impure to reuse) are practiced by many
pharmaceutical plants and are recommended for adoption by
all plants where applicable. This technique could result in
a more cost-effective disposal of organic liquids that are
too strong for effective biological treatment.
End-of-pipe treatment technologies equivalent to biological
treatment should be applied to the wastewaters from all of
the subcategories to achieve BPT effluent requirements. In
addition, to minimize capital expenditures for end-of-pipe
wastewater treatment facilities, BPT technology includes the
maximum utilization of current in-plant pollution abatement
methods presently practiced by the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category.
To limit the release of high TSS, BOD and COD in the final
discharge, effluent polishing ponds and diversion basins are
recommended for treatment plants in the A and C
subcategories. In recognition of the greater complexity and
variability of subcategory C wastes the BPT model for this
subcategory includes a tertiary stage comprising a trickling
filter and two final clarifiers.
To meet BAT requirements, end-of-pipe treatment technologies
equivalent to BPT treatment, followed by trickling
filtration, final clarification and multi-media filtration
are recommended for subcategory A. For subcategories B, C,
D and E, BPT treatment followed by multi-media filtration is
proposed. BAT treatment technology also includes the
improvement of existing in-plant pollution abatement
measures and the use of the most exemplary process controls.
TSS limitations for BPT are expressed as concentrations
which can be reasonably attained by treatment models
-------
described in the document. TSS limitations for BAT and NSPS
are expressed as concentrations which, by technology
transfer, appear reasonably attainable with multi-media
filtration shown for all subcategories, supplemented by
diversion basins in the A and C models.
NSPS control and treatment standards, to be applied to new
sources, are equivalent to BPT treatment followed by multi-
media filtration. This is identical to BAT standards for
subcategories B, C, D and E. Exemplary in-process controls
are also applicable to this technology. The treatment,
control theory and effluent limitations for the non-process
wastewaters (boiler blowdown, cooling tower blowdown, water
supply treatment plant wastes) generated by the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category should be
covered by the steam supply and non-contact cooling water
point source category regulations which are to be published
by EPA.
-------
TABLE II-la
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products Subcategory
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
which may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of the best practicable control technology currently available:
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BOD5_ in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BODS^ multiplied by a
variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of COD in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 74% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD multiplied by a
variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the pollutant BOD_5
and COD is defined as the average daily mass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
month period within the most recent 36 months, which shall include the
greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the point sources
covered by this subpart of the point source category, calculation of
raw waste loads of BODS^ and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated with
separable mycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided that
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be included in
calculation of raw waste loads. These practices of removal, disposal
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mycelia,
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration of concentrated
solvent waste streams (including tar still bottoms) and broth
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system. This
regulation does not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rather
describes tne rationale for determining the permit conditions. These
limits may be achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
11
-------
TABLE II - Ib 12/6/76
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory B -. Extraction Products
Subcategory
The allowable discharge for the pollutant parameters
BOD_5 _and COD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum production for a given
pharmaceutical plant.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long terir daily jverage raw waste content of EODJ5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 74% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability f_actor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
jDOllutant BODJ5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from j:he
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BCD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the _base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) _shall exclude any waste
load associated with ^solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of solvents- remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include _recovery of solvents from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste sitreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 52 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.C - 9.0
standard units.
12
-------
12/6/76
TABLE II - lc
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis
Products Subcategory
The allowable discharge for the pollutant parameters
and CCD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and" shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum production for a given
pharmaceutical plant.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BODJ5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD_5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically jreflect not less than 74% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 2.2.
The lona term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BODJ and COD is defined as the average daily
mass ot each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BGD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste
load associated with ^solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents _from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibittinclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
13
-------
TABLE II - Id 12/6/76
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation Sufccategory
The allowable discharge for the pollutant parameters
BQDjj and COD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum jgroduction for a given
pharmaceutical plant.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily Average mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically jreflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily averaqe mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 74% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability ^factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant EOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within Jthe most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with jsolvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of jsolvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include jrecovery of solvents .from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste jstreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads i.n fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but jrather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of prograirs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 52 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
14
-------
TABLE II - le 12/6/76
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory E - Research Subcategory
The allowable discharge tor the pollutant parameters
BODJ and COD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum research effort for a
given pharmaceutical plant.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of PCCJ5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 9C% reduction in the
long term daily averacre raw waste content of POD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 111 reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BODJ5 and COE is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered ty this subpart ot the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BCDJ3
and CCD for the purpose of determining NPDE3 permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions art applied) shall exclude any waste
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of. recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse iray be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices ot removal, disposal or reuse
include jrecovery of solvents _from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads jln fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but jrather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions, Thesf> limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 52 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
15
-------
TABLE II-2a
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
which may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of the best practicable control technology currently available:
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BOD5_ in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time arid shall specifically reflect not less than 97% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BODI5 multiplied by a
variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of COD in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 80% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD multiplied by a
variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the pollutant BOD5_
and COD is defined as the average daily mass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
month period within the most recent 36 months, which shall include the
greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the point sources
covered by this subpart of the point source category, calculation of
raw waste loads of BOD5_ and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated with
separable mycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided that
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be included in
calculation of raw waste loads. These practices of removal, disposal
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mycelia,
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration of concentrated
solvent waste streams (including tar still bottoms) and broth
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system. This
regulation does not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rather
describes the rationale for determining the permit conditions. These
limits may be achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
16
-------
TABLE II - 2b 12/6/76
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUB CATEGORY B
The allowable effluent, discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily Average raw waste content of EGD_5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically jreflect not less than 75% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with jolvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of ^solvents remaining
after the practice ^f recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include ^recovery of solvents irrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste jStreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads _in fact, .nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month jghall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
17
-------
TABLE II - 2c 12/6/76
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY C
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 97% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BCD5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically jreflect not less than 80% reduction in the
long term daily Average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
jgollutant BOD5 and COC is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BCDJ5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jhall exclude any waste
load associated with jsolvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of jsolvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents jrrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste jitreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads _in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.C
standard units.
18
-------
TABLE II - 2d 12/6/76
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY D
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCDJ3 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
lonq term daily average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0. ~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 15% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant POD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within jthe most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest ^reduction effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources Covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste
r?ov^°^ed Wl5h ^Olvents in those raw waste^oadst
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or" separate disposal
eUS ma included in calculation of raw waste
« ^
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents Jrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation ^
.
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
xoads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rational? for
arbfSvi^hq the permit conations. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices. '«=i«uj.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 30 mg/1. <*J.«naar
The PH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9 n
standard units.
19
-------
TABLE II - 2e
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATECORY E
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily Average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 9.1% reduction in the
long terir daily jverage raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 15% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
jgollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BODj>
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the _base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with ^solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of jsolvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include ^recovery of solvents f_rom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste ^streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
cf programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month ^hall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
20
-------
TABLE II-3a
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
which may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of the best practicable control technology currently available:
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BODS^ in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD_5 multiplied by a
variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of COD in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 76% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD multiplied by a
variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the pollutant BOD_5
and COD is defined as the average daily mass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
month period within the most recent 36 months, which shall include the
greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the point sources
covered by this subpart of the point source category, calculation of
raw waste loads of BOD_5 and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated with
separable inycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided that
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be included in
calculation of raw waste loads. These practices of removal, disposal
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mycelia,
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration of concentrated
solvent waste streams (including tar still bottoms) and broth
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system. This
regulation does not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rather
describes the rationale for determining the permit conditions. These
limits may be achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
21
-------
12/6/76
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY B
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than six reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of EOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0. ~~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 75% reduction in th«=
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for th<*
pollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of"" BODS
and COD for the purpose of determinina NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads-
.provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
atter the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
ct prograirs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
22
-------
12/6/76
TABLE II - 3c
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY C
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
dally average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 76% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load tor the
pollutant BODJ3 and COC is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within Jthe most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw -waste loads of BCDJ3
and CCD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jhall exclude any waste
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents Jrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste ^streams
(including tar still oottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads j.n fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
23
-------
12/6/76
TABLE II - 3d
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY D
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BODJ5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91^ reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 75% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability _f actor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the _base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) .shall exclude any waste
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads-
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
cf programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
24
-------
TABLE II - 3e 12/6/?6
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY E
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of ECD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than Sl£ reduction in the
long term daily jverage raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0. ~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically Deflect not less than 15% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
20llutant BODJ5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months.
To assure eguity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of EOD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jhall exclude any waste
load associated with ^solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of ^solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may he included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents jfrom waste streams »and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may oe
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of prograirs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month jfhall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
25
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Authority
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(the Act) made a number of fundamental changes in the
approach to achieving clean water. One of the most
significant changes was to shift from a reliance on effluent
limitations related to water quality to a direct control of
effluents through the establishment of technology-based
effluent limitations to form an additional basis, as a
minimum, for issuance of discharge permits.
The Act requires EPA to establish guidelines for technology-
based effluent limitations which must fce achieved by point
sources of discharges into the navigable waters of the
United States. 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 are based on the application of the
BPT 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 are based en the application of the
BAT, resulting in 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 30U (b) of the Act. Section 306 of the
Act requires the achievement by new sources of federal
standards 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 achievable through the application of the NSPS process,
operating methods, or other alternatives, including, where
practicable, a standard permitting no discharge of
pollutants.
Section 304(b) of the Act requires the Administrator to
publish regulations based on the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of the BPT and
the best control measures and practices achievable,
including treatment techniques, process and procedure
innovations, operation methods and other alternatives. The
regulations proposed herein set forth effluent limitations
guidelines pursuant to Section 304 (b) of the Act for the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category. Section
27
-------
304(c) of the Act requires the Administrator to issue
information on the processes, procedures, or operating
methods which result in the elimination or reduction in the
discharge of pollutants to implement standards of
performance under Section 306 of the Act. Such information
is to include technical and other data, including costs, as
are available on alternative methods of elimination or
reduction of the discharge of pollutants.
Section 306 of the Act requires the Administrator, within
one year after a category of sources is included in a list
published pursuant to Section 306(b) (1) (A) of the Act, to
propose regulations establishing federal standards of
performance for new sources within such categories. The
Administrator published in the Federal Register of January
16, 1973 (38 F.R. 1621) a list of 27 source categories.
Publication of the list constituted announcement of the
Administrator's intention of establishing, under Section
306, standards of performance applicable to new sources.
Furthermore, Section 307(b) provides that:
1. The Administrator shall, from time to time, publish
proposed regulations establishing pretreatment
standards for introduction of pollutants into
treatment works (as defined in Section 212 of this
Act) which are publicly owned, for those pollutants
which are determined not to be susceptible to
treatment by such treatment works or which would
interfere with the operation of such treatment
works. Not later than ninety days after such
publication and after opportunity for public hear-
ing, the Administrator shall promulgate such
pretreatment standards. Pretreatment standards
under this subsection shall specify a time for
compliance not to exceed three years from the date
of promulgation and shall te established to prevent
the discharge of any pollutant through treatment
works (as defined in Section 212 of this Act) which
are publicly owned, which pollutant interferes
with, passes through, or otherwise is incompatible
with such works.
2. The Administrator shall, from time to time, as
control technology, processes, operating methods,
or other alternatives change, revise such
standards, following the procedure established by
this subsection for promulgation of such standards.
28
-------
3. When proposing or promulgating any pretreatment
standard under this section, the Administrator
shall designate the category or categories of
sources to which such standard shall apply.
H. Nothing in this subsection shall affect any
pretreatment requirement established by any State
or local law not in conflict with any pretreatment
standard established under this subsection.
In order to insure that any source introducing pollutants
into a publicly owned treatment works, which would be a new
source subject to Section 306 if it were to discharge
pollutants, will not cause a violation of the effluent
limitations established for any such treatment works, the
Administrator shall promulgate pretreatment standards for
the category of such sources simultaneously with the
promulgation of standards of performance under Section 306
for the equivalent category of new sources. Such
pretreatment standards shall prevent the discharge into such
treatment works of any pollutant which may interfere with,
pass through, or otherwise be incompatible with such works.
The Act defines a new source to mean any source the
construction of which is commenced after the publication of
proposed regulations prescribing a standard of performance.
Construction means any placement, assembly, or installation
of facilities or equipment (including contractual obliga-
tions to purchase such facilities or equipment) at the
premises where such equipment will be used, including
preparation work at such premises.
Standard Industrial Classifications
The Standard Industrial Classifications list was developed
by the United States Department of Commerce and is oriented
toward the collection of economic data related to gross
production, sales, and unit costs. The SIC list is not
related to the nature of the industry in terms of actual
plant operations, production, or considerations associated
with water pollution control. As such, the list does not
provide a realistic or definitive set of boundaries for
study of the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry.
The other commodities/services which could have been
considered for coverage within the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category of the miscellaneous
chemicals industry study but were not covered under the
scope of this study as defined by EPA are:
29
-------
SIC 2844 - Cosmetic Preparations
SIC 3842 - Surgical Supplies
SIC 3843 - Dental Supplies
SIC 8071 - Medical Laboratories
SIC 8072 - Dental Laboratories
SIC 8081 - Out-patient Care Facilities
SIC 8091 - Health and Allied Services, not elsewhere
classified
Effluent limitations and guidelines may be developed at a
later date to cover these commodities/services not covered
under the present study.
Methods Used for Development of t|ie Effluent Limitations and
Standards for Performance
The effluent limitations, guidelines and standards of
performance proposed in this document were developed in the,
following manner. The miscellaneous chemicals industry was
first divided into industrial segments, based on type of
industry and products manufactured. Determination was then
made as to whether further subcategorization would aid in
description of the industry. Such determinations were made
on the basis of raw materials required, products
manufactured, processes employed and other factors.
The raw waste characteristics for each category and/or
subcategory were then identified. This included an analysis
of: 1) the source and volume of water used in the process
employed and the sources of wastes and wastewaters in the
plant; and 2) the constituents of all wastewaters
(including potentially toxic constituents) which result in
taste, odor and color in water. The constituents of
wastewaters which should be subject to effluent limitations,
guidelines and standards of performance were identified.
The full range of control and treatment technologies
existing within each category and/or subcategory was
identified. This included an identification of each dis-
tinct control and treatment technology, including both in-
plant and end- of-pipe technologies, which are existent or
capable of being designed for each subcategory or category.
It also included an identification of the effluent level
resulting from the application of each of the treatment and
control technologies, in terms of the amount of constituents
and of the chemical, physical and biological characteristics
of pollutants. The problems, limitations and reliability of
each treatment and control technology and the required
implementation time were also identified. In addition, the
non-water quality environmental impacts (such as the effects
30
-------
of the application of such technologies upon other pollution
problems, including air, solid waste, radiation and noise)
were also identified. The energy requirements of each of
the control and treatment technologies were identified, 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 constituted the
BPT, BAT and NSPS. In identifying such technologies,
factors considered 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.
During the initial phases of the study, an assessment was
made of the availability, adequacy and usefulness of all
existing data sources. Data on the identity and performance
of wastewater treatment systems were known to be included
in:
1. NPDES permit applications.
2. Self-reporting discharge data from various states.
3. Surveys conducted by trade associations or by
agencies under research and development grants.
A preliminary analysis of these data indicated an obvious
need for additional information.
Additional data in the following areas were required: 1)
process raw waste load (RWL) related to production; 2)
currently practiced or potential in-process waste control
techniques; and 3) the identity and effectiveness of end-of-
pipe treatment systems. The best source of information was
the manufacturers themselves. New information was obtained
from direct interviews and sampling visits to production
facilities.
Collection of the data necessary for development of RWL and
effluent treatment capabilities within dependable confidence
limits required analysis of both production and treatment
operations. In a few cases, the plant visits were planned
so that the production operations cf a single plant could be
studied in association with an end-of-pipe treatment system
which receives only the wastes from a single production
process. The RWL for this plant and associated treatment
31
-------
technology would fall within a single subcategory. However,
the wide variety of products manufactured by most of the
industrial plants made this situation rare.
In the majority of cases, it was necessary to visit
individual facilities where the products manufactured fell
into several subcategories. The end-of-pipe treatment
facilities received combined wastewaters associated with
several subcategories (several products, processes, or even
unrelated manufacturing operations). It was necessary to
analyze separately the production (waste-generating)
facilities and the effluent (waste treatment) facilities.
This approach required establishment of a common basis, the
raw waste load (RWL), for common levels of treatment
technology for the products within a subcategory and for the
translation of treatment technology between categories
and/or subcategories.
The selection of treatment plants was developed from inform-
ation available in the NPDES permit applications, state
self-reporting discharge data and contacts within the
industry. Every effort was made to choose facilities where
meaningful information on both treatment facilities and
manufacturing processes could be obtained.
Survey teams composed of project engineers and scientists
conducted the actual plant visits. Information on the
identity and performance of wastewater treatment systems was
obtained through:
1. Interviews with plant water pollution control
personnel or engineering personnel.
2. Examination of treatment plant design and
historical operating data (flow rates and analyses
of influent and effluent).
3. Treatment plant influent and effluent sampling.
Information on process plant operations and the associated
RWL was obtained through:
1. Interviews with plant operating personnel.
2. Examination of plant design and operating data
(original design specification, flow sheets, day-
to-day material balances around individual process
modules or unit operations where possible).
32
-------
12/6/76
table III -1
Biological Products - SIC 2831
Agar culture media
Aggress ins
Allergenic extracts
Allergens
Antigens
Anti-hog-cholera serums
Antiserums
Antitoxins
Ant ivenom
Bacterial vaccines
Bacterins
Bacteriological media
Biological and allied products: anti-
toxins, bacterins, vaccines, viruses
Blood derivatives, for human or veteri-
nary use
Culture media or concentrates
Diagnostic agents, biological
Diphtheria toxin
Plasmas
Pollen extracts
Serobacterins
Serums
Toxi ns
Toxoids
Tuberculins
Vaccines
Venoms
Vi ruses
33
-------
12/6/76
Table I I I -2
Medicinal Chemicals and Botanical Products - SIC 2833
bulk,
ground,
and
Adrenal derivatives: bulk, uncom-
pounded
Agar-agar (ground)
Alkaloids and salts
Anesthetics, in bulk form
Antibiotics: bulk uncompounded
Atropine and derivatives
Barbituric acid and derivatives
uncompounded
Botanical products, medicinal:
graded , and mi 1 led
Brucine and derivatives
Caffeine and derivatives
Chemicals, medicinal: organic
organic—bulk, uncompounded
Cinchone and derivatives
Cocaine and derivatives
Codeine and derivatives
Dig!toxin
Drug grading, grinding, and mil
Endocrine products
Ephedrine and derivatives
Ergot alkaloids
Fish liver oils, refined and concen-
trated for medicinal use
Gland derivatives: bulk, uncom-
pounded
Herb grinding, grading, andmilling
Hormones and derivatives
Insulin: bulk, uncompounded
Kelp plants
Mercury chlorides, U.S.P.
Mercury compounds, medicinal: or-
ganic and inorganic
i n-
i ng
Morphine and derivatives
N-methyl piperazine
Oils, vegetable and animal: medicinal
grade—refined and concentrated
Opium derivatives
Ox bile salts and derivatives: bulk,
uncompounded
Penicillin: bulk, uncompounded
Physostigmine and derivatives
Pituitary gland derivatives: bulk,
uncompounded
Procaine and derivatives: bulk,
uncompounded
Quinine and derivatives
Reserpines
Salicylic acid derivatives, medicinal
grade
Strychnine and derivatives
Sulfa drugs
Sulfonamides
Theobromine
Vegetable gelatin (agar-agar)
Vegetable oils, medicinal grade: re-
fined and concentrated
Vitamins, natural and synthetic: bulk,
uncompounded
34
-------
12/6/76
Table I I I -3
Pharmaceutical Products - SIC 283^
Adrenal pharmaceutical preparations
Analgesics
Anesthetics, packaged
Antacids
Anthelmint ics
Antibiotics, packaged
Antihistamine preparations
Antipyretics
Antiseptics, medicinal
Astringents, medicinal
Barbituric acid pharmaceutical prepa-
rations
Belladonna pharmaceutical prepara-
tions
Botanical extracts: powdered, pilular,
sol id, and fluid
Chapsticks
Chlorination tablets and kits (water
puri fi cat ion)
Cold remedies
Cough medicines
Cyclopropane for anesthetic use (U.S.P.
par N.F.) packaged
Dextrose and sodium chloride injection
mixed
Dextrose injection
Digitalis pharmaceutical preparations
D iuretics
Druggists' preparations (pharmaceuti-
cal s)
Effervescent salts
Emulsifiers, fluorescent inspection
Emulsions, pharmaceutical
Ether for anesthetic use
Fever remedies
Galenical preparations
Hormone preparations
Insulin preparations
Intravenous solutions
Iodine, tincture of
Laxatives
Li niments
Lozenges, pharmaceutical
Medicines, capsuled or ampuled
Nitrofuran preparations
Nitrous oxide for anesthetic use
Ointments
Parenteral solutions
Penicillin preparations
Pharmaceuticals
Pills, pharmaceutical
Pituitary gland pharmaceutical prepa-
rat ions
Poultry and animal remedies
Powders, pharmaceutical
Procaine pharmaceutical preparations
Proprietary drug products
Remedies, human and animal
Sirups, pharmaceutical
Sodium chloride solution for injection
U.S.P.
Sodium salicylate tablets
Solutions, pharmaceutical
Spirits, pharmaceutical
Suppos i tories
Tablets, pharmaceutical
Thyroid preparations
Tinctures, pharmaceutical
Tranqui1izers and mental drug prepa-
rat ions
Vermifuges
Veterinary pharmaceutical prepara-
t ions
Vitamin preparations
Water decontamination or purification
tablets
Water, sterile: for injections
Zinc ointment
35
-------
3. Individual process wastewater sampling and
analysis. ^
The data base obtained in this neanner was then utilized by
the methodology previously described to develop recommended
effluent limitations and standards of performance for the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category. All of
the references utilized are included in Section XV of this
report. The data obtained during the field data collection
program are included in Supplement B. Cost information is
available in Supplement A. The documents are available for
examination by interested parties at the EPA Public
Information Reference Unit, Room 2922 (EPA Library)
Waterside Mall, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
The following text describes the details of the scope of the
study, the technical approach to the development of effluent
limitations and the scope of coverage for the data base for
the pharmaceutical manufacturing pcint source category.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Scope of the Study
To establish boundaries for the scope of work for this
study, the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category was defined to include all commodities listed under
SIC 2831 (Biological Products) r SIC 2833 (Medicinal
Chemicals and Botanical Products) and sic 2834
(Pharmaceutical Preparations). lists of the specific
products covered by these Standard Industrial
Classifications are presented in Tables III-1, Hi-2 and
III-3. It should be noted that the lists as provided in
these tables were developed by the United States Department
of Commerce and are oriented toward the collection of
economic data related to gross production, sales and unit
costs. They are not related to actual plant operations,
production, or considerations associated with water
pollution control and, as such, they do not provide a
precise set of boundaries which is completely applicable for
this type of study of the pharmaceutical industry.
Therefore, to establish effluent limitations and treatment
guidelines for this industry, a more definitive set of
boundaries was established. To accomplish this, SIC 2833
was further subdivided into fermentation products, chemical
synthesis products and extraction products. This additional
subdivision was required to establish a consistent
interrelationship between the major manufacturing processes
employed by the pharmaceutical industry and the major
medicinal chemical groups produced by the industry. During
36
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE III -1*
SHIPMENTS OF PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS
BY CENSUS REGIONS, DIVISIONS AND STATES, 1967
SHIPMENTS OF PHARMACEUTICAL
PREPARATIONS, EXCEPT BIOLOGICALS
REGION (MILLIONS OF DOLLARS)
NORTHEAST
NFW/ YORK
NFW.IFRSFV
PFNNSYI VANIA
OTHER
NORTH CENTRAL
OHIO
INDIANA
II 1 INOIS
MICHIGAN
MISSOURI
OTHER
SOUTH
SOUTH ATLANTIC
FAST SOUTH CFNTRAI
WEST SOUTH CENTRAL
WEST
CALIFORNIA
OTHER
U.S. TOTAL
$2,457.7
789 3
S87 fi
709 0
71 8
1 °87 3
94 1
'
m R
fi? R
292 2
177 9
87 5
°6 8
104 2
97 9
06 3
$4,143.0
PERCENT
OF U.S.
59.3%
31.1
7.1
2.5
100.0%
PRESECRPTION DRUG INDUSTRY FACT BOOK, PMA, 1973
37
-------
the course of the study, the following four major production
areas were identified for in-depth study:
A. Fermentation processes: used to produce primarily
antibiotics and steroids.
B. Biological products and natural extractions
manufacturing processes: used to produce blood
derivatives, vaccines, serums, animal bile
derivatives, animal tissue derivatives and plant
tissue derivatives.
C. Chemical synthesis processes: used to produce
hundreds of different products, from vitamins to
anti-depressants.
D. Formulation processes: used to convert the
products of the other three manufacturing areas
into the final dosage forms (tablets, capsules,
liquids, etc.) marketed to the public.
In addition, since research is such a discrete and important
part of the pharmaceutical industry, a fifth study area was
established:
E. Research: including microbiological, biological and
chemical research activities.
A further subdivision of subcategory E was considered, which
may be described as research farms. Animals ranging in size
from poultry to cows and horses are held for the
experimental use of drugs to control disease or promote
growth, ovulation or other desirable effects. The excreta
of such animals are usually disposed of by methods common in
the farming community. The examination of pollution control
measures in this area may be taken up at a later time.
Technical Approach to the Development of Effluent
Limitations Guidelines
The effluent limitations and standards of performance
recommended in this document for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category were developed in the
manner outlined in the section "Methods Used for Development
of Effluent Limitations and Standards of Performance" above.
Scope of Coverage for Data Base
Figure III-1 illustrates the geographical breakdown of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in the continental
38
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE HI -2a
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
C o in o a n v
. . i i— —
Abbott Laboratories
North Chicago, 111.
North Chicago
Wichita, Kansas
Universal Enterprises,
Barceloneta, P. Rico
Rocky Mountain, N.C.
Ross Laboratories,
Columbus, Ohio
American Cyanamid Co.
Wayne, N. J.
Azusa, California
Bound Brook, N. J.
Hannibal, Mo.
Lederle Laboratories,
Pearl River , N. Y.
Willow Island, W. VA.
Princeton, N.J.
Manati, P. Rico
Hoechst- Roussell Pharm
Somerville, N.J.
American Home Products
Corp. , N.Y. , N.Y.
Wyeth Laboratories ,Jnc
Paoli, Pa.
Ayerst Laboratories
Astra Pharmaceutical
Products, Inc.
Worcester, Mass.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
940.7
1,900
2,258.6
No. of
EmpJ.
22,829
38,024
45,703
f
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
X
X
X
X
B
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
39
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE II] -2b
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
Company
Baxter Laboratories, Inc.
Morton Grove, 111.
Travenol Laboratories,
Inc. , Los Angeles, CA
Wallerstein Co. D.' W.
Deerfield, 111.
Cleveland, Miss.
Kingstree , S. C. .
Puerto Rico
Alcon Laboratories
Fort Worth, Tex.
Owens Laboratories
Center Laboratories
Chicago Pharmacal Co.
William A. Webster Co.
Barry Laboratories, Inc.
Pompano Beach, Fla.
Beecham, Inc.
Clifton, N. J.
Clifton, N. J.
Beecham Labs.
Bristol, Tenn.
Piscataway, N. J.
Bristol Myers Co.
New York, N. Y.
Bristol Myers Industrial
Div.
Syracuse, N. Y.
Bristol Myers Products
Hillside, N. J.
Mead, Johnson & Co.
Evansville, Ind .
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
560
60
1,827.7
No. of
EmpJ .
. 19,700
1,789
29,700
Facility. Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
X
X
B
X
X
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
x .
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
40
-------
FIG UK J III -2c
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
Comoany
Bristol Myers Industrial
Barceloneta, P. Rico
Bristol Labs. Corp.
Mayaguez, P. Rico
"Westwood Pharma.
Buffalo, N. Y.
Ciba-Geigy Corp.
Summit, N. J.
Summit, N. J.
Suffern, N. Y.
Mclntosh, Ala.
CPC International Inc.
Engelwood Cliffs, N. J.
(S. B. Penick & Co. Div.
>.V
-------
FIGURE III -2d
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
Company
Burdick & Jackson Labs
Inc. Subs.
Muskegon, Mich.
ICI United States Inc.
Wilmington, Del.
(Stuart Pharma. Div.
Wilmington, Del.)
Newark, Del.
Pasadena, Calif.
Inolex Corp. (American
Can Co. )
Chicago, 111.
(Inolex Pharma. Div.
Chicago, 111. )
International Rectifier
Corp.
El Segundo, Calif. -
(Rachelle Labs. Inc.
Long Beach, Calif.)
Johnson & Johnson
New Brunswick, N. J.
Johnson & Johnson
New Brunswick, N. J.
J&J Baby Products
Piscataway, N. J
Ethicon
Somerville, N'. J.
Ortho Pharma. Corp.
Raritan, N. J.
Ortho Diagnostics
Raritan, N. J.
McNeil Labs.
Fort Washington, Pa.
Pitman- Moore , Inc.
Washington Crossing,
N. J.
Annual
Sales
1975.$MM
t
.2,900
68
2,200
No. of
E m p 1 .
47,400
2,900
54,300
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
B
X
X
. C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
42
-------
FIGUHE III -2e
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTIC
12/6/76
AL COMPANIES
Company
^_ _J i
J & J/D. O. C.
Gurabo, P. Rico
Hemispherica
S. Juan, P. Rico
Ortho Pharma.
P. Rico
Eli Lilly & Co.
Indianapolis, Ind
Tippecanoe Labs.
Lafayette, Ind.
Clinton Labs.
Clinton, Ind.
Mayaguez, P. Rico
Mallinckrodt Inc.
St. Louis, Missouri
(Medicinal Div. )
Jersey City , N. J.
St. Louis, Missouri
Pharma. Prod. Div.
Decatur, 111.
Medical Chemical Corp.
Santa Monica, Calif.
Medi-Chem, Inc.
Santa Monica, Calif.
Merck & Co.
Rahway, N. J.
(Chemical Div)
Albany, Geo.
Danville, Pa.
Elkton, Va.
Hawthorn, N. J.
Rahway, N. J.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
1,250
240
1,490
No. of
Empl.
24,700
3,700
27,000
1
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
X
X
X
B
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X ,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
43
-------
FIGURE III -2f
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
C o m o a nv
St. Louis, Mo.
South San Francisco, Ca
(MSB Mfg. Div.)
'West Pt. , Pa
MSB Quimica de P. Rice
Inc. Subs.
Miles Laboratories
Elkart, Ind
(Marshall Biv. )
Clifton, N. J.
Elkart , Ind.
Madison, Wis.
(Suniner Biv. )
Zeeland, Mich.
Borne Labs .
West Haven, Conn
Minnesota Mining & Mfg.
St. Paul, Minn.
Riker Labs. Subs.
Northridge, Calif.
Morton Norwich Products
Ind.
Chicago, 111.
Norwich Pharma. Co
Norwich, N.Y.
Eaton Labs .
Novo Enzyme Corp.
Mamaroneck, N. Y.
Pfanstiehl Labs. Inc.
Wankegan, 111.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
414
3, 100
540
No. of
Empl .
8,651
83,609
12,300
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
B
X
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
B
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
44
-------
FIG UK IS III -2g
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
Company
Pfizer, Inc.
New York, N. Y.
Brooklyn, N. Y.
Greensboro, N. C.
Groton, Conn.
Terse Haute, Ind.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Pharmachem Corp.
Bethlehem, Pa.
P- L Biochemicals , Inc.
Milwaukee, Wis.
Polychemical Labs, Inc.
Bronx, N. Y.
Richardson Merrell, Inc.
Wilton, Conn.
Lakeside Labs Div.
Milwaukee, Wis.
J. T. Baker Chemical C
Phillipsburg, N. J.
Merrell Nafcl. Labs.
Cincinnati, Ohio
Vicks-Merrell
Cayey, P. Rico
Merrell-Natl. Labs.
Swiftwater, Pa.
A. H. Robins Co.'
Richmond, Va.
Rhodia, Inc.
New York, N. Y.
New Brunswick, N. J.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
1,665.5
658.7
o.
240
No. of
Empl.
39,500
15,000
4,500
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
B
X
C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
45
-------
FIGURE III -2h
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
Company
Schering-Plough Corp.
Kenilworth, N. J.
Kenilworth, N. J.
Union, N. J. -
P. Rico
G. D. Searle Co.
Chicago, 111.
Skokie, 111
Arlington Hts . 111.
Puerto Rico
Smithkline Corp.
Philadelphia, Pa
Philadelphia
Swedeland, Pa.
Puerto Rico
Squibb Corp.
New York, N. Y.
New Brunswick, N. J.
Humacao, P. Rico
Sterling Drug, Inc.
New York, N. Y.
Glenbrook, Conn.
Gulfport, Miss
Trenton, N. J.'
(The Hilton- Davis Chem.
Co. Div. )
Cincinnati, Ohio
(Thomasset Color Div.)
Newark, N. J.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
800
720
589
1, 125
960
No. of
Empl.
15,600
18,700
13,225
34,000
27,376
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
B
X
X
X
X
c
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
46
-------
FIGUJ' '^ III -2i
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
12/6/76
Company
(Winthrop Lab Div.
New York, N. Y. )
Reusselaer, N. Y.
Syntex Corp.
Palo Alto, Calif.
(Arapahoe Chemicals Div
Boulder, Colo.
Newport, Tenn.
(Syntex Agribusiness Inc.
Springfield, Mo.
Verona, Mo.
Cutter Labs.
Berkeley, Calif.
The Upjohn Co.
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Arecibo, P. Rico
Kalamazoo, Mich
Vitamins Inc.
Chicago, 111.
Warner-Lambert Co.
Morris Plains, N. J.
N.eper a Chemical Co.
Inc.
Harriman, N. Y.
Park Davis & Co.
Holland, Mich
Detroit, Mich
Warner- Chilcott Labs
Morris Plains, N. J.
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
250
)
890
2, 100
No. of
Empl.
6,150
16,550
58,500
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
B
X
X
X
X
c
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
47
-------
12/6/76
FIGUf.E III -Zj
PROFILE OF 45 MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES
Company
-Warner- Chilcott
P. Rito
Park Davis Plant
Carolina, P. Rico
Worthing ton Biochemical
Corp.
Freehold, N. J.
Source: 1975 Directory o
$ Sales and tota
"Standard &
Annual
Sales
1975 $MM
8
: Chemical '.
no, of emp.
Poors Corp
No. of
Empl.
210
Droducers St
oyees inforr
u
Facility Profile (Based on
Product Slate)
A
anfor
latior
B
X
1 Res
deri
C
X
X
X
sarch
'ed fr
D
X
X
X
Ins tit
Dm
E
X
:ite
48
-------
United States. Most pharmaceutical manufacturing firms are
located in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Indiana,
Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and California, with
production concentrated in the industrial areas of the East
and the Midwest. In addition, there are approximately 60
pharmaceutical plants on the island of Puerto Rico. All but
one of the plants surveyed for this study were located in
one of these three high-production geographical areas.
The Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (PMA) estimates
that there are between 600 and 700 firms in the United
States producing prescription products. PMA represents 110
manufacturers who annually produce approximately 95 percent
of the prescription products sold in the United States and
an estimated 50 percent of total free-world output.
Industry-wide market share data compiled by PMA show that 20
firms account for 75 percent of total sales in the United
States. Five of the nine firms (16 plants) surveyed for
this study are among these top 20. Figures III-2a—III-2J
present a profile of U5 major pharmaceutical companies.
It should be noted that 71 establishments primarily engaged
in production of commodities listed under codes SIC 2831,
2833 and 283U have applied for NPEES discharge applications.
Of these 71, twenty-three plants are designated as major
dischargers. Forty-four plants were operating under NPDES
permits as of September 1, 1976; thirteen permit
applications are still active and one permit is being
appealed (See Table III-U). Another 13 plants, including
one major discharger, have withdrawn their applications
since they are converting to municipal waste treatment
systems. The status of NPDES discharge applications are
listed in Tables III-U and III-5.
A total of 23 plants were surveyed, of which ten are
considered major dischargers. The distribution of plants
surveyed by subcategory is as follows:
Subcategorv Number of plants
A 13
B 5
C 13
D 8
E 6
It should be noted that some pharmaceutical plants have
processes in more than one subcategory. Where possible in
such cases, the wastewater streams from the different
49
-------
12/6/76
TABLE III-4
NUMBER OF DIRECT DISCHARGERS BY EPA REGION
DERIVED FROM ACTIVE NPDES PERMITS AND PERMIT APPLICATIONS
EPA No. of
Region Dischargers Status
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
3
23
8
11
6
2
3
0
1
1
3 Active Permits
13 Active Permits;
1 Deleted
7 Active Permits;
10 Active Permits;
6 Active Permits;
2 Applications
3 Active Permits;
1 Active Permit
1 Active Permits
10 Applications;
1 Issued & Appealed
1 Application
10 No Permits Required
2 Exempted
Total 58 44 Active Permits;
13 Active Applications;
1 Issued & Appealed;
13 Applications Withdrawn
50
-------
TABLE III-5
NPDES PERMIT STATUS OF DIRECT DISCHARGER PHARMACEUTICAL MANUFACTURERS
12/6/76
EPA
Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
IX
X
NPDES
Permit No.
ME0000400
ME0000671
ME0002585
NY0006335
NJ0000540
NJ0002585
NJ0002801
NJ0003671
NJ0004952
NY0004243
NY0004260
NY0006670
PR0021148
PR0000353
PR0000540
NJ0002542
NJ0003905
NJ0005711
HY0004600
NY0006408
PR0000124
PR0000361
PR0000388
PR0001104
NJ0027618
NY0033219
NY0004146
DE0000060
PA0008419
VA0002178
PA0002891
PA0012696
VA0003042
MD0022560
PA0028118
GA0001619
NC0003263
TN0001481
MS0000833
NC0001589
NC0003506
NC0006564
SC0003123
TN0002780
MS0027995
NC0027928
IN0001104
IN0001112
MI0000922
MI0001945
MI0025330
IL0002003
IN0002852
IN0002861
IN0003581
MI0004715
IL0001881
IL0002445
IL0003191
IL0024074
IL0038831
MI0027235
AR0001783
TX0064912
NE0111091
NE0000701
NE0111295
MO0001970
M00001716
CA0002526
WA0021539
Permit Expiration
Status Date
Active 4-30-79
Active 4-30-79
Active 6-30-79
Applied for
Active 6-29-80
Active 7-31-81
Applied for
Applied for
Active 7-31-79
Applied for
Active 6-30-77
Applied for
Active 1-31-80
Active 1-31-80
Active 8-31-81
Active 7-31-80
Active 4-30-79
Active 9-30-80
Applied for
Applied for
Deleted
Active 12-31-79
Applied for
Active 1-31-80
Applied for
Applied for
Active 12-31-79
ActiveX. 9-10-76
ActiviT"
Issued & Appealed
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active
Active 6-30-79
Active 2-13-80
Active 2-13-79
Active 6-30-79
Active 8-11-80
Active 1-31-80
Active 11-15-78
Active 7-25-80
Active 6-1-79
Active 12-31-79
Applied for
Active 1-31-79
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
Active
Active
No Permit Required
Active
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
No Permit Required
Active
No Permit Required
Active
Applied for
Applied for
Exempt
Active 10-13-77
Exempt
Active 6-8-80
Active 9-25-79
Active 11-30-76
Active 2-15-80
Facility & Location
Marine Colloids, Inc., Rockland, ME.
Stauffer Chemical Co., South Portland, ME.
Morton Norwich Products, Winslow, ME.
Diagnostic Research Inc. , Roslyn, NY.
Ciba-Geigy Corp. , Summit, NJ.
S.B. Penick Co. CPC Intl., Montville, NJ.
Diamond Shamrock Corp. Nopco. , Harrison, NJ.
Merck & Co. Inc. Branchburg Farm, N. Branch
Hof fmann-LaRoche Inc., Belvidere, NJ.
Kraftco Sheffield Chem Norwich, Norwich, NY.
Kraftco Sheffield Chem Oneonta, Oneonta, NY.
Nepera Chemical Co. Inc., Harriman, NY.
Merck Sharp & Dohme, Barceloneta, PR.
Eli Lilly & Co. Inc, Mayaguez, PR.
Warner Chilcott Labs, Carolina, PR.
Warner Chilcott Labs, Morris Plains Boro, NJ.
E.R. Squibb & Sons Inc., Hillsboro, NJ.
Schering Corp., Lafayette, NJ.
Lederle Lab Div. Amer. Cyan., Pearl River, NY.
General Mills Chemicals Inc., Ossining, NY.
Lederle Diagnostics de Puerto, Carolina, PR.
Eli Lilly & Co. Inc., Carolina, PR.
Brischem inc. , Barceloneta, PR.
Manufacturing Enterprises Inc., Humacao , PR.
E.R. Squibb & Son Inc., Princeton, N J .
USV Pharmaceutical Corp., Tuckahoe, NY.
Morton Norwich Products, Norwich, NY.
Bar croft Co., Lewes, DE.
Merck :, Co. Inc. Cherokee Plant, Riverside, PA.
Merck & Co., Inc. Stonewall Plant, Elkton, VA.
West Agro. Chem. Eighty Four Pt., N. Strab. Twp
McNeil Lab Inc. Ft. Wash., Whitemarsh Twp., PA.
Puremade Products, Hopewell, VA.
Abbott Labs Agri.S VI. Worchester Co. Sd.,MD.
National Milling & Chem. Co., Philadelphia, PA.
Merck & Co. Flint Rv. Pit. Albany, Putney, GA.
Mallinckrodt Chem Raleigh, Wake County, NC.
Cutter Labs Inc., Chattanooga, TN.
Travenol Lab Cleveland, Bolivar County, MS.
Abbott Lab Rocky Mount, Nash County, NC .
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Win. Salem, Merry Hill
Travenol Lab North Cove, McDowell County, NC.
Travenol Lab Kingstree, Kingstree, SC.
Chattem Drug & Chem., Chattanooga, TN.
Vicksburg chemical Co., Vicksburg, MS.
Vick. Mfg. Divn. Richardson Me., Greensboro
Dow Chemical-Human Health R & D, IN.
Dow Chemical Co. - Biological Lab.
Parke Davis & Company.
Parke Davis & Company, Detroit, MI.
Parke Davis & Co. -Parkedale Bio. Avon Twp., MI.
Alba Mfg. Co. - NPR, IL.
Eli Lilly & Co. Clinton Labs, Clinton Twp., IN.
Eli Lilly & Co., Lafayette, IN.
Pfizer Inc. , Terre Haute, IN.
Park, Davis, & Co-Holland Chem, Holland, MI.
Abbott Labs., North Chicago, IL.
Sterling Drug Inc. — Glenbrook, IL.
Pierce Chemical Co. , IL.
Travenol Labs Inc., Round Lane Sd., IL.
Mallinckrodt Chem. WKS-NPR, IL.
Ash Stevens Inc., MI.
Travenol Labs-Baxter, Mountain Home, AR.
Hof fmann-LaRoche, Freeport, TX.
Armour-Baldwin Labs., Omaha, NE.
Dorsey Labs, Lincoln, NE.
Pfizer Inc., Sidney, NE.
Syntex Agribusiness, Inc. , Springfield, MO.
Amor. Cyanamid Co., Hannibal, MO.
McGaw Labs, Glendale, CA.
I. P. Callison & Son, Chehalis, WA.
51
-------
processes were examined separately and are considered as
separate plants for the purpose of the above accounting.
From this, it is concluded that the data base has
statistical validity and that it is adequate for the type of
logic stream used in this report.
Units of Expression
Units of pharmaceutical production are shown in kilo-
kilograms (kkg) which is the same as 1000 kilograms or a
metric ton. In-plant liquid flows are sometimes shown in
cubic meters per day (cu m/day) and treatment plant
capacities are shown as gallons per day (gpd) or as millions
of gallons per day (mgd) .
Metric units may be converted to English units by using the
following factors:
1 cubic meter (cu m) = 1 kL = 264.2 gallons
1 kilogram (kg) = 2.205 pounds (Its)
1 kilo-kilogram (kkg) = 2205 pounds = 1 metric ton
1 kg/kkg = 1 kilogram of substance per kilo-kilogram of
product = 1 pound of substance per 1000 pounds
of product
1 milligram per liter (mg/1) = 1 part per million (ppm) -
8.34 Ibs/million gal water or 1 g/cu m water.
For other metric unit to English unit conversions,
see Table XVIII.
52
-------
SECTION IV
INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIZATION
General
The purpose of this study is the development of effluent
limitations and guidelines for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category that will be commen-
surate with different levels of in-process waste reduction
and end-of-pipe pollution control technology. These
effluent limitations and guidelines are to specify the
quantity of pollutants which will ultimately be discharged
from a specific facility. Recognizing that the industries
considered in the total study of the miscellaneous chemicals
category (Pharmaceuticals, gum and wood, pesticides and
agricultural chemicals, adhesive and sealants, explosives,
carbon black and photographic processing) are quite diverse
in raw materials, manufacturing processes, products and
wastewaters, each major industry is treated independently as
a category. Specific subcategories are explained in this
development document for the pharmaceutical manufacturing
point source category.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Discussion of the Rationale of Subcateqorization
Subcategories are established for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category to define those segments
of the industry where separate effluent limitations and
standards should apply. Subcategorization is based on
production methods and the wastewaters generated. These
subcategories are:
A. Fermentation Products
B. Extraction Products
C. Chemical Synthesis Products
D. Mixing/Compounding and Formulation
E. Research
The underlying distinctions between the various
subcategories have been based on the wastewater generated
its quantity, characteristics and applicability of control
and treatment. The following factors have been considered
in determining whether such subcategorizations are
justified:
Manufacturing Processes
53
-------
There are six basic processing techniques in common use in
the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. These
techniques, all distinctly different, are: fermentation,
chemical synthesis, formulation, fractionation, natural
extraction and the growth and isolation of cultures. The
first three of these techniques are by far the most widely
used.
Fermentation processes are used extensively in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category to
produce antibiotics. Fermentation plants are large water
users and the basic process steps used at these facilities
are similar throughout the industry. The basic production
steps consist of the initial fermentation step, a separation
step (usually vacuum filtration or centrifugation) and
finally a series of extraction and purification steps. The
major wastewater from this processing technique is spent
beers from the initial fermentation step.
Chemical synthesis is another major production process in
pharmaceutical manufacturing. Hundreds of different
products are made each year using chemical synthesis
techniques, which include alkylations, carboxylation,
esterification, halogenation, sulfonation, etc. Chemical
synthesis plants are also large water users.
The third major production process in pharmaceutical
manufacturing is formulation. Formulation plants receive
bulk chemical and fermentation products as raw materials and
subsequently manufacture the final dosage forms (tablets,
liquids, capsules, etc.). Some of the unit operations
utilized for formulating final products include drying,
blending, grinding, grading, mixing, labeling, packaging,
etc. Compared to the fermentation and chemical synthesis
processes, formulation is a relatively small water user.
Fractionation, natural extraction and biological culture
growth and separation processing techniques are used on much
smaller production scales than the three previously
discussed techniques. Fractionation techniques consist of a
series of centrifugation and chemical extraction steps.
Natural extraction techniques use animal and plant tissues
as product raw materials and also consist of various
separation and chemical extraction steps. Biological
cultures are another raw material cf medicinal products.
Cultures are grown under optimum conditions and then go
through a series of seeding, isolation, incubation and
drying steps. These three processing techniques are
generally conducted in laboratories on a bench-top scale and
therefore are very small water users.
54
-------
It was concluded that the nature of the manufacturing
process in the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category formed a basis for subcategorization.
Product
Under the Standard Industrial Classification coding system,
the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry is divided into
three product areas: Biological Products (SIC 2831),
Medicinal Chemicals and Botanical Products (SIC 2833) and
Pharmaceutical Preparations (SIC 2834). Within the
Medicinal Chemicals and Botanical Products classification,
there are three additional major product areas:
fermentation products, chemical synthesis products and
natural extraction products. Fermentation products are
primarily steroids and antibiotics. Chemical synthesis pro-
ducts include intermediates used to produce other chemical
compounds as well as hundreds of fine chemical products.
These chemicals are used to ultimately produce the gamut of
medicinal products. Biological products include vaccines,
serums and various plasma derivatives. Natural extractions
include such items as animal gland derivatives, animal bile
salts and derivatives and herb tissue derivatives.
Formulation products are manufactured from the end products
of the other manufacturing areas and include the merchandise
which is finally marketed to the public.
It was concluded that the nature of the product manufactured
by the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category
formed a basis for subcategorization.
Raw Materials
The pharmaceutical manufacturing industry draws upon
worldwide sources for the myriad of raw materials it needs
to produce medicinal chemicals. Fermentation plants require
many raw materials falling into general chemical
classifications such as carbohydrates, carbonates, steep
liquors, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds, anti-foam agents
and various acids and bases. These chemicals are used as
carbon sources, as nutrient sources, for foam control and
for pH adjustment in fermentation processes. Various
solvents, acids and bases are also required for extraction
and purification processes. Hundreds of raw materials are
required for the many batch chemical synthesis processes
used by the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category. These include organic and inorganic compounds and
are used in gas, liquid and solid forms.
55
-------
Plant and animal tissues are also used by the pharmaceutical
manufacturing industry to produce various biological and
natural extraction products. The raw materials used by
pharmaceutical formulation plants are the products of the
other manufacturing areas. These include bulk chemicals
from fermentation and chemical synthesis plants as well as
such items as biles, blood fractions, salts and various
derivatives from biological and natural extraction
facilities.
It was concluded that the nature of raw materials used by
the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category
formed a basis for subcategorizaticn.
Plant Size
From inspection of historical and plant visit data, it was
determined that plant size, measured in terms of production,
apparently has no significant effect on the pounds of
pollutant per pound of production (RVvL).
Plant size, measured in terms of total gross floor area,
could be used as the basis for computing raw waste loads for
the plants in subcategory E. This proved to be a consistent
yardstick for this subcategory in lieu of any production
that can be quantified.
Plant Age
During the study, old and new plants within each subcategory
were visited. Following the analysis of actual survey and
historical data, it was concluded that plant age is not a
significant factor in determining the characteristics of a
plant's wastewater. Both the presence and absence of
separate sewer systems for sanitary and process wastewaters
have been observed in both old and new plants. The age of a
plant is related more to the location of the plant than to
the quantity or characteristics of the plant's wastewaters.
The older plants are located in urban areas, whereas the
newer plants are sited in rural areas. This will affect the
cost of treatment facilities because of land costs and land
availability.
Plant Location
From inspection and wastewater sampling of plants located in
three geographical areas of the country and from analysis of
existing data, it is concluded that plant location does not
affect the quality or quantity of the process wastewater
streams. The geographical areas surveyed included the
56
-------
Midwest, the Northeast, the Middle Atlantic States and the
Southeast (Puerto Rico). Geographical location did affect
the management of non-process streams such as non-contact
cooling water. Recirculation of cooling water was more
common in the warm climate areas (where water conservation
was of more concern) than in temperate geographical regions.
Housekeeping
Plant housekeeping was another factor considered when
comparing the various plants visited during the study. The
pharmaceutical industry has been under a form of pollution
control for a number of years. Certain control standards
for cleanliness, sanitation, hygiene and process control are
matters of particular importance to the industry because of
its concern about product quality. As a result of these
considerations, the pharmaceutical manufacturing point
source category has, as a matter of course, practiced
unusually good manufacturing and housekeeping procedures as
they apply to both processes and personnel. In addition,
the pharmaceutical industry has for years been subject to
certain manufacturing and operational restrictions and
inspections pertaining to the regulations of the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Periodically, FDA personnel
will call on a pharmaceutical manufacturer for an unan-
nounced in-plant inspection covering plant housekeeping
practices. Good manufacturing practices regulations
promulgated by the FDA have teen in force, with
modifications, since 1963. In addition, since the chemical
costs to produce pharmaceutical products are high, in-
ventories are closely watched and checked, inadvertent
spills and batch discharges are closely monitored and
housekeeping practices are maintained at the optimum. Due
to the strict regulations concerning cleanliness enforced by
the FDA, the housekeeping practices observed at all the
plants visited were exceptionally good and therefore they
were not a factor in affecting wastewater quantities and
characteristics. Also, except for the nuclear industry in
certain cases, as a rule the pharmaceutical industry places
greater emphasis upon the purity of its products than does
any other industry.
Air Pollution Control Equipment
The type of air pollution equipment employed by a facility
can affect the characteristics and the quantity of the
process wastewater streams. The use of both dry and wet
pollution control equipment was observed in several areas of
the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. However, these
57
-------
wet devices can produce a larger quantity of process
wastewaters than dry air pollution control equipment.
Nature of Wastes Generated
Various pharmaceutical manufacturing processes have been
examined for the types of contact process water usage
associated with each. Contact process water is defined as
all water which comes in contact with chemicals (including
pharmaceutical products) within the pharmaceutical
manufacturing process and includes:
1. Water required or produced (in stoichiometric
quantities) in a chemical reaction.
2. Water used as a solvent or as an aqueous medium for
the reactions.
3. Water which enters the process with any of the
reactants or which is used as a diluent (including
steam).
4. Water used as an absorbent or scrubbing medium for
separating certain chemicals from the reaction
mixture.
5. Water introduced as steam for stripping certain
chemicals from the reaction mixture.
6. Water used to wash, remove, or separate chemicals
from the reaction mixture.
7. Water associated with mechanical devices such as
steam-jet ejectors for drawing a vacuum on the
process and vacuum pumps.
8. Water used as a quench (including ice) or direct
contact coolant, such as in a barometric condenser.
9. Water used to clean or purge equipment used in
batch-type operations.
The type and quantity of contact process water usage are
related to the specific unit operations and chemical
conversions within a process. The term "unit operations" is
defined to mean specific manufacturing steps, such as
fermentation, distillation, solvent extraction,
crystallization, purification, chemical synthesis,
absorption, etc. The term "chemical conversion" is defined
58
-------
to mean specific reactions, such as oxidation, halogenation,
alkylation, esterification, etc.
Although the study survey teams were not allowed to sample
individual unit operations, it could be seen from evaluation
of all available data that the characteristics of the
wastewaters generated by the different manufacturing
techniques utilized by the pharmaceutical manufacturing
industry varied considerably. The wastewaters from
fermentation processes consisted of high strength spent
fermentation beers, equipment washwaters, floor washwaters
and waste solvents. The many batch operations used in
chemical synthesis operations were a cause of highly
variable wastewaters containing many constitutents. The
wastewater flows from formulation operations are almost
exclusively equipment and floor washwaters.
Biological, natural extraction and research facilities
generate much less wastewater than the other manufacturing
processes. Their wastewater flows are intermittent and
animal wastes are often found in the effluents from research
buildings.
It was concluded that the nature of the wastewaters
generated by the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category formed a basis for subcategorization.
Treatability of Wastewaters
The pollutant loading from plants within the different
manufacturing areas varied widely and therefore the
treatment technologies employed ty companies throughout the
industry varied from highly sophisticated thermal oxidation
plants to small biological package plants.
The wastewaters generated by fermentation and chemical
synthesis processes contain much higher pollutant
concentrations than those generated from the manufacturing
of biological and natural extraction products. Formulation
plants generally discharge wastewaters with moderate
strengths. The lowest strength wastes sampled were those
attributed to research facilities. It was concluded that
the treatability of the wastewaters generated by the
pharmaceutical point source category formed a basis for
subcategorization.
gummary of Considerations
It was concluded that, for the purpose of establishing
effluent limitations guidelines and standards, the
-------
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category should be
grouped into five subcategories. This subcategorization was
based on distinct differences in manufacturing processes,
raw materials, products, and wastewater characteristics and
treatability. The five subcategories that have been
selected for the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category are:
A. Fermentation Products
B. Extraction Products
C. Chemical Synthesis Products
D. Mixing/Compounding and Formulation
E. Research
Because large research animals are sometimes found in
research facilities there is a potential subcategory Eg
(Research Farm) for future consideration.
Description of Subcategories
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products
Fermentation is an important production process in
pharmaceutical manufacturing. This is the basic method used
for producing most antibiotics (penicillin, streptomycin,
etc.) and many of the steroids (cortisone, etc.). The
product is produced in batch fermentation tanks in the
presence of a particular fungus or bacterium. The culture
may be the product, or it may be filtered from the medium
and marketed in cake or liquid form as animal feed
supplement. The product is extracted from the culture
medium through the use of solvents, activated carbon, etc.
The antibiotic is then washed to remove residual impurities,
concentrated, filtered and packaged.
The most troublesome waste of the fermentation process and
the one most likely to be involved in water pollution
problems, is spent beer. This is the fermented broth from
which the valuable fraction, antibiotic or steroid, has been
extracted. Spent beer contains a large amount of organic
material, protein and other nutrients. Although spent beer
frequently contains high amounts of nitrogen, phosphate and
other plant nutrients, it is also likely to contain salts,
such as sodium chloride and sodium sulfate, from the
extraction processes.
This subcategory includes the unit operations which follow
the fermentation steps that are used to separate the product
from the fermentation broth. These include physical
separation steps, such as vacuum filtration and
60
-------
centrifugation, as well as chemical separation via solvent
extraction and distillation. Fermentation requires large
quantities of water. The primary liquid wastes include the
fermentation beers; inorganic solids, such as diatomaceous
earth, which are utilized as a pre-coat or an aid to the
filtration process; floor and equipment washings; chemical
wastes such as solvents; and barometric condenser water from
evaporation.
Subcategory B - Biological and Natural Extraction
Products
Biological product manufacturers produce bacterial and virus
vaccines, toxoids and analogous products (such as allergenic
extracts), serums, plasmas and other blood derivatives for
human or veterinary use. The primary manufacturing steps in
blood fractionation include chemical precipitation,
clarification, extraction and centrifugation. The primary
wastewater sources are precipitates, supernatants,
centrates, waste alcohols and tank washings. The
precipitates and waste alcohols can be incinerated or
reclaimed, while dilute wastes (supernatants, centrates and
tank washings) are sewered. The production procedures for
vaccines are generally lengthy and involve numerous batch
operations. Unit operations include incubation,
centrifugation, staining, freezing, drying, etc.
Liquid wastes associated with the process consist primarily
of spent media broth, waste eggs, glassware and vessel
washings, animal wastes, bad batches of production seed
and/or final product and scrubber water from air pollution
control equipment. Spent media broth, bad batches, waste
eggs, animal carcasses and contaminated feces are normally
incinerated. Wastes from small non-infected control animals
may be landfilled. Equipment washings, animal cage washings
and scrubber blowdowns are usually sewered.
Natural extractions manufacturing includes the processing
(grading, grinding and milling) of bulk botanical drugs and
herbs. Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing
agar and similar products of natural origin, endocrine
products, manufacturing or isolating basic vitamins and
isolating active medicinal principals such as alkaloids from
botanical drugs and herbs are also included in this
industry. The primary wastewater sources include floor
washings, residues, equipment and vessel washwaters and
spills. To the maximum extent possible, bad batches are
corrected rather than discarded. When bad batches cannot be
corrected, liquids are generally discharged to the plant
61
-------
sewer system. Solid wastes are usually landfilled or
incinerated.
Subcategorv C - Chemical Synthesis Products
The production of chemical synthesis products is very
similar to fine chemicals production and uses the following
major unit processes: reaction, extraction, concentration,
separation, solvent recovery and drying. The synthesis
reactions are generally batch types which are followed by
extraction of the product. Extraction of the pharmaceutical
product is often accomplished through solvents. The product
may then be washed, concentrated, filtered and
recrystallized to the desired purity and dried. The major
wastewater sources include tank washes, equipment washes,
spent cooling water and condenser discharges. These wastes
are generally amenable to biological treatment.
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding
and Formulation
Formulation operations for synthesis products may be either
dry or wet. Dry production involves dry mixing, tableting
or capsuling, and packaging. Process equipment is generally
vacuum cleaned to remove dry solids and then is washed down.
Scrubber blowdown from air pollution control devices may
also be a wastewater source, and baghouses (for air
pollution control) will generate a solid waste requiring
disposal. Wet production involves mixing and blending in
large vats and subsequent bottling and packaging. The
primary wastewater sources include tank and equipment
washings and spills.
Subcategory E - Microbiologicalf Biological
and Chemical Research
Generally, quantities of materials being discharged by a
research operation are relatively small when compared with
the volumes generated by production facilities. However,
the problem cannot be measured entirely by the volume of
material going to the sewer. Research operations are
frequently erratic as to quantity, quality and time schedule
when dumping occurs. The most common problem is the
disposal of flammable solvents (especially low-boiling-point
solvents like ethyl ether), which can result in explosions
and fires. The most effective approach to this problem is
to require laboratory personnel to dispose of all waste
solvents in special containers available in the laboratories
and to have the material hauled away by a contractor. The
effluent limitations for this sutcategory were based on
62
-------
total gross floor area, since this proved to be a more
consistent measure than production rate. This approach is
logical, in lieu of any product that can be easily
quantified.
Further study is being made of possible subclassification in
recognition of excrement from large animals at certain
research farms. These wastes resemble feedlot wastes, and
their limitations might be based en total animal weight or
population equivalent.
Process Descriptions
The production from a given process is obviously related to
the design capacities of the individual unit operations
within it. In many cases the unit operations are arranged
as a single train in series. In ether cases, certain unit
operations are arranged in parallel, as in an operation
utilizing several small reactors simultaneously.
There are two major types of manufacturing process within
the industry:
1. Continuous processing operations.
2. Batch processing operations.
Manufacturing processes can be classified in this manner by
the flow of material between unit operations within a
process, which may be either a continuous stream or a series
of batch transfers. Both types of processes normally have
an associated design capacity which is expressed in terms of
thousands of pounds of product per year.
In large-scale continuous processes, all of the subsections
of the process module are operated with the use of automated
controls; in some cases, complete automation or computer
control is utilized. Recording instruments maintain
continuous records of process variables such as temperature,
pressure, flow of fluids, viscosity, pH, liquid level and
the composition of various process streams. Instrumentation
for the indicating, recording and control of process
variables is an outstanding characteristic of modern
chemical manufacture. The function of the operators,
mechanical technicians and supervising engineers in this
type of operation is to maintain the process module in
proper running order and to keep process parameters within
desirable ranges. In large continuous operations, equipment
is frequently segregated to the extent that each process
module is located in its own building cr plant location. In
63
-------
such operations, there is often complete segregation of
contact process waters from non-contact cooling waters.
In general, the chemical processing area of a pharmaceutical
manufacturing plant is made up of a number of batch reactors
followed by intermediate product storage and purification
steps, such as crystallization, distillation, filtration,
centnfugation, solvent extraction and other unit operations
either singularly or in combination. Since some equipment
may be common to several product needs, careful equipment
cleaning is necessary to avoid cross-contamination.
The washings flow to the drainage system and can thus be
collected for subsequent treatment. Where a solvent is
necessary in the cleaning steps for a vessel cleanout, the
vessel is closed and cleaned by recirculation of the solvent
through a pump system. The contaminated solvent is then
discharged to a hold tank for purification by stripping and
subsequent recovery drawoff. The tars or sludges are
usually incinerated or hauled to a landfill. jn some very
small production facilities, the solvent may be disposed of
to an approved disposal firm.
Where solvents are used for cleaning, plant safety becomes a
primary concern. It is extremely important to minimize the
discharge of water-insoluble solvents to plant drains, where
a simple spark could create a major castastrophe. Plant
safety is of constant concern and fire hazards are to be
avoided as much as possible. Consequently, plant safety
measures help eliminate gross discharges of such organics,
although low concentrations remain in dissolved, dispersed,
or emulsified form and require subsequent treatment.
Where solvents are used, both for process and vessel
cleaning, most plants practice solvent recovery. A few
plants also strip weak organic solutions to reduce
contaminant loadings further. The stripping operation is
carried to the point where the organic solution can safely
be combined with other process wastes.
A number of the pharmaceutical manufacturing plants have
evaporation and incineration units to aid in their disposal
of specific'organic wastes which might be difficult to treat
biologically.
Subcategorv A - Fermentation Products
Historically, the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry has
used materials of plant and animal origin as sources for
drugs. The industry also goes a step further and employs
64
-------
12/6/76
WATER
C02 & Air
FIGURE IV -13
TYPICAL FERMENTATION PROCESS
FILTER
SOLVENT
RAW
a\
01
\LS
SEED
••
MEDIA
MAKE-UP
TANK
* J
INOCULUM
TANK
fACID
| . , 1
^ t-ERMENTATION |
f
1
Sterile Air
7 T i
1
f VACUUM |
FILTRAIION "' *• COOLING 1*. bXTRACTION »^
1 '
* SPENT
SPENT BEER
FILTER
CAKE
CARBON
SALT
SOLUTION
SOLVENT
WASTE
FILTRATE
WASTEWATER
-------
the life processes of plants and animals (especially from
microorganisms) to produce useful medications. An excellent
example of this is the fermentation process, in which
microorganisms are permitted tc grew under controlled
conditions to produce valuable and often complex chemicals.
With a few exceptions, notably chloramphenicol and
cycloserine (which are produced ty chemical synthesis), all
antibiotics are produced by fermentation. The technique
involves growing the microorganism on a large scale in
totally enclosed tanks ranging in size from 5,000 to 25,000
gallons under conditions which force the microorganism to
produce the maximum quantity of the antibiotic. Control of
microorganism activity is achieved by the following
techniques:
1. The culture is grown in a fermentation medium which
contains the various ingredients required by the
organism for its nutrition, e.g., a carbohydrate
such as glucose, sucrose, lactose, or starch; a
simple nitrogen source, such as urea or ammonium
sulfate; or a more complex nitrogen source, such as
soybean meal, cornsteep liquor, whey, cottonseed
meal, or a meat digest, in addition, various salts
may be added to provide the organism with its
nutritional requirements for one or more of the
cations (manganese, magnesium, copper, iron,
potassium) and for one or more of the anions
(phosphate, sulfate and chloride). Sometimes other
materials such as oil or yeast extract are added.
If the organism is aerobic, sterilized air is
introduced through a sparger in the bottom of the
vessel and dispersed throughout the fermenting
broth by agitation. It should be emphasized that
the fermentation medium is one which is devised to
stimulate maximum antibiotic production and not
necessarily meet the normal nutritional
requirements of the organism.
2. The organism is grown under conditions of pure
culture, i.e., in the absence of any competing
microorganism. This is achieved by sterilizing
the medium and the fermentor with heat, usually
from steam; by aerating with sterile air, usually
obtained by passage through a filter containing
glass wool or carbon; and by preventing the
entrance of foreign microorganisms during the
fermentation period through operation of the vessel
under positive pressure and the use of steam seals
on all connecting lines.
66
-------
FIGURE IV-lb
TYPICAL FERMENTATION PROCESS WITH ION EXCHANGE REFINING STEPS
Water
12/6/76
1
Filter Aid
Raw ^
Materials
9pr*H —-
--
Acids
I
Ion
Exchange
Pnl i imn
Spent Streams-
and WashpQ
Media I 1
lul _ 1 ,,»,,— 1 I
Make-up ± 1
Tank ^ T
_. fc
FeniieiiLdLion Vacuum
Tank HH.pr *"
Inoculum """
Tank 1 1
CO, & Air Spent
2 Filter
Cake
!
^ Liijuor ^*
r
To WWTP
i '
** Evapord Lor F i 1 Ler ^ : Dri er —
i ' '
1 * 1
^ _ T Liquid f
1 £vaPorator Product Water Vapor
•Product
To WWTP
-------
3. Close control of the physical environment is
achieved by continuous mixing of the batch to
ensure intimate contact of the microorganism with
the components of the medium; by control of the
batch temperature; and finally by control of the
pH. This latter control may be achieved either by
relying on the metabolism of the organism combined
with the proper balance of medium ingredients to
give the desired pH pattern, or by the addition of
acid or bases as needed. Aerated fermentations
often foam excessively and, as a consequence, a
defoamer is usually added intermittently to keep
the batch under control.
The choice of defoamer is influenced by its
defoaming ability and its toxicity to the
fermentation. Interference with product isolation
in the refining step is another factor to be con-
sidered.
U. In a few isolated cases, product formation is
stimulated by the addition, throughout the
fermentation, of a compound which the organism can
incorporate into the final product. An example of
this occurs in the production of benzylpenicillin,
when phenylacetic acid is added, to be incorporated
into the benzyl side chain. Similarly,
phenoxyacetic acid is used to stimulate the
production of phenoxymethyl penicillin.
The antibiotic may be accumulated within the cells of the
microorganism or excreted into the surrounding aqueous
medium, or a combination of the two may occur. Usually, the
antibiotic is recovered from the fermentation broth by
utilizing techniques basically related to solvent extraction
of the filtrate and/or cells such as selective ion exchange,
chromatography, precipitation, or a combination of these.
In a number of fermentation operations, it is possible to
recover the suspended mycelia and nutrients present in the
spent beer. They can then be concentrated, dried and sold
as an animal feed supplement. Of course, for these solids
to be utilized in such a manner, the fermentation waste must
be free of hazardous components. Landfilling is designated
by some companies for such sclids when reuse is not
feasible.
Although many antibiotics are produced commercially, the
general fermentation processes used are very similar.
Flowcharts for typical fermentation processes are depicted
68
-------
FIGURE IV -2
TYPICAL FERMENTATION PROCESS
12/6/76
Vent
Seed
o>
10
Raw
Materials
Packaging
Scrubber
Water to
WTP
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE IV -3
TYPICAL VACCINE PRODUCTION
PROCESS
CHICK
EMBYROS
^»
HARVESTED, MINCED
TRYPSINIZED TO
INDIVIDUAL CELLS
CENTRIFUGE
,*+- _
CELLS
RESUSPENDED
SUPERNATANT
WASTED
CELLS
BOTTLED
INCUBATE
CELLS
^.
t
^
SEED CELLS
WITH VIRUS
SEED
INCUBATE
ADD FRESH
MEDIUM
RE-INCUBATE
HARVEST
FLUIDS
FREEZE
HARVEST
— y».
VENT WASH
4 WATER
1
. fc—
THAW VIRUS
01 KPFrvKinN
AND CLARIFY
DRYING
PACKAGING
AND
LABELING
SPENT
STORAGE
AT4°C
WATER
-------
in Figures IV-1a, IV-1b and IV-2. The major wastewater
sources are the spent beer from the fermentation step,
equipment washdowns, floor washwaters and spent solvents
from subsequent extraction steps.
Subcateqory B - Biological and Natural Extraction
Products
A biological product is any virus or bacterial vaccine,
therapeutic serum, toxin, antitoxin, blood derivative, or
analogous product applicable to the prevention, treatment,
or cure of diseases or injuries in man. They are created by
the action of microorganisms, and they are used for
prophylaxis, treatment and diagnosis of infections and
allergic diseases. Biological products are valuable for
producing immunity to infections and preventing epidemics
caused by contagious diseases. The two major production
processes in this group are blood fractionation and vaccine
production.
Numerous refinements of the detailed procedures for blood
fractionation have been made to increase the yield and
purity of the various components. The principal methods
presently in use for large scale separations are called
method 6, method 5 H and method 9. Method 6 and method 5 H
are used for the main separation of the plasma, whereas
method 9 is for the subfractionaticn cf precipitate II +
III.
Table IV-1 lists the various plasma fractions produced and
indicates their respective components and ultimate uses.
Method 6 is used for the industrial production of plasma.
The plasma for which this method was developed is obtained
from bleedings in which one unit (500 me) of whole blood is
collected in a vessel containing 50 me of 4 percent sodium
citrate. After separating the cells from the plasma, the
plasma is gently stirred, cooled and brought to a pH of 7.2.
The plasma then undergoes a series of centrifugation steps.
The resultant supernatant and/or precipitate is chemically
treated in preparation for the next centrifugation, is
preserved and stored for future use, or is discarded.
Several manufacturers now use a simplified version of method
6. In this simpler system, the number of fractions is
reduced and the total volume of the system is smaller. This
modified procedure has been designated as method 5 H.
71
-------
12/6/76
Table IV -1
Flowsheet of Protein Fractionation of Plasma
Fract ion
of Plasma
II + Ml
I I I
I I 1-2-3
I I 1-3
IV-1
I V-4
VI
Components
antihemophi1ic globulin
I I 1-0 cholesterol: Phosphatides
carotenoids; Vitamin A
estrogens
I I + I I I-W II
Demonstrated Users
treatment of hemophilia
globulins and some
B globulins
I I I-1 isoagglutinins
I I 1-2 prothrombin (thrombin)
immune globulins against
measles and infectious
hepatitis; other anti-
bodies
blood grouping
blood coagulation; nemo
(fibrinogen, which yields in neurosurgery
fibrin foam and film) blood coagulation
plasminogen
a-globulin; cholesterol:
phosphatides; phosphatases
a- and b globulin; esterases
hypertensinogen; some
album in
protein not precipitated
72
-------
FIGURE IV-4
STEROID HORMONES
and
STEROIDAL SYNTHETICS
15
Cyclopentanophenanthrene
Nucleus
CH2OH
H3C C=0
OH
C21H26°5
Prednisone
CH2OH
C=0
H3C i OH
C21H28°5
Cortisone
CH2
C=0
OH
Tr iamc ino lone
73
-------
The precipitate designated II + III, which is produced in
the third step of method 6 and in method 5 H, is the
starting material for method 9. This method is used to
produce additional blood fractions and, as in methods 6 and
5 H, consists of a series of centrifugation steps to
separate the desired plasma fractions.
In general, the production process for vaccines is lengthy
and involves numerous batch operations. Figure IV-3
schematically outlines a typical vaccine production process.
The primary unit operations include mincing, trypsinizing,
centrifugation, incubation, freezing and drying. Liquid
wastes associated with the process consist primarily of
spent media broth, waste eggs, glassware and vessel washings
and bad batches of production seed and/or final product.
Production of material extractions involves the processing
of bulk botanical drugs and herbs. Typical unit operations
used to manufacture products in this group include milling,
grading, grinding, and solvent extraction. These
manufacturing operations are usually carried out on a small
scale and the quantity of wastewater generated is small.
Most extraction processes practice solvent recovery and
recycle and therefore the degree of contamination remaining
in the washwater depends on the extent and efficiency of the
recovery operations. The used plant tissues are generally
incinerated with any waste solvents or are landfilled and
therefore these wastes seldom enter the wastewater stream.
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis Products
The pharmaceutical manufacturing industry employs a greater
variety of complicated steps in its manufacturing processes
than almost any other chemical process industry. The
complex chemical structure of many medicaments probably has
a relationship to the even greater complexity of the
ailments of the human and animal bodies which the products
of the pharmaceutical industry are designed to ameliorate.
For example, synthetic steroids have been synthesized, which
though resembling the hormones in the body have no natural
counterpart, but exert an effect comparable to those natural
hormones. Such a material is prednisone which has the
cyclopentanophenanthrene nucleus common to hormones. See
Figure IV-4.
Each chemical synthesis process is itself a series of unit
operations which causes chemical and/or physical changes in
the feedstock or products. Flow sheets illustrating typical
chemical synthesis of processes are shown in Figures IV-5
and IV-6. In the commercial synthesis of a single product
74
-------
FIGURE IV-5
12/6/76
REUSED
H20
TYPICAL CHEMICAL SYNTHESIS PROCESS
H,0
RAW
RFf-vriFn
RECYCLED
H,0
RAW
tn
II MATERIALS cm WCMTC 1
1 SOLVENTS MATERIALS i
1 HoO 1
2 *" BATCH
PROCESSES
VLS
I 1
•j KtUSED H 0 i '
EVAPORATOR COLDLEc'ToR • "2° \ DUST
I i if I '( COLLECTOR
BATCH — * * 1 i-* * 1 i '
__ PROCESSES RFrnVFRY BATCH RECOVERY
INTERMEDIATE D|ST|| , AT|nw *~ PROCESSES »- PREC|p|TAT|ON **
SVNIHtaii OXIDATION DRYING
WATER MOTHER BRINE WATER WATER WATER
TO WTP LIQUOR TO SALT TOWTP * TOWTP TOWTP 1
TO SALT PLANT RJ|DUE BR|NE
PLANT TO DUMP -TO SALT
PLANT
MA
RECYCLED WASTE
RAW SOLVENTS 1 HEAT
TERIALS MftTRcADW.LS T
\ \ H 0 1 DUST
RArrw Jf 1
PRODUCT" » cni "ENT PRODUCT PRODUCT
SYNTHESIS STRIPPING HciAjVbhV ^
RAW
SPENT
SOLVENTS
Rcrvn en
cni WCWTC
SOLVENTS
\LS
DERIVATIVES
DRYER
DUST
COLLECTOR
PRODUCT
WATER
TOWTP
AIR
-------
FIGURE IV 6
TYPICAL CHEMICAL SYNTHESIS PROCESS
{ANTIBIOTIC MANUFACTURE)
12/6/76
Recycled Raw
Solvent Materials
Solvent H2°
Sol vent
Mother Residui
Liquor to to
Waste Dump
Treatment
Solvent Residue to
to Dump
Recycle
Undesired
Isomer to
Dump
Mother Residue
Liquor to to
Waste Dump
Treatment
Recycle
Residue
to
Dump
Recycle
Residue to Dump
Mother Residue
Liquor to to
Waste Dump
Treatment
76
-------
from a single feedstock, there generally are unit operations
associated with the preparation of the feedstock, the
chemical reaction, the separation of reaction products and
the final purification of the desired product. Each unit
operation may have drastically different water usages
associated with it. The type and quantity of contact
wastewater are therefore directly related to the nature of
the various processes. This in turn implies that the types
and quantities of wastewater generated by each plant's total
production mix are variable.
In the manufacturing of fine chemicals, batch processes are
frequently used for reasons of quality control, economic
considerations, low product demands, FDA requirements, or
specific manufacturing requirements. Batch operations are
more easily controlled when varying reaction rates and rapid
temperature changes are key considerations. This requires
more supervision on the part of operators and engineers,
since conditions and procedures usually change from the
start to the finish. Batch operations with small production
and variable products may also use the same equipment to
make several different chemicals by the same type of
chemical conversion. Hundreds of specific products may be
manufactured within the same building. This type of
processing requires the cleanout of reactors and other
equipment after each batch. Purity specifications may also
require extensive purging of the associated piping. Rapid
changes in temperature during the batch sequence may also
require the direct addition of ice or quench water instead
of slower non-contact cooling through a jacket or coils.
Contact process waters from batch and continuous processes
include not only water produced cr required by the chemical
reactions but also any water which comes in contact with
chemicals within each of the process modules. Although the
flows associated with these sources are generally smaller
than those from non-contact sources, the organic pollution
load carried by these streams may be greater by many orders
of magnitude.
There are several possible major pollution sources in
chemical synthesis production. If the reaction is carried
out in a batch kettle or autoclave, then the washout
solutions will be high in contaminant loadings. If
distillation is done under vacuum, the process vacuum jet
water will be saturated with the lighter components of the
reaction mix. If filtration is involved, two possibilities
exist. If the filter cake is unwanted, then there is a
solid waste disposal problem. If the filtrate is the
unwanted material, this portion is either collected for
77
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE IV -7
TYPICAL PHARMACEUTICAL FORMULATION PROCESSES
TABLET PRODUCTS
WATER
1
WEIGH
INGREDIENTS
i
WASH
WATER
LIQUID PRODUCTS
WATER » MIXir
WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER
III! 1 i
1
WASH
RANU- DRYING » m rwniNr ». TABLET FILM
ATION ** DnYING "" CLCNDING *• COMPRESSION *" COATING
III 1
WASH IA/ACU WASH WASH
WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER PACKAGING
WASH
WATER
< WATER
WATER WATER WATER T
il 1 WASH
1 4 WATER
/I II 1
COOLING WASH WASH WASH WASH
WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER
AMPULE PRODUCTS
GLASS GLAS!
UNPACK WASH
•* OSMUTI^*. ^ FILTER *- TO
SOLUTION STEAM
* i
STERILIZE
DEPYROGENATE
1
WASH WATER WAS
1 1 1
INS
CONDENSATE
i RETURN
DCLAVE
1
PECT
-------
separate treatment or discharged to the process sewer/ where
it is combined with the main effluent for subsequent
treatment. Since chemical reactions frequently involve
acids or bases, an effluent needing pH adjustment may
result, especially if one reactant is used in excess of
stoichiometric proportions. Reactor effluent will sometimes
contain emulsions from which the oil may be separable by pH
adjustment.
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding and Formulation
Pharmaceutical formulation represents all the various
operations that are involved in producing a packaged product
suitable for administering as a finished, usable product
form. It would include such things as mixing of
ingredients, drying of granules, tableting, capsulating,
coating of pills and tablets, preparation of sterile
products and finally the packaging of the finished product.
Figure IV-7 illustrates three typical pharmaceutical
formulation processes.
In general, the specific unit operations of the formulation
process cannot be considered serious water polluters, for
the simple reason that they do not use water in any way that
would cause pollution. It should also be pointed out that
most pharmaceutical formulation plants work on an eight-hour
day, five-day per week work schedule and the usage of water
is limited primarily to that period. As a result of both
the shorter work schedule and the lower water requirements
per unit operation that characterize the plants in this
subcategory, the amount of wastewater generated per pound of
product is considerably lower for the plants in subcategory
D than for the plants in the other categories. This can be
seen from the survey results presented in Table V-1. In
spite of this, however, there are a number of places where
water pollution can be expected. Washup operations are
always a potential pollution source. The application of too
much water over too great an area can flush materials (into
a sewer) that are unusual in terms of both quantity and
concentration. Dust and fume scrubbers used in connection
with building ventilation systems or, more directly, on dust
and fume generating equipment, can be a source of water pol-
lution, depending on the nature of the material being
removed from the airstream. Most pharmaceutical
manufacturing firms are compounders, special processors,
formulators and product specialists. Their primary ob-
jective is to convert a desired prescription into tablets,
pills, lozenges, powders, capsules, extracts, emulsions,
solutions, syrups, parenterals, suspensions, tinctures,
ointments, aerosols, suppositories, and other miscellaneous
79
-------
consumable forms. These operations can be classified as
labor intensive and low in waste production.
Manufacturing descriptions for the different forms of
pharmaceutical dosages are discussed in the subsequent
paragraphs.
Tablets are formed by compaction of powders, crystals, or
granulations. The various modifications which are possible
can be seen in the following list:
Form of Tablet Drug Release Characteristics
Plain compressed Rapid or sustained
Coated Rapid, delayed, sustained,
and repeat action
Molded Rapid
The process of plain compression tatleting can be divided
into the following three basic approaches: wet granulation,
direct compression, and slugging.
For drugs which are not prone to degradation in the presence
of moisture, the wet-granulation step has heretofore been
the most widely used. The process consists of carefully
blending the powdered ingredients (except for the lubricants
and disintegrants) and then wetting the powder with a
solution or dispersion of the binders. The damp mass is
screened to form coarse granules and dried. The classic
method of drying has been to spread the mass on trays and
dry the granules in a hot-air oven. Recent advances in
technology have produced a fluidized-bed drying technique in
which the damp mass is placed into a cylindrical container
with a screened bottom. Heated air is forced through the
mass, causing the mass to be suspended in air and dried
rapidly. This new method has reduced drying time to about
one-fifth of that required by conventional methods. The
fluidized-bed driers have also been modified so that the
granulating fluid can be introduced into the air stream and
can therefore granulate the powders and dry them in one
operation. The dry granules are rescreened to about 20- to
40-mesh granules and then mixed with the lubricants and
disintegrants. The granulation at this point is ready to be
compressed into tablets.
The second technique for the preparation of tablets is
direct compression. Much work has been carried out on this
process in recent years because cf the obvious advantage of
80
-------
reduced labor time. The process consists simply of blending
the ingredients and compressing it into tablets.
The "slugging" technique is used only as a last resort in
the case of drugs which cannot be wet-granulated because of
instability and cannot be compressed directly. Slugging, as
the title suggests, is the compaction of a powder blend into
large tablets. They may be 1 or 2 inches in diameter and
may weigh up to 30 grams. The large tablets are collected
and ground up and converted intc granules and then re-
compressed into final tablet form.
The method for compressing granules into tablets, regardless
of the method of manufacture, is basically identical. The
granulation is fed into a die cavity. The fill is
volumetric and consequently the weight must be controlled by
changing the height of the lower punch, which regulates the
volume available for filling. Since volume is directly
measured, the necessity of having a free-flowing and uniform
granulation becomes apparent. Once the cavity is filled,
the upper punch compresses the powder mass into a tablet.
After the tablet is ejected by the lower punch, the cycle is
repeated.
Compressing equipment varies from small single-punch
machines which have one upper and lower punch and a die, to
large rotary tablet presses having up to fifty-five sets of
punches and dies. The rate of production can vary from 100
tablets per minute on the single-punch machines to 4,500
tablets per minute on the larger presses.
In addition to conventional tablets, methodology has been
developed to compress so-called layer tablets. in this
method, two different granulations are fed into the machine.
First, a portion of one granulation is compressed into a
rather soft tablet and then a measured quantity of the
second granulation is layered upon the partially-compressed
tablet. The mass is then fully compressed, resulting in a
layer tablet. This approach may be used for two reasons:
1) separation of incompatible ingredients and 2) preparation
of sustained-action tablets where one layer provides the
immediate-release dose and the second the slow, sustaining
drug dose.
Tablets prepared as above can be coated to improve taste,
stability, and appearance or to ccntrol the rate and site of
drug release. The coating of tablets can be accomplished by
three basic methods: pan coating, air-suspension coating
and compression coating.
81
-------
Pan coating is the classical technique in which cores, free
™°* SL*?d br?ken tablets' are tumbled in pear-shapJd
pans. While the tablets are in motion, they are wet dSm
with a concentrated syrup containing a film-forming agent
such as gelatin, acacia, or methyIcellulose. When all
surfaces have been wet, a dusting or engrossing powder such
as flour or powdered sugar is added and tumbled under a flow
of warm air. This is usually repeated two or three times to
coat the tablet rapidly and to round off the edges. After
these coats, the tablets are usually dried overnight to
prevent moisture from penetrating the core. This portion of
the process is generally called subcoating. The process is
continued by repeated applications of the heavy syrup
without dusting powder to smooth out the tablet surface
Color coats are applied if desired and then the tablet is
polished with carnauba wax in a canvas- or wax-lined pan.
Pan coating is the standard method of tablet coating and as
a rule the finished coated tablet weight is double that of
the uncoated core.
As in the case of the compression of tablets, recent
advances in the technology have greatly modified coating
procedures. The process of film coating has achieved great
popularity. in this method, tablets are given a thin coat
of a polymeric material, either by repeated application by
hand or automated by means of a programmed system. Air-
suspension coating, known as the Wurster process, is suited
?r ^ coating. The cores are placed in a cylindrical
chamber and "fluidized" (suspended in a stream of air). The
coating solution is atomized into the air stream. Because
of rapid evaporation of the solvent, the coating material is
continuously deposited upon the tablet. The time required
for coating in this method is about one-tenth that for
conventional methods.
The coatings discussed so far have all had one common
ractor, i.e., the coating materials were either suspended or
dissolved in a solvent. Another method of coating is
compression (or dry) coating. in this process, a core
tablet is prepared and then an outer coating is compressed
around the inner tablet. This results in what might be
called a tablet within a tablet.
Molded tablets are prepared by molding a damp mass into the
general shape of tablets.
Most individuals refer to tablets of any type as "pills"
Actually, pills are a definite and distinct class of dosage
form and were the forerunner of today's tablet. Pills
combine a drug and an "excipient" which, when damp, gives
82
-------
•the mass a doughlike consistency. The mass is divided into
dose units and then rolled into balls and allowed to dry.
Although pills can be produced mechanically, the inherent
problems of accuracy as compared to tablet production have
caused a dramatic decrease in their use. The basic process
is to mix the drug with the excipient and then dampen this
with some agent such as acacia syrup, glycerol, sugar syrup,
or synthetic gums. The plastic mass is rolled into long
pipes of uniform diameter and then cut into pieces
equivalent to one dose of the drug. The divided portions
pass between two belts and are rolled into spherical pills,
dusted with a powder to prevent sticking together and
finally dried. The finished pills may be coated in the same
manner as tablets.
Next to tablets, capsules rank second as the most widely
used solid oral dosage form. They have an advantage over
tablets in that they do not require the addition of binders
and disintegrants. Capsules fall into two basic categories,
hard and soft. Hard gelatin capsules are prepared in two
sections, one of which slips over the other. They are
prepared empty and filled with powder when needed. The soft
gelatin capsule is made with gelatin and glycerol and
retains its plasticity even when dry. The soft capsules are
not prepared in advance but as part of the manufacturing
process.
The manufacture of hard gelatin capsules is a rather precise
technique, since the seal of the capsule depends upon the
tight fit of the top over the body of the capsule. The
process consists of dipping steel pins into a solution of
gelatin maintained at a precise temperature. When the pins
are removed from the bath, a film of gelatin adheres to the
pins. The temperature is critical, since the viscosity of
the gelatin is affected by temperature and this determines
the thickness of the film adhering to the pins and
consequently the wall thickness of the finished capsule.
When the capsule has been dried, trimmed to proper length
and removed from the pin, the upper and lower portions are
joined. The sizes of the capsules vary greatly from those
holding approximately 30 mg to those holding several grams
for veterinary use. The colors of the capsules can be
controlled by added dyes or pigments.
Capsules are filled by various pieces of equipment.
Machines separate the upper and lower portions of the
capsules, filling the powder into the lower half and then
rejoining the capsule components. Since the fill is
83
-------
volumetric, the ratio of drug to diluent must be adjusted to
obtain the correct dose of drug for a specific capsule size.
After the capsules are filled they are usually cleaned with
air and tumbled with sodium chloride to remove any dust
which may cling to the capsule. They may subsequently be
imprinted with a name or trademark for identification.
Although the majority of soft gelatin capsules contain non-
aqueous solutions or soft masses containing the drug,
powders can be filled into this type of dosage form. in
soft gelatin capsule manufacture, two continuous films of
gelatin are passed between two rotary die plates which
contain cavities, each corresponding to one-half of the
capsule. As they come together, the mass or liquid is
injected into the partially-sealed capsule. Upon further
rotation, the edges are pressure-sealed and the capsule is
cut out of the ribbon. If the capsules are to be filled
with powders, one ribbon is passed under a hopper containing
the powder, which is fed into a cavity created when the
gelatin is molded into the die ty vacuum. After filling,
the second ribbon seals the capsules in a manner analogous
to that for the liquid capsules.
Although aerosols have been used for over twenty years for
dispensing insecticides and insect repellents, the
usefulness of this medium for the dispensing of drugs has
been recognized widely only since the 1950*s.
Aerosols are usually manufactured by the cold-filling
method. The propellants are usually fluorinated
hydrocarbons of varying compositions having different vapor-
pressure and boiling-point characteristics. Generally, the
solution or suspension of the propellants and the drug is
chilled to reduce the vapor pressure and the solution is
filled volumetrically into suitable containers. The valves
are then firmly attached and sealed to the container. Care
must be exercised in this operation to exclude moisture,
since the propellants are hydrolyzed by moisture to yield
corrosive products. Generally, the operations are carried
out in dehumidified areas. The finished containers are
usually placed in water and defective units are detected by
the appearance of bubbles.
An alternative method of manufacture is to seal the valve to
the empty container and then force the solution through the
valve under pressure. This method is useful for the
preparation of small quantities.
Liquids may be simple solutions, syrups, elixirs, or
suspensions. These preparations are usually manufactured in
84
-------
jacketed glass-lined or stainless-steel vessels similar to
chemical reactors. The solutions are filtered under
pressure through plate filters and then pumped into suitable
storage tanks prior to filling. At this stage the bulk
product is usually sampled for analysis and control of
physical specifications.
The manufacturing processes for suspensions and emulsions
are similar to that for solutions, except that after
dispersion by simple mixing the system is passed through a
homogenizer or colloid mill. These units may force the
dispersion through a small orifice under high pressure or
pass the dispersion between two plates, one stationary and
the other rotating at high speed. The aperture between the
plates is adjustable to vary the shearing action of the
mill. Advances in ultrasonics have made it possible to
utilize this form of energy in production for dispersion of
substances. This method has proved useful for both
suspensions and emulsions.
The manufacturing of ointments involves melting a base
material and then blending in the drug. The mass is allowed
to cool and is then passed through roller mills, high-speed
colloid mills, or mills of the rotor and stator type. In
the last case, adequate cooling of the mill is important,
since too much heat buildup will cause the ointment to melt,
resulting in a non-homogeneous product.
Creams are manufactured in a similar manner, except that the
products consist of two phases and therefore each phase must
be heated separately and the drug incorporated into one of
them. The two phases are mixed with rapid stirring and are
stirred continuously until cool.
The manufacturing process for suppositories consist of
melting a loose material, dispersing the drug and pouring
the mixture into pre-chilled molds. This can be carried out
by manual or automatic methods. Suppositories can also be
made by compression of a powdered base in which the drug has
been dispersed. The latter method is not used in full pro-
duction unless specifically required by the nature of the
drug.
Subcategory E - Microbiological, Biological and
Chemcial Research
A new drug normally takes five to six years to reach the
market, resulting in an average cost of five million
dollars. On the average, 5,000 chemical compounds are
investigated before one is found that is therapeutically
85
-------
useful. Research in the pharmaceutical industry is a team
effort. The industry employs pure and applied scientists of
almost all disciplines from mathematicians and physicists to
pharmacologists, pharmacists, chemists and medical
practitioners. Because of the high cost of a new drug and
the general importance to the public health, companies are
mainly interested in cures for the more common ailments.
Nevertheless, many remedies for rare diseases and diagnostic
agents have come from the laboratories of the pharmaceutical
industry. The three areas of research are chemical,
microbiological and biological, The wastes generated from
these various research areas range from exotic chemicals to
animal wastes.
Scientists of various disciplines, including pharmacology,
biochemistry, organic and physical chemistry, zoology and
bacteriology, may be involved in the preclinical testing and
evaluation of a new drug. Meaningful biological tests using
laboratory animals such as rats, dogs and monkeys are
designed to test the pharmacological actions of the chemical
entities. Potential antibacterials, antivirals and related
drugs must be tested against a broad spectrum of
microorganisms. If these preliminary tests are promising,
short- and long-range toxicity studies must be performed and
dose levels suitable from both the pharmacological response
and toxicity points of view must te determined.
Laboratory animals are used extensively by pharmaceutical
research facilities. The types of animals used include
dogs, cats, monkeys, rabbits, guinea pigs, rats and mice.
The animal colonies where these test animals are housed can
be a major wastewater source. The aniiral cages are usually
dry cleaned and the residue washed into the plant sewer
system. The collected feces and any animal carcasses are
incinerated or landfilled if the waste matter is not
infected. The exhaust gases from the incinerators pass
through wet scrubbers and the scrubber blowdown is
subsequently discharged to the plant sewer system.
General Utilities and Services
At first glance, a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant often
appears to be a chaotic maze of equipment, piping and
buildings that is totally unlike any ether facility, even
those which manufacture the same product. Nevertheless,
there are certain basic components common to almost all
chemical plants: a process area; storage and handling
facilities for raw materials, intermediates and finished
products; electrical, steam, air and water systems with
associated sewers and effluent treatment facilities; and, in
86
-------
most cases, a laboratory, an office, control rooms and
service roads.
The storage facilities associated with any pharmaceutical
manufacturing plant obviously depend upon the physical state
(i.e. solid, liquid, or gas) of the feedstocks and products.
Storage equipment frequently utilized includes: cone-roof
tanks, with or without "floating" roofs, for storage of
liquid hydrocarbons; cylindrical or spherical gas-holding
tanks; underground and above ground storage tanks; and
concrete pads or silos for storage of solids.
Wastewater emanating from storage facilities normally
results from storm run-off, tank washing, accidental spills
and aqueous bottoms periodically drawn from storage tanks.
Although the generation rate is sporadic and the volume
small, these wastewaters have in most cases contacted the
chemicals which are present in this area. For this reason,
they are normally sent to a process sewer and given the same
effluent treatment as contact-process wastewaters.
Utility functions, such as steam supply, deionized water,
ice water supply, hot water supply and cooling water, are
generally set up to service several processes. Boiler feed
water is prepared and steam is generated in a single boiler
house. Non-contact steam used for surface heating is
circulated through a closed loop, making varying quantities
available for the specific requirements of the different
processes. The condensate is almost always recycled to the
boiler house, where a certain portion is discharged as
blowdown.
The three major uses of steam generated within a
pharmaceutical manufacturing -plant are:
1. For non-contact process heating. In this
application, the steam is normally generated at
pressures of 125 to 650 psig, or low-pressure steam
at pressures of 5 to 50 psig, for heat-sensitive
products.
2. For power generation, such as in steam-driven
turbines, compressors, and pumps associated with
the process. In this application, the steam is
normally generated at pressures of 650 to 1500 psig
and requires superheating.
3. For use as a diluent, a stripping medium, or a
source of vacuum through the use of steam-jet
ejectors. This steam actually contacts the
87
-------
Figure IV - 8
EVAPORATIVE COOLING WATER SYSTEM
12/6/76
03
CO
Blowdown
Hot Water
3T_L I. A
J L
Cooling Tower
Treated
Make-up
Water
Cold Water
Heat Load
Heat Load
Heat Load
Heat Load
Alternative
Blowdown
-------
hydrocarbons in the manufacturing processes and is
a source of contact process wastewater when
condensed. It is used at a substantially lower
pressure than the foregoing and frequently is
exhaust steam from one of the other uses.
*
Water conditioning or pretreatment systems are normally part
of the utilities department of most plants. From the
previous discussions, it should be obvious that the required
treatment may be quite extensive. Ion-exchange
demineralization systems are very widely employed, not only
for conditioning water for high-pressure boilers, but also
for conditioning various process waters. Clarification
preceding an ion exchange operation may be employed. In some
cases, a demineralization system is dedicated to a single
processing step with a high demand for continued water and,
therefore, is operated as part of that production unit.
Non-contact cooling water also is normally supplied to
several processes from the utilities area. The system is
either a loop which utilizes one or more evaporative cooling
towers, or a once-through system with direct discharge.
A closed system is normally used when converting from once-
through river cooling of plant processes. In the closed
system, a cooling tower is used for cooling all of the hot
water from the processes. Figure IV-8 illustrates this
method. With the closed system, makeup water from the river
is required to replace evaporation less (at the tower),
drift and blowdown. Drift is droplet carry-over in the air
(as opposed to evaporative loss). The cooling tower
industry has a standarized guarantee that drift loss will
not exceed 0.2 percent of the water circulated. Blowdown to
a sewer or river is necessary to avoid a build up of
dissolved solids. Although blowdcwn is usually taken off
the hot water line, it may be removed from the cold water
side to comply with regulations that limit the temperature
of cooling water discharged. Blowdown from a tower system
will vary, depending on the dissolved solids concentration
in the make-up water and the cycles of concentration
maintained in the system. Generally, blowdown will be about
0.3 percent per 10°F of cooling, in order to maintain a
dissolved solids concentration in the recirculated water of
three to four times that of the make-up water.
The quantity and quality of the blowdown from boilers and
cooling towers depend on the design of the particular plant
utility system. The heat content of these streams is purely
a function of the heat recovery equipment associated with
the utility system. The amounts of waste brine and sludge
89
-------
produced by ion exchange and water treatment systems depend
on both the plant water use function and the intake water
source. None of these utility waste streams can be related
directly to specific process units.
Quantitative limitations on parameters such as dissolved
solids', hardness, alkalinity and temperature, therefore,
cannot be allocated on a production basis. The limitations
on parameters like these, which are associated with non-
contact utility effluents, are being established in the
effluent guidelines for the steam supply and non-contact
cooling water industry.
The service area of the plant contains the buildings, shops
and laboratories in which most of the plant personnel work.
The sanitary wastes from this area obviously depend on the
number of persons employed. It should be noted that most
bulk chemical synthesis plants run continuously and have 3
operating shifts per day. There are also wastes associated
with the operation of the laboratory, machine shops,
laundry, etc. Depending on the size of the plant, there may
be tank car and/or tank truck cleaning facilities which
could add to the process wastewater load. The wastes from
the service area normally are combined with the wastes from
the process area prior to treatment.
Basis for Assignment to Suhcateqo.ries
The subcategorization of the pharmaceutical manufacturing
point source category assigns pharmaceutical production
facilities to specific subcategcries according to the
manufacturing processes which they utilize. The
subcategories selected were:
Subcategory Description SIC
A Fermentation Products 2833
B Biological and Natural
Extraction Products 2833
C Chemical Synthesis Products 2833
D Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation 283U
E Research
This subcategorization of the pharmaceutical manufacturing
point source category was based on the nature of
90
-------
manufacturing processes, raw materials, and products and the
wastewater quantities and qualities generated by each of
these production subcategories. Table V-1 indicates the
plant production levels, wastewater flow rates and RWL's
which typify each of the subcategories. The characteristics
of the wastewaters generated by point sources falling into
each of the subcategories is also discussed in Section V.
Subcategory C (chemical synthesis) was further divided
according to manufacturing processes. Although wide
variance in raw waste loads originally suggested a
classification of antibiotics by synthesis (C2) the single
example of thermal oxidation treatment of C2 wastes did not
justify separate consideration of C1 and C2 wastes.
For subcategory E, which encompasses research facilities, a
different measure was used for establishing effluent
limitations, i.e., total enclosed building floor area. The
raw waste loads computed on a total enclosed building floor
area basis were comparable. The number of test animals
supported by a research facility was also investigated as a
basis for calculating RWL levels for category E; however,
this parameter did not prove tc be as consistent as total
enclosed building floor area.
A possible future classification of Sutcategory E into El
(Research - Microbiological, Biological, Chemical) and E2
(Research Farm) is being studied, with the possibility of
expressing limitations in terms of large-animal weight or
population equivalents.
Pharmaceutical Plant Summaries From Field Survey
Plant identification numbers were assigned from number 1
through number 26. Plants numbered 1 through 20 in the
initial survey by Roy F. Weston, Inc., (RFW) retained those
original identification numbers in the follow-on work by
Jacobs Engineering whether or not a plant was revisited.
Plants assigned numbers 21 through 26 were checked only by
Jacobs Engineering for the purpose of this overall study.
Note that plant numbers 6, 7 and 13 were abandoned because
scheduled plant visits did not occur as originally planned.
Plant descriptions and data summaries are as follows:
Plant 1
The operations of this plant are in the A and C
subcategories.
91
-------
FIGURE IV- 9
Typical Thermal Oxidizer
Configuration
12/6/76
STACK GASES
RAW WASTE
vo
10
SUPPLEMENTAL
FUEL
UTILITY WATER
SULPHURIC
ACID
TANK
SCRUBBER
EFFLUENT
-------
A unique method of wastewater disposal is used at this
plant; it is evaporated and incinerated. This is
accomplished in part in two John Zink Thermal Oxidizers.
This type of unit is an incinerator in the form of a large
horizontal cylinder. A "primary feed", in this case
essentially the nonaqueous liquid waste stream from the
manufacturing processes, is sprayed axially into one end. A
short distance downstream four jets around the circumference
introduce secondary feed, consisting of watery wastes. This
operation not only destroys the organic matter in those
wastes, but also serves to moderate the temperature, which
otherwise would be higher than the equipment could tolerate.
However, supplementary fuel is necessary if the entire
volume of liquid wastes is to be incinerated. See Figure
IV-9 for typical schematic for a thermal oxidizer and
ancillary equipment.
The plant also has a triple-effect evaporator and a Carver-
Greenfield waste heat boiler, burning certain oily wastes as
well as watery wastes. A rotary kiln incinerator destroys
solid wastes.
Small amounts of pollutants are present in condensates and
in water used for scrubbing the stack gases and in some of
the cooling waters. The overall efficiency of BOD reduction
is rated at about 99%.
The treatment process is seen in a favorable light from the
standpoint of pollution control, but in view of the fuel
requirement and other operating costs, it is not yet assured
that it is a practical operation for the industry generally.
The company has other plants manufacturing the same
products, but in no other place is the same method used for
wastewater treatment.
Samples of various streams were taken by RFK on October 15
and 16, 1974 and were analyzed both by RFW and the company.
A series of samples were taken for analysis by the PJB
Laboratory of Jacobs Engineering Company on April 20, 1976.
It is difficult in this plant to secure results for con-
centrations in raw waste streams that will permit comparison
with other plants, since the processes of handling the
wastes are so different. RFW secured figures of 12,500 mg/1
for BOD and 31,100 mg/1 for BOD in the wastewater stream
from the fermentation operations. The high concentration in
comparison with most plants is due, no doubt, to frugal use
of water to minimize the fuel requirement for evaporation.
No figures were derived for the wastes from chemical
93
-------
synthesis and no usable information of this type was
obtained from the PJB tests.
Plant 2
This is a large plant with fermentation and chemical
synthesis operations. The wastewater treatment plant has
grown by successive expansions, and in consequence it now
includes a complex array of basins, pipes, aerators,
chemical feed equipment, etc. This is not a disadvantage,
since it allows considerable flexibility of operation.
A John Zink Thermal Oxidizer is used fcr the disposal of the
non-aqueous waste stream. The strongest of the aqueous
streams serves as secondary feed to the oxidizer; in this
way as much as 15% of the COD in the wastewater is
incinerated.
There are essentially three wastewater treatment plants.
For the purposes of this discussion they are designated as
the "100", "200" and "300" plants.
100 Plant - an activated sludge plant to treat a wastewater
stream from fermentations and associated extraction
operations. When sampling was undertaken on May 15, 1974,
the 24-hour flow was 314 cu m The plant includes a primary
clarifier, two aeration tanks in parallel and two secondary
clarifiers. The effluent of these facilities then goes to
the 200 plant.
200 Plant - the principal waste stream entering this plant,
amounting to 1280 cu m/day, is described as "sanitary
wastes." The stream includes human wastes, but the load
comes principally from the rinsing of equipment and from
other wastewater sources in the production areas, with the
addition of the discharge from the 100 plant, the influent
flow is 1594 cu m/day exclusive of the return of centrate
from sludge processing. Data from the company indicates
that this returned flow is normally about 67 gpm, or 360 cu
m/day. The treatment plant is basically of the activated
sludge type.
300 Plant - this treatment plant received a flow (on April
16, 1976) of 500 cu m of wastewater from the chemical
synthesis operations. This included 210 cu m of wastes
trucked in from another pharmaceutical plant on that day.
The 18-month average flow through the 300 plant in 1973 and
1974 was reported to be 960 cu m/day. The treatment plant
includes a relatively small equalization tank, chemical feed
94
-------
equipment for pH adjustment, clarifier, three aeration tanks
with volumes which total 1340 cu m, clarifier and two
aerated basins (referred to as lagcons and covered with
inflated membranes to diminish heat losses). These lagoons
provide an additional aeration time of about three days.
The stream from this plant joins the combined flow from the
rest of the system and the total flew passes through a final
clarifier and then discharges from outfall 001. Surface
runoff and certain cooling waters discharge by way of other
outfalls.
There is a pesticide manufacturing operation with a small
wastewater flow that is treated by carbon sorption and then
added to the other flows. The residual impurities make a
negligible contribution to the raw waste load of the total
plant.
Records of the company for the period from January 1973 to
June 1974 show the following averaged results:
18-month averages, January 1973 - June 1974
Effluents of the Treatment Plants
Spent broth "Sanitary" Chemical Total
System Wastes Wastes
Stream 100 Stream 200 Stream 300
Flow, cu m/day 810 1430 948 3,188
COD, kg/day 11,900 4600 19,600 36,100
mg/1 14,700 3200 20,600
BOD, kg/day 7,140 2360 9,450 18,950
mg/1 8,820 1650 9,950
Struzeski calculated removal efficiencies for the overall
system in March and May, 1974 with average results of 76%
for BOD and 66% for COD.
Because of return flows from the centrifuge and other
complications due to the flow patterns, raw waste loads are
not easily calculable. The Roy F. Weston Co. made a six-
week study of the plant (May and June 1974) and estimated,
by comparison with company data, that the corrected raw
waste loads were as follows:
95
-------
Stream EOC, kg/day
Fermentation 7,900
Miscellaneous 1,800
("Sanitary")
Chemical Syn- 10,700
thesis
Total: 20,UOO
Samples were taken by PJE personnel on April 1U, 197A and
analyzed, with results as shown en the laboratory report
sheets. Flows were probably atypical on that day, as judged
by the information submitted. The results do not yield any
refinement of the deductions based upon the earlier studies.
The company reports that equipment and operation
modifications have led to progressive improvement of
efficiency. Data submitted for the year 1975 showed 9,770
kg/day of raw BOD load from the antibiotic system (treatment
plants 100 and 200) with a BOD removal efficiency of 92.8%.
The chemical system had a raw BOD load of 5,380 kg/day and
an efficiency of 91.0%. These figures are based upon daily
tests (nominally 365 results).
The company submitted monthly averages of suspended solids
in the effluent streams from the antibiotic area (the 100 +
200 system) and from the chemical synthesis area, with 1975
annual averages as follows.
Antibiotic Chemical
Area Synthesis Area
Flow, cu in/day 810 2,400
Effluent TSS, mg/1 666 362
Effluent TSS, kg/day 1,600 2,930
Plant 3
The activities in this plant are in subcategories B and D.
The manufacturing activity consists of production of
bacterial and virus vaccines, processing of botanical
products as well as gland derivatives and manufacturing and
processing of a broad line of pharmaceutical preparations.
Subcategory B activities, manufacturing Pharmaceuticals and
biologicals, primarily take place in one building, while
mainly subcategory D activities, packaging and filling, take
place in another separate building. In addition, the
96
-------
complex includes research, a pilot plant, warehouse and
offices.
All sanitary, boiler and process wastewaters are collected
by a combined sewer system that connects to the municipal
sewer system. Cooling water is taken from and returned to a
river. The major source of liquid process waste is from
floor washings and the washings cf equipment and vessels
between batch operations.
Because of the inaccessibility of the sewer line from one
building, waste samples could cnly be taken from the
building in which mainly subcategory B activities take
place. Two eight-hour composite samples were taken on
September 24, 1974. The sampling coincided with two eight-
hour shifts. The observations were as follows:
Flow, cu m/day 1,530
BOD, mg/1 178
COD, mg/1 416
SS, mg/1 u
TOC, mg/1 122
RFW estimated net industrial raw waste loads by making
deductions for human waste loads, with results as follows:
Total Net
Flow Industrial
Flow, cu m/day 1,530 1,492
EOD, kg/day 273 265
COD, kg/day 636 617
SS, kg/day 74.8 67.1
TOC, kg/day 202 194
Plant 4
Subcategories A and C define the type of operations in this
plant.
The treatment plant provides equalization and neutralization
basins with a retention time of 9 hours. The flow then goes
to a plastic-media bio-filter, 15 m in diameter by 6.6 m
high (1,180 cu m), followed by activated sludge treatment.
The aeration period is 17 hours. Waste sludge is filtered
and incinerated, along with mycelia from the fermentation
plant. Wastewater flow averaged 3,800 cu m/day in 1973-
i y / 4 •
97
-------
Historical data presented by Struzeski (14 mo.) shows an
average raw BOD concentration of 1,870 mg/1 in an average
flow of 3,840 cu m/day. The average raw BOD load is 7,080
kg/day. The data also show an average BOD reduction of
79.7%. This includes contaminated cooling waters that
bypass the biofilter-activated sludge plant; thus, the
efficiency of the plant is doubtless higher than 80%.
Weston1s
mg/1):
1974
22 Sept.
23 Sept.
24 Sept.
21 Nov.
22 Nov.
data give the following information (results in
COD
Inf. Eff.
3260
3230
4510
3050
1840
576
823
470
593
700
BOD
Inf.
1560
1300
2200
600
876
Eff.
60
350
14
282
68
ss
Inf.
Eff.
332
556
1270
936
598
109
308
64
143
87
3180 632
80% removal
Raw waste loads based on
Fermentation flow = 1040
Chemical synthesis flow =
cu m/day
1307 155 728 142
88X removal
Weston*s data are presented below:
Kg/day
EOD COD TSS TDC
cu m/day 4520 7300 635 2190
= 4150
2330 9340 3210 4070
Plant 5
The activities of this plant are in sufccategories D and E.
The products manufactured are primarily ethical and
proprietary Pharmaceuticals formulated or prepared for human
consumption. The manufacturing operations include
formulation and compounding of liquid and dry products,
coating of dry products, preparation of ampules and
packaging of final products. All manufacturing is done by
batch operations. In addition to manufacturing, the plant
has administrative and research facilities.
Approximately 1000 persons are employed at the plant
complex. Manufacturing employees work in two shifts, while
administrative and research employees work single shifts.
98
-------
The major sources of liquid process wastes in all process
operations are floor washings and equipment and vessel
washings between batch operations. Cooling water bleed-off
and boiler blow-down are also discharged into the process
wastewater sewer. Storm water runoff is diverted to a
nearby stream.
Research activities, involving development and testing of
new products, take place in two buildings which house large
colonies of animals. The bulk of the liquid waste from
these facilities consists of cage washings and general
laboratory wastes.
Both sanitary and process waste flows are treated by an
activated sludge treatment process. The treatment plant
includes a 76 cu m primary settling tank, two 170 cu m
equalization tanks, two 200 cu m aeration tanks in series,
each with an air flow of 13 cu m/minute, two final settling
tanks of 36 cu m each and a facility to chlorinate the waste
stream before it is discharged to a river. An 81 cu m
aerobic digester and a 50 cu m sludge thickener are
provided. Subsequent solids disposal is to a landfill.
Waste samples were taken by RFW Co. from September 10, 1974,
to September 13, 1974. Composite samples were taken on each
of the four days from the research areas, the total process
and sanitary waste flow into the treatment plant. The
treatment plant effluent was sampled for one day.
The average total wastewater flow was 220 cu m/day,
including 64 cu m/day average fron; the research facilities.
Average analytical results were as follows:
Influent Effluent
mq/1 kg/day mq/1 % removal
Total Wastewater
FLOW* 220*
BOD 364 80 3.5 99.0
COD 641 141 28 95.6
SS 41 9.0 22 73
TOG 193 42.5 52 73
Wastewater from Research Facilities Kg per 100 sq.m
FLOW* 64*
BOD 314 20 0.22
COD 571 39 0.42
SS 21 1.4 0.015
TOC 110 7 0.076
Wastewater from Production Facilities, not including
99
-------
cooling towered boiler blowdown - ty difference
BOD 384 60
COD 655 102
ss 49 7.6
TOG 228 35.5
*Flow in cu m per day
TSS
jnq/1
24
26
36
16
10
26
10
6
12
8
8
12
6
7
24
»
Average 12.2 61 15.
Plant 8
at «»
100
-------
Wastewaters include tank washings, equipment washings,
boiler blowdownr sanitary wastes, process wastes, cage
washings and contact cooling water. The combined wastes go
to a 2-hectare (5-acre) pond with aerators in the influent
end. The pond provides 15 to 30 days aeration. The
wastewater then goes into basins where ferric chloride and
then a polyelectrolyte are added. Air flotation serves to
remove the precipitate, after which the effluent is
chlorinated and discharged to a river. Waste sludge is
hauled to a landfill.
Samples were taken of the total wastewater in and out of the
treatment plant October 9 through 11, 1974. The average
total wastewater flow for that period was 473 cu m/day.
Average analytical results are presented below.
Influent Effluent Percent
mq/1 Kg/day mq/1 Removal
BOD 19 9.1 5.8 70
COD 77 36 48 38
SS 15 7.3 30
TOG 16 7.6 16
Deductions were made for sanitary, boiler blowdown, and
cooling water, leaving the standard EWL of:
Flow Parameter Kg/day
76 cu m/day BOD 4.75
COD 14.8
TSS 0.52
TOC 1.53
The company provided treatment plant influent and effluent
data for 1973 and 1974. The average flow for that period
was 719 cu m/day. The average analytical results are:
Influent Effluent % Removal
mq/1 Kg/day mq/1
BOD 46.3 33 7.8 83
COD 118 85 50.5 57
SS 31.6 23 22.2 30
By both sets of data, the wastewaters are of low strength,
and the performance of the treatment plant is poor.
101
-------
Plant 9
The principal activity of this plant is in subcategory A,
making a single antibiotic product. There is also a
pharmaceutical section which fills and packages 23 products.
Process wastewaters, boiler blowdcwn, cooling tower blowdown
and storm water are pumped to the wastewater treatment
facilities, consisting of four lagoons and three "cascade
basins." Two of the lagoons with a total volume of 6,000 cu
m are equipped with aerators totaling 150 HP. The total
flow is said to be 1,570 cu ir/day; hence, the aeration
period is about four days. Following aeration, the
wastewater flows to two more basins with a holding time of
2.8 days, then to three "cascade basins" and finally to a
sink hole.
RFW calculated deductions for raw waste loads other than
industrial; they amounted to only a few percent of the
total, 1.3% in the case of BOD.
The table below shows the available analytical data. The
variability and the paucity of the data are such that these
results should not be used as a basis for conclusions.
BOD COD TOG TSS NH3/N P
mq/1 mq/1 mq/1 mq/1 mq/1 mq/1
June »74 company data (one day)
Influent 1151 2119 116 86 2.3
1st lagoon 269 577 142 102 2.2
Sink hole 49 278 132 134 39 3.4
11 October »74 RFW
Influent 1890 3600 281 785 43 5.0
2nd lagoon 540*
or 237* 1300
Effluent 432 144 3 55 5.7
14 October «74 RFW
Influent 3150 6700 2060 914 55 14.2
2nd lagoon 245 330 286
Effluent 26 317 155 4 58 7.8
% Removals** 98 91
* The basic data sheet shows 540.
102
-------
**These percent removals are obtained for each constituent
from the average of all of the influent concentrations
and all of the effluent concentrations. "Sink hole" is
considered, for this purpose, to be the same as
"plant effluent."
Plant 10
The principal product of this plant is vitamin C, but it
also manufactures sulfa drugs, and in part packages products
in gelatin capsules. It operates 24 hours/day, 5 to 7
days/week.
The wastewater treatment plant provides about 8 hours
retention in an equalization pond equipped with two 25-HP
floating aerators, followed by an activated sludge process,
clarifier and a polishing pond.
Information secured in the RFW studies present a somewhat
confusing picture, in that the indicated flow into the
treatment plant is twice as great as the flow out and two
different figures appear for the daily amount of
manufactured product. It is assumed that RFVi personnel had
adequate reasons for the figures that they used; their
computations of raw BOD load/ton cf product are accepted and
presented below. Deductions were made for sanitary and
cooling water. Samples were taken for four days, 9/17/71
through 9/20/74.
Industrial flow, cal-
Total waste culated by deducting
as measured sanitary & cooling water
Flow, cu m/day 6,820 4,920
BOD, kg/day 8,220 8,180
COD, Kg/day 19,000 18,810
TSS, Kg/day 928 960
TOC, Kg/day 6,410 6,350
Treatment plant data for the same four days gave the
following averages:
Influent Effluent % Removal
BOD, mg/1 1,220 47 96
COD, mg/1 2,800 1,350 52
TSS, mg/1 146 122 16
TOC, mg/1 944 606 36
103
-------
The manufacture of vitamin C, as in this plant, is not a
typical subcategory C operation. The raw BOD load per ton
of product is relatively low.
Plant 11
Plant 11 is a producer of fine medicinal chemicals in the C
subcategory. The production facilities occupy two
manufacturing areas, with related administrative facilities.
Operations are conducted three shifts/day, seven days/week.
Average daily total waste flow in late 1974 was roughly 1
mgd, with an average raw waste BOD loading of 7,500 Ib/day
(3,409 kg/day).
Production wastes consist of spent mother liquors, product
washings, contact cooling water and other process wastes,
all collected in an industrial wastewater system. Sanitary
wastes are separately collected and treated in a package
activated sludge treatment plant before joining the
industrial waste stream and the combined flows are treated
in an activated sludge system, discharging effluent to a
river. Non-contact cooling water is discharged to the river
directly.
Design equalization basin capacity is 12 hours, but actual
detention time was 24 hours at 1974 flows. Design detention
time in aeration is 12.3 hours, but 1974 flow was one-half
the design flow and only three of the six aeration tanks
were in use.
Ammonia stripping and cyanide destruction are used on
certain process streams before arrival at the treatment
plant.
Waste sludge is thickened, vacuum-filtered without digestion
and hauled to a landfill.
Company records were available for the period January 1973
to June 1974 showing the following:
Influent Effluent % Removal
N* mq/1 N* mq/1
BOD 136 894 106 79 91
COD 171 2634 315 398 85
TSS 114 126
*N = number of samples.
104
-------
Samples taken 2 October *74 through 5 October '74 were used
to determine raw waste loads:
BOD
COD
TSS
TOC
Kg/day
7,560
12,500
950
6,690
Plant 12
The activities of this plant are in subcategory B. The
manufacturing operations produce human blood products,
influenza virus vaccine and various unit-dose syringe
products.
The only wastewater associated with blocd fractionation
processes is the washing of equipment, tanks and floors.
All waste blood fractions are incinerated and solvents are
recovered by distillation and reused.
The only wastewater associated with the sterile injection
filling processes is distilled water used for rinsing glass
syringe barrels.
All process and sanitary wastewater, boiler blowdown, and 70
to 15% of all contact cooling water is collected by a sewer
system that discharges to the municipal sewer. Surface
runoff, noncontact cooling water and 25 to 30% of all
contact cooling water is discharged directly to the river.
Samples of the total plant effluent were collected for
analysis by RFW during the period October 22 through October
24, 1974. The following table shows the results and also
the net industrial load as calculated ty RFW.
Flow*
BOD
COD
SS
TOC
As
Measured
Kg/day
89*
25.4
46.3
5.9
9.1
Calculated
Industrial BOD Load
_ Kg/day
20.0
33.1
0.45
3.6
*Flow is in cu m/day
105
-------
Plant 14
The activities of this plant are in subcategory E. Included
at the facility are small-scale chemical compounding and
biological fermentation facilities, animal housing
facilities, laboratories, and administrative offices. The
pharmaceutical and biological research is directed toward
the development and testing of new products. The principal
operations are conducted during a single shift, five days
per week.
The bulk of the liquid
consists of cage washings.
waste generated by the facility
All wastewater, cooling water and boiler blowdown are
collected by a sewer system and flow to a package activated
sludge wastewater treatment plant. A 170 cu m equalization
basin is followed by a primary clarifier, an aeration tank,
a secondary clarifier and chlorination before discharge to a
creek. Dried waste sludge is taken to a landfill.
Composite samples of the influent and effluent were taken by
RFW Co. on two days in October, 1974. Average flows and
analytical results were as follows:
Influent Effluent
Flow, cu m/day
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
SS, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
184
100
235
238
114
13
32
10
18
Percent
Removal
87
84
95.8
84
An estimated deduction for human sources can be made from
the above raw waste loads, resulting in the standard
industrial raw waste load below:
BOD
COD
SS
TOC
Flow = 110 cu m/day
kg/day
12.5
27.3
37.7
14.4
kq/1000m2
1.58
3.46
4.77
1.83
The company furnished data on operations of the wastewater
treatment plant over a nine month period, January through
September, 1974. Data included both influent and effluent
106
-------
levels of BOD, COD and SS. There were 96 influent BOD tests
and about 190 tests for the other parameters.
Percent
Influent Effluent Removal
Flow, cu m/day 231
BOD, mg/1 67 1.75 97.4
COD, mg/1 197 18.2 90.8
SS, mg/1 143 5.9
The average flow during the nine months in 1974 was 231 cu m
per day. Deducting for human sources, the average standard
raw waste load for that period 9.73 kg/day of BOD and 31.4
kg/day of COD.
Plant 15
This plant is a bulk chemical production facility. Its
activities are in subcategory c. The facilities consist of
several warehouses, an administration building, a tank farm,
and several process buildings. All products are
manufactured via batch operations. The manufacturing area
operates 24 hours a day, five days a week, while
administrative personnel work eight hours a day, five days a
week.
Sources of wastewater are varied and include tank washes,
barometric condenser water, tank boilouts, cooling water
discharges, caustic and acid washes, fume scrubbers, water
layer separations, floor and equipment washings and sanitary
wastes.
Process and sanitary wastes are collected by separate sewer
systems and treated in an activated sludge plant prior to
discharge to a river. Caustic an£ acid wastes are pumped
separately to holding tanks. The tank contents are
subsequently mixed and neutralized before clarification and
discharge to the treatment plant. Stormwater run-off and
cooling tower blowdown are discharged into the plant storm
sewer system and mixed with treatment plant effluent prior
to river discharge.
The treatment plant has an aeration lagoon, of 110 cu m
volume followed by clarification, neutralization and
chlorination. Dewatered sludge is hauled to a landfill.
107
-------
Industrial
Stream
iy 129
12,200
17,900
9,170
326
1,740
2.1
Sanitary
Stream
30
725
1,510
275
104
13
16
Calcu-
lated
159
10,000
14,770
7,480
274
1,411
4.7
Effluent
Stream
2,000
3,680
218*
47
1,195
.
Percent
Removal
80
75
24
Twenty-four hour composite samples of the raw process waste
and the total effluent from the wastewater treatment plant
were obtained by RFW Co. on Oct. 8 and 9, 1974.
Flow, cu m/day
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
NHn-N, mg/1
Phosphate, P
*Probably erroneous, in view of COD and BOD data.
The total plant flow, including boiler blowdcwn and water
treatment plant wastes, was 257 cu m/day.
The company furnished data on the process waste flow into
the treatment plant and the treatment plant effluent over a
period of 17 months in 1973 and 1974. The average
analytical results are presented fcelow.
Process Treatment Plant Percent
Waste Flow Effluent Removal
COD, mg/1 20,900 14,000 33
SS, mg/1 1,000 359 64
Plant 16
The plant produces flue vaccine, tetanus toxoid and other
subcategory B materials and has a research laboratory. (The
biologicals are packaged, but this is a normal part of the
subcategory B operation). Thus, the plant is classified in
the "B" and "E" subcategories. The number of employees is
reported to be 200.
Spent eggs, animal bodies and other wastes are incinerated.
The wastewater flow, excluding storm flow but including
108
-------
cooling water, amounts to 208 cu m/day. it is treated in an
activated sludge plant having an aeration time of about 37
hours. There are two secondary clarifiers in series, each
with a detention time of 5 hours. The flow is chlorinated
and then goes to a pond providing a detention time of 6
days.
Data submitted by the company show nine pairs of influent-
effluent monthly average BOD results obtained in 1974. The
BOD results average 106 and 4.4 (96% removal). The average
flow, according to the data submitted, is 220 cu m/day. The
BOD raw waste load is 22 kg/day.
RFW sampled on October 25, 1974, obtaining in and out BOD
values of 23 mg/1 and 4 mg/1. These two values cannot be
compared, in view of the total detention time of about 8
days in the plant. Furthermore, the RFW data sheet
indicates that production was essentially zero on that day.
No standard raw waste loads can be calculated.
Plant 17
The operations of this plant are divided into subcateqories
B, D and E.
The wastewater passes through an equalizing tank, then is
treated with hydrogen peroxide (H202) and oxinite (NaClO2)
and discharged to a municipal sewerT ~
No company data on the wastewater composition have been
submitted. RFW Company sampled the total wastewater stream
on three days: 29, to 31 Oct., 1974 and sampled streams from
the individual subcategories, except on the first day.
Flows and analytical data for the principal constituents of
interest are shown in the following table.
Sub-
cate-
gory
B
D
E
Sum*
BOD
Flow
cu m/
day
870
227
840
1937
kg
day
751
216
166
833
mq
1
518
950
198
430
COD
kg
day
726
349
339
1408
IDS
1
834
1510
404
726
TOC
kg
day
128
135
64
327
mq
1
147
595
77
169
TSS
kg
day
28
3
42
73
mg
1
32
14
50
38
P
mq
1
3
22
15
40
Amm.
N
mq
1
.4
1.7
.8
.14
109
-------
Total*
Flow 2645 917 347 1270 650 457 173 161 61 2 .8
Total**
Flow 2650 1391 525 2262 854 490 185 88 39 10 .6
* 30 and 31 Oct.
** 29, 30 and 31 Oct.
The flow from the individual sources fall short of
accounting for the total flow and raw waste loads measured
at the plant.
RFW calculated deductions for sanitary and non-process
flows. These deductions amounted to less than 5% of the
flows and raw waste loads.
Plant 18
This is a pharmaceutical formulating plant (subcategory D)
whose major products are tablet and liquid preparations.
The major sources of wastewater to the treatment plant are
tank, floor and equipment washings and sanitary wastes.
Boiler blowdownr cooling water and storm runoff are diverted
to a holding pond before discharge tc a river.
The wastewater treatment plant has a plastic media trickling
filter designed for 3200 mg/1 of BOC. This is followed by
an activated sludge system with an air supply of 5.6 cu
m/minute and a design aeration time of 24 hours. The
effluent is chlorinated and pumped through a sand filter
before discharge to a river.
For determining raw waste loads, company historical data
from 1969 (4 days) and RFW data from 1974 (2 days) were
used. Averages are presented below:
Flow cu m/day
104
Parameter
BOD
COD
TSS
TOC
kg/day
104
224
28
112
Treatment plant efficiencies are based on RFW data for two days
110
-------
in 1974.
EOD
COD
TSS
TOC
Influent
mg/1
748
1,670
103
530
Effluent
mg/1
59
290
2
120
% Removal
92
83
98
77
Plant 19
This is a large plant with activity chiefly in subcategories
A, C and D.
Wastewaters from cafeteria, toilets and some research
facilities go directly to a municipal sewer. Once-through
cooling water returns to a lake.
The process wastewaters are treated in a plant that provides
a covered equalization basin holding 2300 cu m and covered
activated sludge basins with the same total volume. At
current average flow rates the aeration period is
approximately 2H hours. Two final clarifiers are designed
for overflow rates of 7.33 m/day (180 gallons per sq. ft.
per day). This overflow is approximately the present rate.
The plant is well operated. Dissolved oxygen in the
aeration tanks, pH, BOD load, mixed liquor suspended solids
temperature are the basis of tuning the plant to obtain
and
the best results. The pH is controlled"on the basis of the
pH in the aeration tanks. If the temperature of the
wastewater exceeds 40°C, as it may in the summer, it is
cooled and when necessary steam is added to keep the
temperature above 36°C. Management estimates that the
aeration period might need to te four times as long at
ambient temperatures.
Heretofore the effluent has been discharged to a lake,
it is now going into a municipal sewer.
but
A relatively high degree of variability has been shown in
the performance of this plant. Historical data have shown
average performance levels over different periods of time as
follows:
111
-------
Interval
June to
Dec. 1923
Jan. to
Dec. 1974
Jan. to
Apr. 1975
May 1975 to
April 1976
Flow
cu m/day
2590
2800
2800
2350
Avg. Inf.
BOD, mq/1
2847
3066
3400
2919
% BOD
Removal
jRange)
77.
85.
93.
94.
4
0
3
8
to
to
to
to
97.
95.
95.
98.
8
2
4
8
Monthly
Averages
(Average)
93.5
91.1
94.1
96.9
During the 12-month interval from May 1975 to April 1976 the
BOD load was 28% less than in the preceding interval. This
would contribute in a minor way to the better operation.
The company believes that improved facilities and procedures
have played an important part. In any case, performance
during that interval does not show any trend toward better
or poorer results, so it appears that the interval can be
used as indicative of the capability of a plant of that type
operating under optimal conditions.
Certain other analyses showed the following average
over that period.
values
TOC
TSS
Influent
mq/1
2118
Effluent
mq/1
304
296
% Removal
85.6
The performance of the plant is highly variable. Ten
percent of the time the BOD of the effluent was less than 23
mg/1 and 10% of the time it exceeded 160 mg/1. Sometimes
the effluent is quite clear, tut much of the time it is
milky, probably due to non-floccing spirilla or other
bacteria that will not settle out. It is characteristic of
the activated sludge process that certain kinds of nutrients
will produce non-flocculent cultures of this sort. There is
little hope that the activated sludge process alone will
give clear effluents when treating wastewater from the A and
C subcategories.
On Sept. 23 and 24, 1974 RFW measured and sampled the
streams from the A and C parts of the plant, as well as the
final effluent, with results as follows:
112
-------
Flow, cu m/day
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
TKN, mg/1
Fermen-
tations
1620
4215
9420
3240
2182
245
Phosphorus, P, mg/1 46
Chemical
Synthesis Total
1230
1650
3420
858
600
130
13
2850
3110
6800
2216
1701
196
32
Eff.
134
680
292
210
60
3.5
Percent
Removal
95.7
90.0
87
BOD removal, found to be 95.7X, was fairly close to the 12-
month average. Therefore the 90% removal of COD is probably
at least roughly indicative of the average condition
according to Jacobs Engineering personnel reviewing the
data.
Plant 20
The activity of this plant is the production of a single
antibiotic by fermentation. The active ingredient is in the
mycelium, which is sold in bulk and in a dried powdered
form.
The wastewater flow in 1974 was reported to be 950 cu m per
day. This includes sanitary sewage from septic tanks. The
flow is treated in an activated sludge plant having a 4500
cu m aeration basin (and hence an aeration period of 4.8
days), equipped with three 50-HP floating aerators. The
flow then goes to a 10-m diameter clarifier, after which it
discharges, along with cooling waters, to a river.
The RFW company sampled the wastewater flows on 29 Oct. to 1
Nov., 1974 and obtained the following results:
Date 1974
Flow cu m/day
BOD, mg/1
Infl.
Effl.
COD, mg/1
Infl.
Effl.
29 Oct.
927
750
90
1,440
499
30 Oct.
946
3,700
110
14,160
1,210
31 Oct.
946
310
20
434
2,590
1 NOV.
965
770
222
1,490
887
113
-------
TOG, mg/1
Infl. 530 5rOOO 121 440
Effl. 201 225 130 315
TSS, mg/1 282 386 38 812
Ammonium, N
mg/1 10 93 5 60
Phosphate, P
mg/1 7 40 0 12
In view of the long retention period in the treatment plant
(about 5 days) and the large variations of the influent, the
samples cannot be considered as even approximately matched.
The results are of very little value for calculating either
standard RWL's or treatment plant efficiency.
Plant 21
Fermentations are a major source of high-strength
wastewaters at this plant. Chemical systhesis facilities
manufacture benzoic and fumaric acids on a large scale, but
do not produce a large wastewater load. Briefly, the
process wastes plus sanitary wastes pass through these
units:
a. Primary earthen clarifier, 260 cu m.
b. Two aeration ponds, equipped to operate either in
parallel or in series, with a total volume of
28,000 cu m. Each pond is equipped with five 75-
hp. floating aerators.
c. Secondary earthen clarifier, 400 cu m sludge is in
part returned to the aeration basins, thus making
this an activated sludge process.
d. Two clarigesters, providing additional
sedimentation.
e. Two trickling filters with rock media, 240 cu m
total. These are used as nitrifying units, as the
EOD removal capacity is not critical.
f. Plastic media filter with 1160 cu m of media.
g. Final clarifier, 280 cu m.
114
-------
h. Stabilization pond, 3 ha., 38,000 cu m equipped
with six 20 hp aerators. The aerators were not
being used at the time of our visits on 1 and 2
April 1976 and reportedly are used only as a backup
system under present operating conditions.
i. Final polishing pond, 14 ha., 170,000 cu m.
j. Chlorination in a small "retention basin."
k. Discharge to a creek, where it mixes slightly
polluted cooling water and surface drainage from
the plant area. The sanrpling points designated,
"Sidestream Dam" or "Powerline," represent the
combined discharge. Except for storm periods, this
flow constitutes the full flow of this creek.
Sludge removed in the treatment works goes to an aerobic
digestion basin where it is aerated by three to five 75-hp.
surface aerators. Part of it goes to a 16 ha. stabilization
pond from which there is no overflow. The rest of the
sludge is spread on agricultural land owned by the company.
The flow through the treatment plant is about 4600 cu m per
day. Hence, the detention time is 6 days in the activated
sludge basins and about 44 days in the ponds that follow the
trickling filters. The other flow (chiefly the 1100
cooling-water system) amounts to about 10,000 cu m/day.
The company reports that in 1975 the average reduction of
BOD at the end of the activated sludge process was 93.1%;
after the trickling filters it was 96.1%; after the 7.5 acre
polishing pond, it was 98% and after the final pond, it was
99 + X.
The total power needs of the treatment plant were estimated
by plant personnel to be 1400 to 1500 hp (as cited by
Struzeski).
Sludge disposal, by using it agriculturally on company-owned
land, is an interesting operation. A similar project is
described in Water and Sewage Works, January 1976. With
cropping, the amount that can be spread is 38,000 gal. per
acre per year. At 3-1/2% to 4% solids, this amounts to
about 12,000 Ibs. of solids per acre, (13,500 kg/ha)
containing 1250 Ibs of N per acre, (1400 kg/ha), nearly all
in an organic form. The nitrogen content may limit the rate
of application because of problems that may be caused by
nitrate in the ground water. At an application rate of
38,000 gal/acre/year, about 750 acres would be needed to
115
-------
receive all of the sludge. Roughly half of the sludge
produced is applied to the land. it is hoped that the
sludge can be commercialized. This will necessitate
delivering the sludge at greater distances. Because of the
hauling costs, it will be necessary to reduce the water
content.
The plant also has a small filling and packaging operation
and a research laboratory. It was not possible to sample
these flows separately nor to determine the total flow from
them. There is also, at a distance of about two miles, a
"Research Farm" where large animals are kept for experiments
in feeding, A very small wastewater flow is brought to the
manufacturing plant by pipeline. A surcharged manhole on
the line contained what appeared to be unpolluted water. It
was not sampled. The methods of manure disposal applied
generally on farms are suitable here.
Plant 22
The activities of this plant are in the A and C
subcategories.
The treatment plant for the process wastewaters plus
sanitary wastewaters has these principal units:
1. Equalizing basin, 1200 cu m.
2. Neutralization basin.
3. Sedimentation basin, 20 m diameter.
4. Plastic media trickling filter, 1680 cu m.
5. Activated sludge, providing an aeration period of 4
hours.
6. Floatation for separating the sludge.
7. Two trickling filters in parallel, totaling 4,200
cu m of media.
8. Two final clarifiers 12 m in diameter.
9. Discharge to a watercourse.
At one time the company incinerated the liquid wastes, but
discontinued the practice because cf high cost.
Waste sludge is passed over Sweecc screens, then centrifuged
and hauled to a landfill, but the company plans to place a
sludge incinerator in operation scon.
The company has submitted data relative to wastewater
treatment for 1974 and 1975. The year 1975 is used for
appraising performance. Production was reduced or
discontinued during all or part of five weeks in the summer
116
-------
and a week at the end of the year. Those weeks are deleted
from the record used for appraising performance.
Flow thru the wastewater treatment plant averaged 4707 cu m
per day. A cooling water stream of 21,000 cu m per day
Ijoins the process effluent before final discharge. BOD
tests were run weekly and COD tests daily. Suspended solids
(TSS) tests were made dailyr but only in the effluent after
admixture of cooling water. A hypothetical calculation of
suspended solid in the treatment plant effluent was made on
the assumption of no suspended solids in the cooling water
These results must be looked upon only as indication of the
largest amounts that might have teen present in the
effluents.
Tests for ammonium, reported as Nr were also made daily and
tests for total phosphorus three times a week. These tests
were on the total plant effluent including the coolinq
™6f: /S in the case of the TSS determinations, these
results have been converted to hypothetical concentrations
on the assumption of no N or P in the cooling water
Flow, cu m/day
Influent COD, mg/1
Influent BOD, mg/1
COD reduction, %
BOD reduction, %
Ammonia in effluent,
as N, mg/1
Total phosphorus
as P, mg/1
1974
5070
5330
2660
75.3*
93.4*
1975
4730
4980
2420
76.0
93.1
33
10.1
21-month
average
4875
5130
2520
75.
8
93.2
* Except first 3 months, when plant performance was poor.
Samples were taken by Jacobs Engineering Co. on 23 and 24 March
and 1 April, 1976, with results as follows:
Wastewater from
Flow, cu m/day
BOD, mg/1
COD, mg/1
TOC, mg/1
TSS, mg/1
Fermentation Plant
1320
1820
4670
1120
675
Chemical Plant
303
7700
16000
6080
555
117
-------
Treatment plant effluent samples were obtained on only one
day, and showed BOD and COD reductions of 94X and 74%.
Plant 23
The major facilities consist of vaccine and serum production
area, filling and packaging of various synthetic organics,
virology and control laboratories, bleeding barn, barn for
horses, chicken house, softener, small cooling tower,
maintenance shop and offices. The plant has a large
distilled water unit but no demineralizer. The waste
treatment plant is located a few hundred yards away. Thus,
the plant can be subcategorized as belonging to
subcategories B, D and E.
The subcategory D activities are not large-scale operations,
since the daily output of product is less than 1 kg per
employee. The raw waste load arises largely from operations
of the B subcategory. Wastes from large animals apparently
are not included in the wastewater flows.
All the wastewaters are collected in a sump and pumped to
the treatment plant. The plant includes a 150 cu m
equalizing basin, two activated sludge aeration tanks with a
total volume of 254 cu m, a 117 cu m clarifier and a
chlorination tank.
The company supplied reports of wastewater analyses for 1974
and 1975. The PJB laboratory of Jacobs Engineering Co.
analyzed samples taken on 4 and 5 May, 1976. The average
results for the company»s 1975 data and the PJB data are
shown belcw:
118
-------
Company data, PJB data,
weekly tests for two days in
1975 1976
Flow, cu m/day 3U5 332
BOD, influent, mg/1 21.2* 11
effluent, mg/1 1.4 2
Percent removal 93.U%
COD, influent, mg/1 105 98
effluent, mg/1 63 67
Percent removal UOX 32%
TSS, effluent, mg/1 18
*In three of the BOD tests all of the oxygen was
depleted. In two cases BOD results were estimated on
the basis on the COD test, BOE averaging 0.2U of the COD
in the raw wastewater of this plant. The third was
estimated as being as great as the highest BOD test
reported.
**The PJB data are insufficient for reliable percent-
removal data, especially in the case of BOD.
Plant 21
The activities in this plant are in sutcategories D and E.
The major facilities consist of compounding, filling,
packaging, a small pilot plant, quality control
laboratories, offices, warehouse and utilities. A separate
small building contains the toxicology laboratories. The
plant operates essentially on a five-day, one-shift
schedule.
Wastewater from floor and equipment washing in the
toxicology building joins waste flows from human service
facilities in what is called the sanitary waste line. All
manufacturing area floor washings, spills, equipment
cleanings and cooling tower blowdown are run through the
industrial wastewater line. The two flows join just before
entering the treatment plant.
The treatment plant includes a 26 cu meter skimming tank,
two 296 cu meter equalization tanks receiving 15 cu
meters/min of air, two 26 cu meter "stabilizers" (?), four
activated sludge aeration tanks totaling 212 cu meters and
two 26 cu meter clarifiers. Aerobic digestion and
dewatering of the sludge is provided.
119
-------
The wastewater flow is quite well equalized over the 7-day
week, being only 11% lower on non-working days. The
calculated average aeration period in the activated sludge
tank is 16 hours. The equalization tanks provide in effect
a rather long but variable period of pre-aeration.
The company furnished data on operations of the wastewater
treatment plant over a two-year period ending with March
1976. The data for the 12-month period from April 1975 to
March 1976 is used. Tests were made once a week for
influent and effluent BOD and TSS. Effluent COD
determinations were made on each of the 245 working days.
Average results by months were as follows:
Month
Average Flow
Concentration, mq/1
cu meters/day BOD COD TSS
Eff Eff Eff
BOD
Inf
April '75
May '75
June "75
July '75
August '75
September '75
October '75
November '75
December '75
January '76
February '76
March '76
297
338
359
348
389
399
355
338
267
298
288
272
329
12.0
6.5
11.2
12.4
10.2
19.3
10.1
14.4
9.4
18.3
14.8
8.8
T271
40
40
42
40
49
68
57
53
69
80
88
70
17
21
20
26
23
24
22
39
36
54
34
26
"2875
206
131
158
140
152
176
199
213
257
279
224
204
795
The flow shown in the above table is the average for the
working days. The concentrations shown are the arithmetical
averages of the concentrations as determined, not the
weighted averages that result from dividing average load by
average flow.
Samples were taken in April 1976 and analyzed cooperatively
by the company and the PJB laboratory of Jacobs Engineering
Co. with results as shown in the following table.
Standard factors for calculating the BOD contribution from
the human service facilities would indicate that about half
of the raw BOD load was from that source. However, the
120
-------
factor used for that calculation, 0.023 kg per employee, may
be too large.
ANALYSES OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES TAKEN IN APRIL 1976
Flows: 28 - 29 April 273 cu meters
29 - 30 April 307 cu meters
Date
(April)
28-29
29-30
28-29
Average
28-29
29-30
28-29
29-30
Average
28-29
29-30
28-29
29-30
Average
BOD PJB *
PJB
Company
COD PJB
PJB
Company
Company
TSS PJB
PJB
Company
Company
Industrial
mg/1
134
74
162
123
306
216
315
215
263
25
20
22
Waste
kg/day
36.6
22.7
44.2
34.4
83.6
66.3
86.0
66.0
75.5
6.8
6.1
6.4
Mixed
Influent
mg/1
76
67
126
90
320
304
311
279
304
60
59
Effluent
(chlor-
inated) %
mg/1 Removal
5
4
16
8
91
60
93
93
72
68
82
24
26
32
34
29
73
52
*PJB laboratory at Jacobs Engineering Co.
Plant 25
Production Operations: Fermentation and subsequent refining,
sterile bulk manufacturing, fine organic chemicals and
antibiotic production, chemical development pilot plant and
laboratories, quality control labs, some packaging, filling
and compounding operations.
Ultimate discharge is to municipal sewers, but the process
wastes from subcategories A and C operations are pretreated
to reduce the BOD. Sanitary wastes, including most of the
wastes from subcategories D and E operations, go to the
sewer directly.
The pretreatment plant has four aeration tanks totaling
5,200 cu m, but about 10% of the volume is baffled off to
provide sedimentation. A dilute sludge is pumped from this
121
-------
compartment partly to return to the aeration basin and
partly to clarifiers or thickeners. The sludge, after
centrifuging, is hauled to a landfill. The flow through the
treatment plant averages 1,000 cu m per day. The aeration
period is 3-1/2 days.
The company has submitted records of effluent analyses for
1974, 1975 and the first three months of 1976. Using the
12-month period from April 1975 to March 1976, the average
flows and concentrations of wastewater discharged to the
sewer were as shown below:
Flow, cu m/day 1500
BOD, mg/1 252
COD, mg/1 1487
TSS, mg/1 927 (20.OX Ash)
TSr mg/1 3234
C12 demand, mg/1 78
Samples were taken for anlysis by Jacobs Engineering
personnel on 27 and 28 April, 1976, with results as shown on
the laboratory report sheets. From the analyses and
information on flows as submitted by the company, the
following table has been constructed to show the waste loads
carried by different streams, (The total flow during the
May sampling was lower than the 12-month average.)
122
-------
Plant 25
Analytical Data by PJE Laboratory of
Jacobs Engineering Co.
Stream
Wastewater from
fermentation
a/26/76, comp.
Wastewater from
fermentation plus
solvent recovery,
4/28/76 comp.
Bulk chemical waste-
water, 4/27/76, grab
Bulk chemical plus
development waste-
water 4/27/76, grab
Sterile bulk chemical
mfg., 4/27/76, grab
Filt.
Residue
(D.S.)
mg/1
31,480
25,400
558
17,200
958
Equalization basin in-
fluent 4/28/76, comp. 4,708
Equalization basin effu-
ent 4/27/76, comp. 6,172
Effluent pretreated for
discharge to sewer,
4/27/76, comp. 4,264
Effluent pretreated for
discharge to sewer,
4/28/76, comp. 4,264
Total plant effluent
grab 2,550
Non-Filt.
Pesidue
(S.S)
mg/1
436
BODS COD
420
21
44
41
862
858
1,282
1,404
744
mg/1 mg/1
TOG
mg/1
22,800 34,800 14,400
13,400 76,300 10,800
1,020 15,600 3,200
2,480 690
603 1,920 450
2,320 6,430 1,600
3,830 7,740 1,900
208 2,640
820
353 5,490 1,700
197 2,560 1,620
According to this Table 25, it would appear that BOD5_ and
COD removals from equalization basin effluent to treatment
123
-------
plant effluent ("equalization basin effluent" to "effluent
pretreated for discharge to sewer") were 93% and 48%
respectively.
Plant 26
This plant conducts operations in sutcategories A, B, Cr D
and E. Except for sanitary wastes, all flows are
intermingled. It is not possible to obtain separate samples
for the different subcategories.
In the wastewater treatment plant, the total flow, including
sanitary flows, is first treated with Magnifloc at a dosage
rate of about 1 mg/1 and then goes to an 18 m diameter
clariflocculator. Secondary treatment is provided by
activated sludge using refined oxygen produced at the site,
in an aeration tank of 3000 cu m capacity. Then it goes to
three clarifiers in parallel and a fourth one in series,
each one 12 m in diameter. The effluent is chlorinated and
discharged to a municipal system.
Company data have been supplied in the form of monthly
averages for the period from Jan. 1974 to March 1976.
During the first year, some of the loads, both influent and
effluent, have been considerably higher than at any time
since. They are still highly erratic, but there has not
been a conspicuous trend since then. It is reasonable to
use the twelve-month period from April 1975 to March 1976 as
a basis for appraising treatment plant performance. For
this period the following average conditions prevailed:
1975 data
Percent
Flow Influent Effluent Removal
cu m/day mg/1 mg/1
4340
BOD 1239 93 92.5
TSS 1135 177 83.7
On March 25, 1976, personnel of Jacobs Engineering Co. in
cooperation with plant personnel took 24-hour composite
samples and on March 26, they took composites from 8 am to 9
pm. The samples were split and analyzed by the laboratory
of the plant as well as the PJB laboratory of Jacobs
Engineering. (Subsamples for IOC were sent to another
laboratory.) Except for BOD, the differences between the
results by the two laboratories are in a tolerable range.
124
-------
The 24-hour and the 12-hour composites did not indicate any
consistent tendency for the 12-hour to be higher or lower
than the 24-hour composite. Weighted averages were taken in
proportion to the times. Average values of the principal
parameters of wastewater load are as follows:
Percent
Influent Effluent Removal
BOD, mg/1 1150 48 96
COD, mg/1 2536 211 92
TOC, mg/1 373 27*
120*
SS, mg/1 1590 153
*Doubtful results
125
-------
SECTION V
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
General
This section is intended to describe and identify the water
usage and wastewater flows in the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category. After developing an
understanding of the fundamental production methods and
their inter-relationships in each subcategory, a
determination was made of the best method of characterizing
each manufacturer's discharges which would enhance the
interpretation of the manufacturer's wastewater profile. If
unit raw waste loads could be developed for each production
process within a segment, then the current effluent
wastewater profile could be obtained by simply adding the
components. To forecast future profiles it would be a
routine matter of projecting the types and sizes of future
manufacturing operations and adding the associated
wastewater loads to determine what the new wastewater load
would be.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Plants in the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category operate continuously throughout the year. Their
processes are characterized largely by batch operations,
which have significant variations in pollutional
characteristics during any typical operating period.
However, some continuous unit operations are used in the
fermentation and chemical synthesis subcategories. Batch
operations refer to those processes that utilize reactors on
a fill-and-draw basis. The reactor is charged with a batch
of raw materials, and at the conclusion of the reaction, the
vessel is emptied, cleaned, and charged again with raw
materials. In a batch operation, the flow of raw material
into a reactor and the flow of product from the reactor are
intermittent. In a continuous operation, the flow of raw
materials into a reactor and the flow cf product from the
reactor are continuous. Hybrid operations derived from
these two types of operation are called semi-continuous.
The major sources of process wastewaters in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category include
product washings, product purification and separation,
fermentation processes, concentration and drying procedures,
equipment washdowns, barometric condensers and pump-seal
waters. Wastewaters from this point source category can be
127
-------
characterized as having high concentrations of BOD5, COD,
TSS and volatile organics. Wastewaters from some wet
chemical syntheses may contain heavy metals (Fe, Cu, Ni, Ag)
or cyanide and may have anti-bacterial constituents which
can exert a toxic effect on biological waste treatment
processes. Considerations significant to the design of
treatment works are the highly variable BOD5 loadings, high
chlorine demand, presence of surface-active agents, the
possibility of nutrient deficiency and the possibility of
potentially toxic substances.
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products
Fermentation is an important production process in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. Liquid wastes from a
fermentation plant can be classified as (1) strong
fermentation beers, (2) inorganic solids, such as
diatomaceous earth, which are utilized as a product or an
aid to the filtration process, (3) floor and equipment wash
waters, (4) chemical wastes such as solvent solutions used
in extraction processes and (5) barometric condenser water
resulting from solids and volatile gases being mixed with
condenser water.
The most troublesome waste of the fermentation process is
spent beer. The beer is the fermented broth from which the
valuable fraction, antibiotic or steroid, has been
extracted, usually through the use of a solvent. Spent beer
contains the residual food materials such as sugars,
starches and vegetable oils not consumed in the fermentation
process. Spent beer contains a large amount of organic
material, protein and other nutrients. The spent beer
frequently contains high amounts of nitrogen, phosphate and
other growth factors as well as salts like sodium chloride
and sodium sulfate.
Methods for treating the liquid fermentation waste are
generally biological in nature. Although fermentation
wastes, even in a highly concentrated form, can be
satisfactorily treated by biological systems, it is much
better and less likely to upset the system if these wastes
are first diluted to some degree by addition of other waste
streams. one such recommended method is to combine
fermentation wastes with large volumes of sanitary
effluents. NO further nitrogen, phosphorus or trace
elements are generally needed to carry out a satisfactory
biological reduction of the contaminants in the combined
wastes. Fermentation wastes are characterized by high BODS,
COD and TSS concentration and pH values generally ranqiHq
between 4 and 8.
128
-------
Subcateqory B - Biological and Natural
Extraction Products
The two major production processes utilized to manufacture
biological products are blood fractionation and vaccine
production. The primary sources of wastewaters in blood
fractionation processes are spent solvents, waste plasma
fraction and equipment (reactor) wash waters. Generally,
the spent solvents are recovered or incinerated with the
waste plasma fraction. The primary sources of wastewater
generated during vaccine production are spent media broth,
spent eggs, glassware and vessel washings and bad batches of
production seed and/or final product. The spent media broth
and spent egg wastes are usually incinerated, while the
washwater wastes are sewered. Natural extractions
production includes the processing of bulk botanical drugs
and herbs. The primary wastewater sources include floor
washings, residues, equipment and vessel wash waters and
spills. Whenever possible, bad batches are recycled; if
this is not feasible, the bad batches are discharged to the
plant process sewer system. Solid wastes, such as spent
plant tissue, are usually landfilled or incinerated. The
wastewaters from these production processes are
characterized by low BODS and COD concentrations and pH
values between 6 and 8.
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis Products
The effluent from the chemical synthesis segment of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry probably is the most
difficult to treat compared with the others, because of the
many batch type operations and chemical reactions, including
nitration, amination, halogenation, sulfonatiori, alkylation,
etc. The processing may generate wastes containing high
COD, acids, bases, cyanides, refractory organics, suspended
and dissolved solids, and many other specific contaminants.
In some instances, process solutions and vessel washwater
may also contain residual organic solvents. Thus, it may be
necessary to equalize or chemically treat a process
wastewater before it is acceptable for discharge to a
municipal or on-site conventional biological treatment
facility.
Wastewaters from the production of fine chemicals are
characterized by high BOD5 and suspended solids
concentrations and pH variations from 1 to 11. Major
wastewater sources from these chemical plants include
process wastes (filtrates, centrates, spent solvents, etc.),
floor and equipment wash waters, ejector condensate, spills,
wet scrubber spent waters and pump seal water. Some
129
-------
wastewaters from chemical manufacturing plants are not
always compatible with biological waste treatment and
although it is sometimes possible to acclimate bacteria to
various chemicals, there may be instances where certain
chemical wastes are too concentrated or too toxic to make
this feasible.
Subcatecrory p - Mixing/compounding and
Formulation
Pharmaceutical manufacturing represents all the various
operations that are involved in producing a packaged product
suitable for administering as a finished, usable drug. The
majority of pharmaceutical manufacturing firms are
compounders, special processors, formulators and product
specialists. Their primary objective is to convert the
desired prescription to tablets, pills, lozenges, powders,
capsules, extracts, emulsions, solutions, syrups,
parenterals, suspensions, tinctures, ointments, aerosols,
suppositories and other miscellaneous consumable forms.
These operations can be described as labor intensive and low
in waste production. In general, none of the unit
operations utilized in manufacturing a drug (i.e., mixing,
drying, tableting, capsulating, packaging, etc.) generates
wastewater because none of them uses water in any way that
would cause a water pollution problem. The primary use of
water in the actual manufacturing processes is for cooling
water in chilling units. The major sources of wastewater
from a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant are: floor and
equipment wash waters; wet scrubbers; inadvertent raw
material, intermediate, or product spills; and laboratories.
The use of water to clean out mixing tanks can flush
materials of unusual quantity and concentration into the
plant sewer system. The washouts from recipe kettles, which
are used to prepare the master batches of the pharmaceutical
compounds, may contain inorganic salts, sugars, syrup, etc.
Dust fumes and scrubbers used in connection with building
ventilation systems or, more directly, on dust and fume
generating equipment, can be another source of wastewater
depending on the characteristics of the material being
removed from the air stream.
The current manufacturing practices established by industry
and codified by the FDA have insured a number of safeguards
with regard to several of these wastewater sources:
1. Tableting, pill, encapsulating and powder
preparation areas are segregated, with air control
to remove air-borne particles through adequate
recovery systems.
130
-------
2. Bulk chemical preparation areas involving aqueous
solutions are generally curbed and guttered so that
spills and washdowns can be directed to the proper
treatment system.
3. Generally, pharmaceutical operations are under-
roof; thus, storm water contamination does not
present a problem.
4. Generally, pharmaceutical operations utilize
scrubbing systems on any vacuum or vent air control
systems. Thus, seal and scrubber water can be
discharged to the proper drain system for
appropriate treatment.
Pharmaceutical plants generate wastewater effluents similar
in characteristics to domestic sewage and readily treatable
in a biological treatment system. The wastewaters from a
pharmaceutical manufacturing plant are generally
characterized by low BOD and COD concentrations and by a pH
from 6 to 8.
Subcategory E - Research
Generally, quantities of materials being discharged by
research operations are relatively small when compared with
the volumes generated by production facilities. However,
the problem cannot be measured entirely by volume of
material going to the sewer. Research operations are
frequently erratic as to quantity, quality and time schedule
when wastewater discharging occurs. The most common problem
is that of flammable solvents, especially volatile solvents
such as ethyl ether, that can cause explosions and fires.
The major wastewater sources are vessel and equipment
washings, animal cage wash water, and laboratory-scale
production units. The wastewaters are generally
characterized by BODj> and COD concentrations similar to
domestic sewage and by pH values between 6 and 8.
Factors Affecting wastewater characteristics
The characteristics of the wastewater generated by a plant
in the pharmaceutical industry depend a great deal on
various in-plant production procedures. Specifications and
standards in "The Good Manufacturing Practices Regulations"
place severe restrictions on the ability to reuse and
recycle process effluents because of cross-product
contamination considerations. However, some of the
industrial in-plant pollution abatement techniques which are
131
-------
12/6/76
TABLE V - la
Raw Waste Loads
Subcategory Production
and Plant kkg/day
A 01
04
09
19
20
21
22
Average
B 08
12
17
23
Average
04
10
11
15
19
22
3.0
2.21
0.64
2.4
3.3
2.0
1.84
2.2
0.06
0.15
1.94
0.16
0.58
32.9
31.6
8.8
1.11
11.3
5.01
Flow
cu m/day
*
1040
2060
1620
946
4600
1320
1930
473
89
870
332
441
4150
6820
3420
159
1230
303
BOD COD TSS
kg/day
3750
4520
6490
6830
1305
6120
2560
4510
9.1
24
450
3.6
122
2330
8220
7560
1590
2030
2720
mg/1
*
4350
3150
4215
1380
1330
1940
2730
19
271
520
11
205
561
1220
2220
10,000
1650
8960
kg /day
9330
7300
13,800
15,300
4140
15,000
6420
10,200
36
45
726
32
210
9340
19,000
12,500
2350
4210
5150
mg/1
*
7020
6700
9420
4380
3260
4860
5940
77
506
834
98
379
2250
2800
3670
14,800
3420
17,000
mg/1
*
610
914
2180
1860
360
765
1110
15
64
32
37
773
146
281
274
600
Average
15.1
2680
4080
4100
8760
7320
415
Non-typical values since waste is incinerated
132
-------
12/6/76
TABLE V - lb
Raw Waste Loads
Sub category Production
and Plant kkg/day
D 03
05
17
18
24
Average
E 05
14
17
Average
AC 253
26
30.2
8.99
24.8
17.6
13. 61
19.0
922
792
3752
182
0.58
9.4
Flow
cu m/day
1530
156
227
284
290
497
64
184
840
363
1015
41604
BOD
kg /day
272
60
216
212
26
157
20
18.4
166
68.1
806
4780
mg/1
178
384
950
748
90
470
314
100
198
204
795
1150
COD
kg /day
636
102
349
473
88
330
39
43.1
339
140
5370
10,600
mg/1
416
670
1510
1670
304
914
571
235
404
403
5300
2540
TSS
mg/1
49
49
14
103
60
55
21
238
50
103
83
1590
Active ingredients =1.6
2 2
Floor area x 100 m
A and C EWL can be separated but production cannot
Assumed average flow
133
-------
used and can significantly influence a plant's wastewater
characteristics are discussed belcw:
1. Solvent recovery and recycle are normally practiced
in both the chemical synthesis and fermentation
segments of the industry. Certain products require
a high purity solvent in order to achieve the
required extraction efficiency. This increases the
incentive for making the recovery process highly
efficient. Ammonia recovery and reuse are employed
in some cases.
2. Incineration is a common unit operation in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. some
solvent streams which cannot be recovered
economically are incinerated. Incineration is also
used to dispose of such items as "still bottoms"
from solvent recovery units, research animals,
sludges and waste materials from biological
products manufacturing.
3. Dry-vacuum cleaning units are used extensively in
pharmaceutical manufacturing plants. In this
practice, a potential source of significant
wastewater flows is removed, in exchange for a
solids-handling problem which has significantly
less adverse environmental impact.
4. Chemical synthesis plants also employ various
pretreatment operations for cyanide destruction and
the removal of heavy metals from the wastewaters
generated by certain unit operations. This
practice improves the biological treatability of
the plant's wastewater and reduces the potential
problem of metals or cyanide in the final effluent
from the wastewater treatment plant.
Although the study survey teams did observe some of these
in-plant measures, information provided by the individual
plants concerning their operation was minimal and sampling
around these units was not allowed. For these reasons, it
was not possible to evaluate the efficiencies of such units
and determine their effectiveness to reduce raw waste loads.
Raw waste loads (RWLs) were computed for each of the plants
visited during the study survey period. Only contact
process wastewaters were used in calculating these loading
values. The noncontact streams which were segregated from
the contact process wastewater flows and were not included
in the raw waste load figures include the following:
134
-------
1. Domestic sewage wastewaters.
2. Boiler and cooling tower tlowdowns or once-through
cooling water.
3. Chemical regenerants from boiler and process feed
water preparation.
H. Storm water runoff from nonprocess plant areas,
e.g., tank farms.
Five major parameters were considered:
1. BODI5 raw waste loading (expressed as kg BODj>/day)
2. COD raw waste loading (expressed as kg COD/day)
3. TSS raw waste loading (expressed as kg TSS/day)
U. TOC raw waste loading (expressed as kg Toe/day)
5. Contact process wastewater flew loading (expressed
as cubic meters (cu m)/day)
The RWL figures for subcategory E are expressed as cubic
meters or kilograms per 1rOOO square meters of floor area.
Development of the raw waste loads (RWL) was accomplished in
stepwise fashion from the data obtained in the field. The
RWL data relating to individual manufacturing processes were
grouped according to the subcategory in which the processes
were assigned. The RWL figures computed for the plants
surveyed are shown by subcategory in Table V-1. Information
regarding raw waste loads and wastewater treatment plant
performance in the pharmaceutical industry was gained by
visiting 23 plants. With the generous cooperation of the
companies, various waste streams were sampled for analysis
(See supplement B). The companies supplied confidential
information regarding production, as well as treatment plant
layouts, number of employees, flows, historical data on
performance of the treatment facilities, etc.
The samples obtained in conjunction with the inspection
tours generally represent conditions on only one to three
days and hence are less reliable than the historical data of
the companies, but they are used if other information is not
available. Furthermore, those samples were generally
analyzed for several constituents in addition to the
principal parameters of waste lead, and they also serve to
indicate that the companies1 analyses and the survey's
results are measuring essentially the same characteristics.
135
-------
Raw waste loads were calculated from what appeared to be the
most reliable available data. The estimated loads coming
from human accommodations (toilets, cafeterias) were rarely
available for separate sampling. For the purpose of
correcting the raw waste loads to reflect the industrial
loads, the human wastes were estimated on the following
basis:
Parameter Per capita per day
Flow 0.11 cu tn (30 gallons)
BOD 0.023 kg (0.05 Ibs.)
COD 0.056 kg (0.125 Ibs.)
Suspended Solids 0.023 kg (0.05 Ibs.)
Corrections were made in sufccategories B, D and E, but in
the A and C subcategories the human loads are insignificant,
being less than 1% of the total.
For subcategories A, B, C, D and E, the RWL values were
determined by averaging the RWL values computed for the
plants in each subcategory. These RKL values are shown in
Table V-1. RWL values for TSS were not developed for any of
the subcategories; instead, allowable TSS effluent
concentrations are proposed. This approach was taken
because of the fact that suspended solids will be developed
in any biological wastewater treatment system and it is,
therefore, more logical to establish an allowable TSS
effluent concentration.
As expected, plants falling into subcategories A and C
generate wastewaters with the highest pollutant
concentrations. In subcategory A, these high levels are
primarily due to spent solvents used in extraction processes
and sewered fermentation beers. In sutcategory C, a myriad
of organic chemicals are used as intermediates in the
production of fine chemicals and contribute significant
pollutant loads to plant wastewater effluents.
Most of the formulating and packaging of pharmaceutical
products is done in plants other than those that are
producing the basic active ingredients, but there are some
plants which do carry out both functions. For the purpose
of calculating the standard raw waste load, such plants
should be treated as though they were two. The basic
ingredient would be counted once as the product of the
subcategory A or subcategory C process producing it and
again as a product of the subcategory D process of preparing
it for sale. This does not apply to plants of the B
category, where vaccines and antitoxins are invariably
produced in a form ready for market.
136
-------
TABLE V-2
Comparison of Raw Waste Load Data
Pharmaceutical Industry
12/6/76
Parameter
Flow
BOD
Units
cu m/day
kg/day
mg/1
Range of Values
Subcategory
A
946-4600
1305-6830
1330-4350
j
COD • kg /day
mg/1
TSS i mg/1
I
COD /BOD
4140-15,300
3260-9420
Subcategory
B
89-870
Subcategory
C
159-6820
i
3.6-450 1590-8220
11-520
Subcategory
D
156-1530
26-272
561-10,000 j 90-950
32-726 i 2350-19,000
77-834
2250-17,000
!
88-636
304-1670
360-2180 ( 15-64 \ 146-773 | 14-103
! !
t * » i
i
I
BOD/TSS
1.62-3.17 1.61-8.89
!
i
1.48-4.01 | 1.62-3.38
i
| 0.74-7.13 j 1.27-16. 2 | 0.72-36.5
i
i i
i t
1.5-67.8
Subcategory
E
64-840
18-166
39-339
21-238
1.82-2.35
0.42-15.0
u>
-------
TABLK V-3
SUMMARY OF RAW WASTE LOADS
12/6/76
Contaminants
Sub. Cat. of Interest
Raw Waste Load (RWL)
Flow
cu m/day kg/day mg/1 kg/day mg/1
_BODs_
COD
TSS
mg/1
BOD5, COD, TSS
NH3-N, Total-N,
POi
1930
4510
2730 10,200 5940
1110
BOD5> COD, TSS 441 122 205
NH3-N, Total-N,
P04
BOD5, COD, TSS 2680 4080 4J.OO
NH -N, Total-N,
Hg? *0,
210
379
8J60 7320
37
415
BOD , COD, TSS
NH -N, Total-N
Pof , Hg.
497
157
470
330
914
55
BOD,., COD, TSS
NH -N, Total-N,
PO , Hg.
363
68.1
204
140
403
103
138
-------
There are also a few plants that produce an antibiotic by
fermentation and then molecularly alter it by processes
similar to those used for chemical synthesis. The material
should be counted once as a product of subcategory A and
again when it emerges in its final form as a product of
subcategory C.
Table V-2 presents a summary of BWL parameter ranges for
each subcategory, as well as several ratios calculated to
determine whether correlations existed between any of the
parameters. From this table, it can be seen that the
pollutant raw waste loadings within each subcategory were
fairly consistent, although the raw waste loads varied
considerably from subcategory to sutcategory. This would
verify the subcategorization selected for the pharmaceutical
industry. Also, although the CQD/EOCJ5 and BOD5/TSS ratios
varied widely within each subcategory as well as from
subcategory to subcategory, the BOE5/TOC ratios within each
subcategory were generally close and fairly consistent from
subcategory to subcategory.
Some thought has been given to the establishment of a
subcategory E2, the farm type of research station in which
large animals and poultry are kept. In some cases the
disposal of animal manures follows the similar operations on
farms generally. In at least one case, animals are kept on
slotted floors, with the excreta washed into a sump and
being treated by biological oxidation.
139
-------
12/6/76
TABLE V-4a - RAW WASTE LOADS
(kg/day)
*»
o
Subcategory
and Plant
A 01
04
09
19
20
21
22
B 08
12
17
23
— . .
C 04
10
11
15
19
22
D 03
05
17
18
24
E 05
14
17
TDS
•——
2080
4400
1220
8110
1820
13,300
4990
50.4
183
920
311
9050
37,000
28,500
4660
2860
2390
i
483
76.4
513
241
30.9
103
243
TKN
516
213
224
384
766
1460
732
5.1
0.66
7.97
0.07
1760
41.4
2730
244
1 168
: 5.47
! 1.62
6.45
i 0.41
7.2
: 2.68
. 4.98
i 6.75
{
NO N
0.003
0.0
52.6
'. 0.0
;
; 0.0
0.009
: o.o
,
,
1.36
• 0.17
0.0
8.25
0.30
0.009
0.01
j 1.02
1 0.002
i 0.04
1 0.02
TOTAL P
60.6
20.0
6.0
72.7
38.0
312
112
7.1
0.33
2.17
— — —
1QS
19.3
136
0.20
193
125
1.37
1.62
8.43
0.22
1.9
0.90
0.95
i 8.6
OIL &
GREASE Cl
794
283 154
525 34.3
;
0.30 i
0 . 32
!
i 228C
300 159C
! i 10 8C
^103
; 42.0 ! 31..
i ™^^^™~ , 4 * .
1 j 14;
, 0.87 ,
! | 3.
j 3.08 \
i Vi
[•«•«»« J J ^
so.
1
__ __ t
0.0
205
455
31.6
j co 9
, i
n^nn
14^
2610
3 31.3
31 _«««««»
) 13.1
— ;
40 i
16.2
2 J 47.6
HARDNESS Ca
i
0.0 0.0
535 143
502 492
70 . 6
«._
I
344
696 220
177
13.0
14.1
j 5.0
| 38.2
-------
04
09
TABLE V-4b -RAW WASTE LOADS
(kg/day)
16.0
0.0
0.0
0.08
165
12/6/76
Subcategory
and Plant
.
Mg
, , „
Cn.
PHENOL
Fe
Na
Bb
He
Cu
K
-
B
19
20
21
22
08
12
17
23
«•" ' ~'~ u.t^u HOJ U>L/ y^y y^Q -^ 2 I
210 0.029 0.51 242 in? '
A.-TA. ____ __ _ J.UZ I
2,9 o.O - !
j
' MMM t
^— — — .— . j
! 0.006 0.006 -
— — .— , 0.04 — __ _____ en i
U«-JU — u.ij o.O 0.10 i
04
10
11
15
19
22
64.2
| 0.02
3.17
1.84
16.7
9500
281
151
u
E
UJ
05
17
18
24
05
14
17
i 0.03 ! 0.79
!
;
_ _. ' ----- /"* rt*5
• 0.053
^.j^ ; ___u _^ „ „ r\ OQ
; 0.15
5.57
0.02
; ;
2.48
i 0.001
0.0
1
0.24
0 02
- - ,
0.002
0.19
-------
12/6/76
TABLE V-4c - RAW WASTE LOADS
(kg/day)
Subcategory
A 01
04
09
19
20
21
22
B 08
12
17
23
f- C 04
10 10
11
15
19
22
D 03
05
17
18
24
E 05
14
17
Cr
i
i
<
0.0
0.18
0.20
Zn
0.0
' 0.27
I
i 1.03
Q.Q7
; 0.52
Al
0.0
0.04
"
As
0.30
14.4
Sulfide
=
i
j
i 0.21
I
i
1
Mn
0.009
Se
0.13
____ * «—
i
i
i
!
^
i
i
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
General
•-=. .553
related published data ?««? 9 n examination of
VI- amerS l
aa ««
VI- 1) wee selected aAd!xami^amferS (listed in
wastewaters during the fill^da^ ?f ?U indu«trial
addition, several specific narfm^ COllection Program, m
individual PharmaceutIcfjCsuSategorv ^f^T^f f°r each
data are summarized in Supple^en? B su^i ^ sampling
laboratory analytical results H*L * SuPPlement B includes
calculations, histo?icirdat J ' f ? *°m ?lants visited, RWL
computer print-outs fshowina ?1S1S °f historical data,
Pollutants, performance dS^trefSSl t^dU?tion and
effluent limitations calcula?i ^!f o technologies and
calculations, and B are available* ll Supplements A (cost
Information Center, Room ?5 5 « ? *? EPA **eedcm of
D.C. 20460. ' m 232' Watersxde Mall, Washington,
follows: a<> r°r aivld^g the pollutants into groups
1. Pollutants of significance.
2. Pollutants of specific significance.
as
egngoupg f r dF°11Utan n
indicate the basil for seleafL dlSJUffed «^rein, will
which the actual ef f Sent 1 ?»t J + • the Parameters upon
postulated for each industrial ltati°ns guidelines wire
of this document. are isc"ssed in Section XII
143
-------
Pollutants of Significance
Parameters of pollution significance for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category are BOD5, COD, TOC and
TSS.
BOD5, COD and TOC have been selected as pollutants of
orS^i0*"0?, ^cause thgy are the primary measurements of
organic pollution. In the survey of the industrial
categories, almost all of the effluent data collected from
wastewater treatment facilities were based upon BOD™
because almost all the treatment facilities were biological
processes. if other processes (such as evaporation,
i?°i^ra K" °r activated carbon) are utilized, either COD
TOC may be a more appropriate measure of pollution. In
Because historical data are usually not available for TOC,
limitations will only be set for EOD5, COD and TSS at this
time.
144
-------
Table VI-1
List of Parameters to be Examined
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Total Organic Carbon
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Suspended Solids
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
PH
Alkalinity
Acidity
Total Phosphorus
145
-------
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
I- Pollutant Properties
Acidity and Alkalinity - pH
Although not a specific pollutant, pH is related to the
acidity or alkalinity of a waste water stream, it is not a
linear or direct measure of either, however, it may properly
be used as a surrogate to control both excess acidity and
excess alkalinity in water. The term pH is used to describe
the hydrogen ion - hydroxyl ion balance in water.
Technically, pH is the hydrogen icn concentration or
activity present in a given solution. pH numbers are the
negative logarithm of the hydrogen icn concentration. A pH
of 7 generally indicates neutrality or a balance between
free hydrogen and free hydroxyl ions. Solutions with a PH
above 7 indicate that the solution is alkaline, while a pH
below 7 indicates that the solution is acid.
Knowledge of the pH of water or wastewater is useful in
determining necessary measures for corrosion control
pollution control and disinfection. Waters with a pH below
6.0 are corrosive to water works structures, distribution
lines and household plumbing fixtures and such corrosion can
add constituents to drinking water such as iron, copper
zinc, cadmium, and lead. Low pH waters not only tend to
dissolve metals from structures and fixtures but also tend
to redissolve or leach metals from sludges and bottom
sediments. The hydrogen ion concentration can affect the
"taste" of the water and at a low pH, water tastes "sour".
Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress
conditions or kill aquatic life outright. Even moderate
changes from "acceptable" criteria limits of pH are
deleterious to some species. The relative toxicity* to
aquatic life of many materials is increased by changes in
the water pH. For example, metalocyanide complexes can
increase a thousand-fold in toxicity with a drop of 1.5 pH
units. Similarly, the toxicity of ammonia is a function of
pH. The bactericidal effect of chlorine in most cases is
less as the pH increases and it is economically advantageous
to keep the pH close to 7.
*The term toxic or toxicity is used herein in the normal
scientific sense of the word and not as a specialized
term referring to section 307(a) of the Act.
146
-------
Acidity is defined as the quantitative ability of a water to
neutralize hydroxyl ions. It is usually expressed as the
calcium carbonate equivalent of the hydroxyl ions
neutralized. Acidity should not te confused with pH value.
Acidity is the quantity of hydrogen ions which may be
released to react with or neutralize hydroxyl ions while pH
is a measure of the free hydrogen ions in a solution at the
instant the pH measurement is made. A property of many
chemicals, called buffering, may hold hydrogen ions in a
solution from being in the free state and being measured as
pH. The bond of most buffers is rather weak and hydrogen
ions tend to be released from the tuffer as needed to
maintain a fixed pH value.
Highly acid waters are corrosive to metals, concrete and
living organisms, exhibiting the pollutional characteristics
outlined above for low pH waters. Depending on buffering
capacity, water may have a higher total acidity at pH values
of 6.0 than other waters with a pH value of 4.0.
Alkalinity; Alkalinity is defined as the ability of a water
to neutralize hydrogen ions. It is usually expressed as the
calcium carbonate equivalent of the hydrogen ions
neutralized.
Alkalinity is commonly caused by the presence of carbonates,
bicarbonates, hydroxides and to a lesser extent by berates,
silicates, phosphates and organic substances. Because of
the nature of the chemicals causing alkalinity and the
buffering capacity of carbon dioxide in water, very high pH
values are seldom found in natural waters.
Excess alkalinity as exhibited in a high pH value may make
water corrosive to certain metals, detrimental to most
natural organic materials and toxic to living organisms.
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.
Oil and Grease
Because of widespread use, oil and grease occur often in
wastewater streams. These oily wastes may be classified as
follows:
1. Light Hydrocarbons - These include light fuels such
as gasoline, kerosene and jet fuel and
147
-------
miscellaneous solvents used for industrial
processing, degreasing, or cleaning purposes. The
presence of these light hydrocarbons may make the
removal of other heavier oily wastes morS
difficult.
2. Heavy Hydrocarbons, Fuels and Tars - These include
the crude oils, diesel oils, #6 fuel oil, residual
oils, slop oils and in some cases, asphalt and road
*Cci3r«
i
3. Lubricants and Cutting Fluids - These generally
fall into two classes: non-emulsifiable oils such
as lubricating oils and greases and emulsifiable
SJj-n8UC^i aS ^t€r solufcle oils, rolling oils,
cutting oils and drawing compounds. Emulsifiable
oils may contain fat soap or various other
additives.
4. Vegetable and Animal Fats and Oils - These
originate primarily from processing of foods and
natural products.
These compounds can settle or float and may exist as
solids or liquids depending upon factors such as method
of use, production process and temperature of waste
*
« *n* 2 e STen in Sma11 <*uantities cause troublesome
SSSnS Problems. Scum lines from these agents are
produced on water treatment basin walls and other
containers. Fish and water fowl are adversely affected by
ai^« i? f K" h*bitat« oil emulsions may adhere to the
gills of fish causing suffocation and the flesh of fish is
tainted when microorganisms that were exposed to waste oil
are eaten. Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments of
water can serve to inhibit normal benthic growth. Oil and
grease exhibit an oxygen demand.
Levels of oil and grease which are toxic to aquatic
organisms vary greatly, depending on the type and the
•Pf"es «?8?eptibility- However' ^ has been reported that
crude oil in concentrations as low as 0.3 mg/1 is extremely
nnht V ^sh-water fish. It has been recommended thai
public water supply sources be essentially free from oil and
oK 9rease in quantities of 100 1/sq km (10 gallons/ sq
show up as a sheen on the surface of a body of water
The presence of oil slicks prevent the full aesthetii
148
-------
enjoyment of water. The presence of oil in water can also
increase the toxicity of other substances being discharged
into the receiving bodies of water. Municipalities
frequently limit the quantity of oil and grease that can be
discharged to their waste water treatment systems by
industry.
Oxygen Demand (BOD, COD, TOC and
Organic and some inorganic compounds can cause an oxygen
demand to be exerted in a receiving body of water.
Indigenous microorganisms utilize the organic wastes as an
energy source and oxidize the organic matter. In doing so
their natural respiratory activity will utilize the
dissolved oxygen.
Dissolved oxygen (DO) in water is a quality 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 com-
petitive and less 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 bleed clotting, decreased
tolerance to certain toxicants, reduced food utilization
efficiency, growth rate and maximum sustained swimming
speed. Other organisms are likewise affected adversely
during conditions of decreased CO. Since all aerobic
aquatic organisms need a certain amount of oxygen, the
consequences of total depletion of dissolved Oxygen due to a
high oxygen demand can kill all the inhabitants of the
affected aquatic area.
It has been shown that fish may, under some natural
conditions, become acclimatized to low oxyqen
concentrations. Within certain limits, fish can adjust
their rate of respiration to compensate for changes in the
concentration of dissolved oxygen. It is generally agreed,
moreover, that those species which are sluggish in movement
(e.g., carp, pike, eel) can withstand lower oxygen
concentrations than fish which are more lively in habit
(such as trout or salmon) .
The lethal affect of low concentrations of dissolved oxygen
in water appears to be increased by the presence of toxic
substances, such as ammonia, cyanides, zinc, lead, copper,
or cresols. With so many factors influencing the effect of
149
-------
oxygen deficiency, it is difficult to estimate the minimum
safe concentrations at which fish will be unharmed under
natural conditions. Many investigations seem to indicate
that a DO level of 5.0 mg/1 is desirable for a good aquatic
environment and higher DO levels are required for selected
types of aquatic environments.
Biochemical oxygen demand (EOD) is the quantity of oxygen
required for the biological and chemical oxidation of
waterborne substances under ambient or test conditions.
Materials which may contribute to the BOD include:
carbonaceous organic materials usatle as a food source by
aerobic organisms; oxidizable nitrogen derived from
nitrites, ammonia and organic nitrogen compounds which serve
as food for specific bacteria; and certain chemically
oxidizable materials such as ferrous ironr sulfides,
sulfite, etc. which will react with dissolved oxygen or are
metabolized by bacteria. In most industrial and municipal
wastewaters, the BOD derives principally from organic
materials and from ammonia (which is itself derived from
animal or vegetable matter).
The BOD of a waste exerts an adverse effect upon the
dissolved oxygen resources of a body of water by reducing
the oxygen available to fish, plant life and other aquatic
species. Conditions can be reached where all of the
dissolved oxygen in the water is utilized resulting in
anaerobic conditions and the production of undesirable gases
such as hydrogen sulfide and methane. The reduction of
dissolved oxygen can be detrimental to fish populations,
fish growth rate, and organisms used as fish food. A total
lack of oxygen due to the exertion of an excessive BOD can
result in the death of all aerobic aquatic inhabitants in
the affected area.
Water with a high BOD indicates the presence of decomposing
organic matter and associated increased bacterial
concentrations that degrade its quality and potential uses.
A by-product of high BOD concentrations can be increased
algal concentrations and blccms which result from
decomposition of the organic matter and which form the basis
of algal populations.
The BOD5 (5-day BOD) test is used widely to estimate the
pollutional strength of domestic and industrial wastes in
terms of the oxygen that they will require if discharged
into receiving streams. The test is an important one in
water pollution control activities. It is used for
pollution control regulatory activities, to evaluate the
design and efficiencies of waste water treatment works and
150
-------
to indicate the state of purification or pollution of
receiving bodies of water.
Complete biochemical oxidation of a given waste may require
a period of incubation too long for practical analytical
test purposes. For this reason, the 5-day period has been
accepted as standard and the test results have been
designated as BOD5. Specific chemical test methods are not
readily available for measuring the quantity of many
degradable substances and their reaction products. Reliance
in such cases is placed on the collective parameter, BOD5_,
which measures the weight of dissolved oxygen utilized by
microorganisms as they oxidize or transform the gross
mixture of chemical compounds in the waste water. The
biochemical reactions involved in the oxidation of carbon
compounds are related to the period of incubation. The
five-day EOD normally measures only 30 to 40% of the total
organic oxygen demand of the sample, and for many purposes
this is a reasonable parameter. Additionally, it can be
used to estimate the gross quantity of oxidizable organic
matter.
The BOD5 test is essentially a bioassay procedure which
provides an estimate of the oxygen consumed by
microorganisms utilizing the degradable matter present in a
waste under conditions that are representative of those that
are likely to occur in nature. Standard conditions of time,
temperature, suggested microbial seed and dilution water for
the wastes have been defined and are incorporated in the
standard analytical procedure. Through the use of this
procedure, the oxygen demand of diverse wastes can be
compared and evaluated for pollution potential and to some
extent for treatability by biological treatment processes.
Because the BOD test is a bioassay procedure, it is
important that the environmental conditions of the test be
suitable for the microorganisms to function in an
uninhibited manner at all times. This means that toxic
substances must be absent and that the necessary nutrients,
such as nitrogen, phosphorous and trace elements, must be
present.
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) is a purely chemical oxidation
test devised as an alternate method of estimating the total
oxygen demand of a waste water. Since the method relies on
the oxidation-reduction system of chemical analyses rather
than on biological factors, it is more precise, accurate,
and rapid than the BOD test. The COD test is widely used to
estimate the total oxygen demand (ultimate rather than 5-day
BOD) to oxidize the compounds in a waste water. It is based
151
-------
on the fact that organic compounds, with a few exceptions,
can be oxidized by strong chemical oxidizing agents under
acid conditions with the assistance of certain inorganic
catalysts.
The COD test measures the oxygen demand of compounds that
are biologically degradable and of many that are not.
Pollutants which are measured by the BOD5 test will be
measured by the COD test. In addition, pollutants which are
more resistant to biological oxidation will also be measured
as COD. COD is a more inclusive measure of oxygen demand
than is BODj> and will result in higher oxygen demand values
than will the BOD5 test.
The compounds which are more resistant to biological
oxidation are becoming of greater and greater concern not
only because of their slow but continuing oxygen demand on
the resources of the receiving water, but also because of
their potential health effects on aquatic life and humans.
Many of these compounds result from industrial discharges
and some have been found to have carcinogenic, mutagenie and
similar adverse effects, either singly or in combination.
Concern about these compounds has increased as a result of
demonstrations that their long life in receiving waters -
the result of a slow biochemical oxidation rate - allows
them to contaminate downstream water intakes. The commonly
used systems of water purification are not effective in
removing these types of materials and disinfection such as
chlorination may convert them into even more hazardous
materials.
Thus the COD test measures organic matter which exerts an
oxygen demand and which may affect the health of the people.
It is a useful analytical tool for pollution control
activities. It provides a more rapid measurement of the
oxygen demand and an estimate of organic compounds which are
not measured in the BOD!> test.
Total organic carbon (TOC) is measured by the catalytic
conversion of organic carbon in a waste water to carbon
dioxide. Most organic chemicals have been found to be
measured quantitatively by the equipment now in use. The
time of analyses is short, from 5 to 10 minutes, permitting
a rapid and accurate estimate of the organic carbon content
of the waste waters to be made by relatively unskilled
personnel.
A TOC value does not indicate the rate at which the carbon
compounds are oxidized in the natural environment. The TOC
test will measure compounds that are readily biodegradable
152
-------
and measured by the BOD5 test as well as those that are not.
TOC analyses will include those biologically resistant
organic compounds that are of concern in the environment.
BOD and COD methods of analyses are based on oxygen
utilization of the waste water. The TOC analyses estimates
the total carbon content of a waste water. There is as yet
no fundamental correlation of TOC to either BOD or COD.
However, where organic laden waste waters are fairly
uniform, there will be a fairly constant correlation among
TOC, BOD and COD. Once such a correlation is established,
TOC can be used as an inexpensive test for routine process
monitoring.
Total Suspended gplids
Suspended solids include both organic and inorganic
materials. The inorganic compounds include sand, silt and
clay. The organic fraction includes such materials as
grease, oil, tar and animal and vegetable waste products.
These solids may settle out rapidly and bottom deposits are
often a mixture of both organic and inorganic solids.
solids may be suspended in water for a time and then settle
to the bed of the stream or lake. These solids discharged
with manfs 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.
Suspended solids in water interfere with many industrial
processes, cause foaming in boilers and incrustations on
equipment exposed to such water, especially as the
temperature rises. They are undesirable in process water
used in the manufacture of steel, in the textile industry,
in laundries, in dyeing and in cooling systems.
Solids in suspension are aesthetically displeasing. When
they settle to form sludge deposits on the stream or lake
bed, they are often damaging to the life in water. 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 nature, solids use a portion or all of the
dissolved oxygen available in the area.
Disregarding any toxic effect attributable to substances
leached out by water, suspended solids may kill fish and
shellfish by causing abrasive injuries and by clogging the
153
-------
gills and respiratory passages of various aquatic fauna.
Indirectly, suspended solids are inimical to aquatic life
because they screen out light and they promote and maintain
the development of noxious conditions through oxygen
depletion. This results in the killing of fish and fish
food organisms. Suspended solids also reduce the
recreational value of the water.
Turbidity; Turbidity of water is related to the amount of
suspended and colloidal matter contained in the water. It
affects the clearness and penetration cf light. The degree
of turbidity is only an expression of one effect of
suspended solids upon the character of the water. Turbidity
can reduce the effectiveness of chlorination and can result
in difficulties in meeting EOC and suspended solids
limitations. Turbidity is an indirect measure of suspended
solids.
II. Pollutant Materials
Ammonia (NE3)
Ammonia occurs in surface and ground waters as a result of
the decomposition of nitrogenous organic matter. It is one
of the constituents of the complex nitrogen cycle. It may
also result from the discharge of industrial wastes from
chemical or gas plants, from refrigeration plants, and from
the manufacture of certain organic and inorganic chemicals.
Because ammonia may be indicative of pollution and because
it increases the chlorine demand, it is recommended that
ammonia nitrogen in public water supply sources not exceed
0.5 mg/1.
Ammonia exists in its non-ionized form only at higher pH
levels and is most toxic in this state. The lower the pH,
the more ionized ammonia is formed and its toxicity
decreases. Ammonia, in the presence of dissolved oxygen, is
converted to nitrate (NCT3) by nitrifying bacteria. Nitrite
(NO2)r which is an intermediate product between ammonia and
nitrate, sometimes occurs in quantity when depressed oxygen
conditions permit. Ammonia can exist in several other
chemical combinations including ammonium chloride and other
salts.
Nitrates are considered to be among the objectionable
components of mineralized waters. Excess nitrates cause
irritation to the gastrointestinal tract, causing diarrhea
and diuresis. Methemoglobinemia, a condition characterized
by cyanosis and which can result in infant and animal
154
-------
deaths, can be caused by high nitrate concentrations in
waters used for feeding. Ammonia can exist in several other
chemical combinations, including ammonium chloride and other
salts. Evidence exists that ammonia exerts a toxic effect
on all aquatic life depending upon the pH, dissolved oxygen
level and the total ammonia concentration in the water. A
significant oxygen demand can result from the microbial
oxidation of ammonia. Approximately 4.5 grams of oxygen are
required for every gram of ammonia that is oxidized.
Ammonia can add to eutrophication problems by supplying
nitrogen to aquatic life. Ammopia can be toxic, exerts an
oxygen demand and contributes to eutrophication.
Cyanide (CN)
Cyanide is a compound that is widely used in industry
primarily as sodium cyanide (NaCN) or hydrocyanic acid
(HCN). The major use of cyanides is in the electroplating
industry where cyanide baths are used to hold ions such as
zinc and cadmium in solution. Cyanides in various compounds
are also used in steel plants, chemical plants, photographic
processing, textile dyeing and ore processing.
Of all the cyanides, hydrogen cyanide (HCN) is probably the
most acutely lethal compound. HCN dissociates in water to
hydrogen ions and cyanide ions in a pH dependent reaction.
The cyanide ion is less acutely lethal than HCN. The
relationship of pH to HCN shows that as the pH is lowered to
below 7 there is less than 1% of the cyanide molecules in
the form of the CN ion and the rest is present as HCN. When
the pH is increased to 8, 9 and 10, the percentage of cya-
nide present as CN ion is 6.7, 42 and 87%, respectively.
The toxicity of cyanides is also increased by increases in
temperature and reductions in oxygen tensions. A
temperature rise of 10°C produced a two- to threefold
increase in the rate of the lethal action of cyanide.
In the body, the CN ion, except for a small portion exhaled,
is rapidly changed into a relatively non-toxic complex
(thiocyanate) in the liver and eliminated in the urine.
There is no evidence that the CN ion is stored in the body.
The safe ingested limit of cyanide has been estimated at
something less than 18 mg/day, part of which comes from
normal environment and industrial exposure. The average
fatal dose of HCN by ingestion by man is 50 to 60 mg. It
has been recommended that a limit of 0.2 mg/1 cyanide not be
exceeded in public water supply sources.
The harmful effects of the cyanides on aquatic life are
affected by the pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen content
155
-------
and the concentration of minerals in the water. The
biochemical degradation of cyanide is not affected by
temperature in the range of 10 degrees c to 35 degrees C
while the toxicity of HCN is increased at higher
temperatures.
On lower forms of life and organisms, cyanide does not seem
to be as toxic as it is toward fish. The organisms that
digest BOD were found to be inhibited at 1.0 mg/1 and at 60
mg/1 although the effect is more cne of delay in exertion of
BOD than total reduction.
Certain metals such as nickel may complex with cyanide to
reduce lethality, especially at higher pH values. On the
other hand, zinc and cadmium cyanide complexes may be
exceedingly toxic.
Mercury (Hg)
Mercury is an elemental metal that is rarely found in nature
as a free metal. The most distinguishing feature is that it
is a liquid at ambient conditions. Mercury is relatively
inert chemically and is insoluble in water. Its salts occur
in nature chiefly as the sulfide (HgS) known as cinebar.
Mercury is used extensively in measuring instruments and in
mercury batteries. It is also used in electroplating, in
chemical manufacturing and in some pigments for paints. The
electrical equipment industry uses mercury in the
manufacture of lamp switches and ether devices.
Mercury can be introduced into the body through the skin and
the respiratory system. Mercuric salts are highly toxic to
humans and can be readily absorbed through the
gastrointestinal tract. Fatal doses can vary from 3 to 30
grams. The total mercury in public water supply sources has
been recommended not to exceed 0.002 mg/1.
Mercuric salts are extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic
life. Mercuric chloride is more lethal than copper,
hexavalent chromium, zinc, nickel and lead towards fish and
aquatic life. In the food cycle, algae containing mercury
up to 100 times the concentration of the surrounding sea
water are eaten by fish which further concentrate the
mercury and predators that eat the fish in turn concentrate
the mercury even further.
156
-------
Phosphorus
Phosphorus occurs in natural waters and in wastewaters in
the form of various types of phosphate. These forms are
commonly classified into orthophosphates, condensed
phosphates (pyro-, meta- and polyphosphorus) and organically
bound phosphates. These may occur in the soluble form, in
particles of detritus or in the bodies of aquatic organisms.
The various forms of phosphates find their way into waste
waters from a variety of industrial, residential and
commercial sources. Small amounts of certain condensed
phosphates are added to some water supplies in the course of
potable water treatment. Large quantities of the same
compounds may be added when the water is used for laundering
or other cleaning since these materials are major
constituents of many commercial cleaning preparations.
Phosphate coating of metals is another major source of
phosphates in certain industrial effluents.
The increasing problem of the growth of algae in streams and
lakes appears to be associated with the increasing presence
of certain dissolved nutrients, chief among which is
phosphorus. Phosphorus is an element which is essential to
the growth of organisms and it can often be the nutrient
that limits the aquatic growth that a body of water can
support. In instances where phosphorus is a growth limiting
nutrient, the discharge of sewage, agricultural drainage or
certain industrial wastes to a receiving water may stimulate
the growth, in nuisance quantities, of photosynthetic
aquatic microorganisms and macroorganisms.
The increase in organic matter production by algae and
plants in a lake undergoing eutrophication has ramifications
throughout the aquatic ecosystem. Greater demand is placed
on the dissolved oxygen in the water as the organic matter
decomposes at the termination of the life cycles. Because
of this process, the deeper waters of the lake may become
entirely depleted of oxygen, thereby, destroying fish
habitats and leading to the elimination of desirable
species. The settling of particulate matter from the
productive upper layers changes the character of the bottom
mud, also leading to the replacement of certain species by
less desirable organisms. Of great importance is the fact
that nutrients inadvertently introduced to a lake are, for
the most part, trapped there and recycled in accelerated
biological processes. Consequently, the damage done to a
lake in a relatively short time requires a many fold in-
crease in time for recovery of the lake.
157
-------
When a plant population is stimulated in production and
attains a nuisance status, a large number of associated
liabilities are immediately apparent. Dense populations of
pond weeds make swimming dangerous. Boating and water
skiing and sometimes fishing may be eliminated because of
the mass of vegetation that serves as an physical impediment
to such activities. Plant populations have been associated
with stunted fish populations and with poor fishing. Plant
nuisances emit vile stenches, impart tastes and odors to
water supplies, reduce the efficiency of industrial and
municipal water treatment, impair aesthetic beauty, reduce
or restrict resort trade, lower waterfront property values,
cause skin rashes to man during water contact and serve as a
desired substrate and breeding ground for flies.
Phosphorus in the elemental form is particularly toxic, and
subject to bioaccumulation in much the same way as mercury.
Colloidal elemental phosphorus will poison marine fish
(causing skin tissue breakdown and discoloration). Also,
phosphorus is capable of being concentrated and will
accumulate in organs and soft tissues. Experiments have
shown that marine fish will concentrate phosphorus from
water containing as little as 1 ug/1.
Nitrogen
Ammonia nitrogen (NH_3-N) and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
are two parameters which have received a substantial amount
of interest in the last decade. 1KN is the sum of the NH3-N
and organic nitrogen present in the sample. Both NH_3 and
TKN are expressed in terms of equivalent nitrogen values in
mg/1 to facilitate mathematical manipulations of the values.
Organic nitrogen may be converted in the environment to
ammonia by saprophytic bacteria under either aerobic or
anaerobic conditions. The ammonia nitrogen then becomes the
nitrogen and energy source for autotrophic organisms
(nitrifiers). The oxidation of ammonia to nitrite and then
to nitrate has a stoichiometric oxygen requirement of
approximately U.5 times the concentration of NH3.-N. The
nitrification reaction is much slower than the carbonaceous
reactions and, therefore, the dissolved oxygen utilization
is observed over a much longer period.
Pollutants of Specific Significance
In addition to the parameters already discussed, there are
pollutants specific to various individual industry
categories of the miscellaneous chemicals industry. These
will be covered as applicable to the industry discussions as
158
-------
is done in the following text for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing industry.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry
Review of raw waste load (RWL) data indicates that the
pollutants of special significance to the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category, in addition to BODS,
COD, TOC and TSS are: mercury, cyanide, ammonia nitrogen,
organic nitrogen and total phosphorus. The raw waste loads
computed for all parameters analyzed in the field are
presented in Table V-4, except for EOD5, COD, TOC and TSS
(which are presented in Tables V-1a and V-1b).
Toxicity
Toxicity is classified as either acute or chronic. Acute
toxicity is characterized by the rapid onset of negative
physiological effects upon exposure, whereas chronic
toxicity is usally manifested by the appearance of negative
physiological effects after a prolonged dosage of a chemical
at concentrations below the acute level. The latter effect
is often the result of the accumulation of the toxic
compound in the tissues of the organism. one complicating
factor in trying to understand toxicity is the synergistic
or antagonistic effect of various chemicals. For example,
mature fish have been killed by 0.1 mg/1 of lead in water
containing 1 mg/1 of calcium, but have not been harmed by
this concentration of lead in water containing 50 mg/1 of
calcium.
Mercury and Cyanide
Numerous synthetic mercuric salts are used by the
pharmaceutical industry to produce medicinal products and
disinfectants. Cyanide salts are used by the industry as
catalysts in certain chemcial synthesis processes
(amination). The presence of mercury and/or cyanide in
wastewaters from these processes may have toxic effects on
the biological unit operations of a wastewater treatment
plant and thus cause it to be ineffective.
The U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) drinking water
standards specify a maximum allowable cyanide concentration
of 0.01 mg/1, as CN-. "U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Preliminary Draft of Interim Primary Drinking Water
Standards" proposes a limit of 0.002 mg/1 of mercury.
Only minimal concentrations of mercury and cyanide were
observed in most of the RWL data. This is attributed to the
159
-------
P°Jlutar* abatement measures currently
in the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry
(i.e., metals recovery, cyanide destruction). it is
emphasized that the end-of-pipe treatment models proposed in
this study should be used in conjunction with these in-plant
practices. Their expanded use, wherever feasible and
improvement of current in-plant contaminant reduction
systems are also encouraged.
Nitrogen
Ammonia nitrogen and organic nitrogen have been previously
discussed. High concentrations of organic and inorganic
nitrogen were observed in the BWL data for the
pharmaceutical industry. AS federal, state and local
effluent discharge standards become more stringent it is
inevitable that maximum allowable discharge limitations will
be adopted for the various forms of nitrogen and that
nitrogen removal will become a major requirement of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category.
However, the selection of ammonia and organic nitrogen
discharge standards shall be related to local conditions.
Phosphorus
Phosphorus compounds are used by some segments of the
pharmaceutical industry. High total phosphorus
concentrations were observed in the raw water from plants in
subcategories A and c. Phosphorus is often a limiting
nutrient in many water courses; consequently, elevated
phosphorus concentrations often lead to algae blooms and
steady degradation of impounded waters. The selection of
standards for discharge of phosphorus shall be related to
local conditions.
160
-------
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
General
The entire spectrum of wastewater control and treatment
technology is available to the pharmaceutical manufacturing
segment. The selection of technology options depends on the
economics of that technology and the magnitude of the final
effluent concentration. Control and treatment technology
may be divided into two major groupings: in-plant pollution
abatement and end-of-pipe treatment.
After discussing the available performance data for each of
the subcategories covered under pharmaceutical
manufacturing, conclusions will be made relative to the
reduction of various pollutants commensurate with the
following distinct technology levels:
I. Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available (BPT)
II. Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable (BAT)
III. Best Available Demonstrated Control Technoloov
(NSPS) ^
T«, facilitate the economic analysis of these proposed
effluent limitations and guideline sr model treatment systems
have been proposed which are considered capable of attaining
the recommended RWL reduction. it should be noted and
understood that the particular systems have been chosen for
use in the economic analysis only and are not the only
°f attaining the specified pollutant
It is the intent of this study to allow the individual plant
to make the final decision about what specific combination
or pollution control measures is test suited to its
nrn .in c^W^ with the limitations and standards
presented in this report.
161
-------
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
General
Pharmaceutical wastewaters vary in quantity and quality
depending on the type of manufacturing activities employed
by the various segments of the industry. However, in
general, the wastes are readily treatable. The results of
an industry survey indicate that a variety of in-plant
abatement techniques are utilized by pharmaceutical plants,
and, overall, in-plant wastewater control measures are being
practiced throughout the industry. Therefore, these
techniques can be incorporated as part of the technology
available to meet the limitations. The survey has shown
that biological treatment methods are the most prevalent
end-of-pipe wastewater treatment systems utilized by the
industry.
In-plant Pollution Abatement
It is within the manufacturing facility itself that maximum
reduction, reuse and elimination of wastewaters can be
accomplished. In-plant practices are the major factor in
determining the overall effort required in end-of-pipe
wastewater treatment. A complete evaluation of the
effectiveness of in-plant processing practices in reducing
wastewater pollution requires detailed information on the
wastewater flows and pollution concentrations from all types
of processing units. With such information one could
determine the pollutional effect of substitution of one
alternative subprocess for another, or of improving
operating and housekeeping practices in general. This kind
of information was not readily available, as the survey
contractor in most instances was not permitted to review
manufacturing processes in sufficient detail to develop such
information.
Despite this lack of specific process wastewater data, there
is information of a more general nature which indicates that
substantial wastewater pollution reduction through in-plant
control is possible. Specific in-plant techniques that are
important in controlling waste discharge volumes and
pollutant quantities are discussed telow:
Housekeeping and General Practices
In general, operating and housekeeping practices within the
pharmaceutical industry appear to be excellent. The
competitive nature of the industry, combined with strict
regulations from the Food and Drug Administration, requires
162
-------
most producers to operate their plants in the most efficient
manner possible. A few of the better practices used by
exemplary plants are described in the following discussion.
1. All of the plants visited in subcategory D
(mixing/compounding and formulation) carried out their
routine cleaning most efficiently by vacuum cleaning. Most
facilities utilized "house" vacuum systems equipped with bag
filters. This practice has resulted in a substantial
reduction in the concentration of pollutants and volume of
wastewater generated.
2. The use of portable equipment in conjunction with
central wash areas is a common practice by many plants
throughout the industry. This practice provides better
control over the possibility of haphazard dumping of "tail
ends" of potentially harmful polluting material to the
sewer.
3. Quality control laboratories are an integral part
of the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry. Solvent and
toxic substance disposal practices within the laboratories
are further evidence of the apparent industry-wide
commitment to good housekeeping. Standard practice
throughout the industry is to collect toxic wastes and
flammable solvents, especially low-boiling-point solvents
like ethyl ether, in special waste containers located within
the laboratories. Disposal of these wastes varies within
the industry, but the most prevalent practice is to have the
wastes disposed of by a private contractor or by on-site
incineration.
4. Spills of both liquid and solid chemicals, not only
inside production areas, but in general plant areas such as
roads and loading docks, can lead to water pollution. In
most of the pharmaceutical plants visited a comprehensive
spill prevention and cleanup procedures program was an
integral part of the plantfs good housekeeping procedure.
Several plants visited during the survey had excellent spill
prevention programs and have efficiently reduced the amount
of water used for spill cleanup through the use of vacuum
collection devices and "squeegees".
5. Stormwater runoff from manufacturing areas, under
certain circumstances, contains significant quantities of
pollutants. One exemplary technique for controlling such
discharges, observed at several plants during the survey
visits, consisted of containment and monitoring of
stormwater for pH. If the stormwater pH exceeds permit
limits it is then automatically diverted to the waste
163
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VII -1
BAROMETRIC CONDENSER
CUSTOMARY
HATER VAPOR IN
COOLING WATER
FOR 10-MILLION-BTU/HR DUTY
COOLING HATER AT 85°,
OUTLET TEMPERATURE AT 125°
PROCESS WATER 10,000 LB/HR
COOLING WATER 250,000 LB/HR
TOTAL 260,000 LB/HR
CONTAMINATED WATER
SUBSTITUTION OF AN AIR FAN
WATER VAPOR IN
1
PROCESS WATER
COOLING WATER
TOTAL
10,000 LB/HR
0
10,000 LB/HR CONTAMINATED WATER
H
I LI
164
-------
treatment facility. Uncontaminated stormwater is discharged
without further treatment.
6. The survey indicated that disposal of off-
specification batches to the sewer system is not a wide-
spread practice because of the high value of the product.
Most of the subcategory D plants visited reprocessed their
off-specification liquid formulation batches and either
discharged the off-specification solid products in a
landfill or reformulated them when possible. Plants in
other subcategories, when reprocessing is not possible,
either incinerate off-specificaticn batches or collect them
in drums and dispose of them via a private disposal
contractor.
Process Technology
Many of the newer pharmaceutical plants are being designed
with reduction of water use and subsequent minimization of
contamination as part of the overall planning and plant
design criteria. Improvements which have been implemented
in existing plants are primarily dedicated to better control
of manufacturing processes and other activities with regard
to their environmental aspects. Examples of the kinds of
changes which have been implemented within plants surveyed
are:
1. The use of barometric condensers (Figure VII-1) can
result in significant water contamination, depending upon
the nature of the materials entering the discharge water
stream. This could be substantially reduced by substituting
an exchanger for water sprays as shewn on Figure VII-1. As
an alternative, several plants are using surface condensers
to reduce hydraulic or organic loads.
2. Water-sealed vacuum pumps often create water
pollution problems. Several plants are using a
recirculation system as a means of greatly reducing the
amount of water being discharged. These systems often
require the recycled water to be cooled.
3. The recovery of waste solvents is a common practice
among plants using solvents in their manufacturing processes
(subcategory A - Fermentation Products; subcategory C -
Chemical Synthesis Products; and to a lesser extent
subcategory B - Biological Products). However, several
plants have instituted further measures to reduce the amount
of waste solvent discharge. Such measures include
incineration of solvents that cannot be recovered
economically and "bottoms" from solvent recovery units, and
165
-------
design and construction of solvent recovery columns to strip
solvents beyond the economical recovery point.
4. One plant (19) producing a large amount of organic
the dischar9e of this toxic substance by
h
the arsenic. Arsenic-laden waste streams are
segregated and concentrated before being reused. Non-
appr'o've'd "iiSm^ reSidU€S ™ ^^^ *"* Sh±Pped tO an
5. several techniques have been employed by various
subcategory A plants in an effort to reduce the volume o?
fermentation wastes discharged to end-of-pipe treatment
systems. These include concentration cf "spent beer" wastes
by evaporation and dewatering and drying of waste mycelia.
The resulting dry product in some instances has sufficient
a part
6. Several plants have installed automatic TOC
monitoring instrumentation and others have utilized pH and
TOC monitoring to permit early detection of process Spsets
which may result in excessive discharges to sewers.
,«• 1' • S?vera* Plants (08, 12, 17) in subcategory B
(Biological Products) segregate the spent eggs used on virus
production and the waste plasma or blood fractions used in
blood fractionation procedures. They are disposed of by
incineration at these plants.
8. Substitution of chemicals in this industry may be
possible, but only when this practice would not constitute a
process change that could result in an intrinsic change in
the production requiring approval by the FDA.
9. some plants practice ocean discharges or deep-well
injection following a pretreatment to dispose of process
wastewater. Recent regulations tend to limit the use of
ocean discharge and deep-well injection because of the
potential long-term detrimental effects associated with
these disposal procedures. Hence, these practices are not
€I*CO
Recycle/Reuse Practices
Recycle/reuse can be accomplished either by returning
wastewater to its original use, or by using it to satisfy a
demand for lower quality water. The recycle/reuse practices
within the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
166
-------
category are varied and only a few examples are described
briefly below:
1. Reduction of once-through cooling water by
recycling through cooling towers is used in numerous plants
and results in decreased total volume of discharge.
2. Once-through non-contact surface condenser waters
are reused as waste combustion scrubber waters by one
pharmaceutical plant (01). Although this practice is not
applicable to all segments of the industry, it can lead to a
substantial reduction in water usage and should be
considered in situations where it does not pose a serious
threat to product contamination.
3. Several plants (e.g.r17) reuse waste deionized rinse
water for cooling tower makeup.
4. Waste cooling water from one plant (18) was
collected in an aesthetically located pond and held as a
source of water for fire protection.
At-source Pretreatment
The survey indicated that at-source pretreatment to protect
downstream biological treatment plants was practiced by very
few plants on an industry-wide basis. Those manufacturing
plants utilizing at-source pretreatment were mostly in
subcategory C. The particular pretreatment processes
utilized are discussed below:
Cyanide Destruction
The purpose of the cyanide treatment is to reduce high
levels of cyanide from raw waste streams by alkaline
chlorination prior to treatment involving biological
activity (oxidation lagoons and deep trickling filters).
The treatment of cyanide wastes by alkaline chlorination
involves the addition of chlorine to a waste of high pH.
Sufficient alkalinity, usually Ca(Qti)2 or NaOH, is added
prior to chlorination to bring the waste to a pH of about
11. Violent agitation must accompany the chlorination to
prevent the cyanide salt from precipitating out prior to
oxidation and hydrolysis. About 7 to 9 pounds each of
caustic soda and chlorine are normally required to oxidize
one pound of CN to N£ and CO2. However, variation can be
expected, depending on the COD and alkalinity of the waste.
Destruction of 99.7 percent of cyanide has been achieved by
one plant (11) .
167
-------
Cyanide removal can also be accomplished by electrolytic de-
struction (26) and by ozonization (27) .
Mercury Removal
Mercury removal can be accomplished ty other techniques (18)
such as sulfide precipitation, ion exchange, reduction, or
adsorption. One manufacturing plant (02) in subcategory C
produces a product requiring the use cf mercury. The waste
from this process contains about 25 mg/1 of mercury. In
order to protect the biological treatment system utilized to
treat the plant's chemical wastes, the mercury-contaminated
wastewater is pretreated. Pretreatment consists of exposing
the waste to zinc under the proper chemical conditions to
permit the amalgamation of the two metals. The mercury
concentration has been reduced to less than 5 mg/1. The
contents of the holding tank are mixed with other chemical
wastes to further reduce the mercury concentration before it
is discharged to activated sludge treatment. The mercury-
zinc sludge is disposed of by a private disposal contractor.
Ammonia Removal
Two plants (05, 11) in subcategory C use ammonia compounds
in their manufacturing processes resulting in waste streams
containing 2.5 to 3.0 percent ammonia. A steam stripping
column is utilized to reduce this concentration to about 0.6
percent after which it is mixed with ether chemical waste
streams to dilute it before treatment ty an activated sludge
system. The stripped ammonia is returned to the process and
reused.
Sewer Segregation
Wastewater quantity is one of the major factors that affects
the cost of waste treatment facilities. In order to provide
efficient treatment of the wastes originating within a
pharmaceutical plant it is important to consider segregation
of concentrated waste streams, since it frequently
simplifies waste treatment problems. Segregation and
pretreatment of a process waste stream may be desirable
where seme specific pollutant can be removed more
efficiently while it is present in its most concentrated
form. Examples are the removal of ammonia or organic
solvents by steam stripping and the use of various processes
to remove metal-bearing waste. Some highly concentrated
wastes should be disposed of by a licensed scavenger rather
than by addition to the wastewater stream.
168
-------
Segregation and incineration of strong waste streams is
being practiced by many pharmaceutical plants; however,
potential for further segregation still exists. It is
conceivable that plants utilizing a variety of manufacturing
processes could further separate their waste streams to
optimize the overall treatment efficiency of their waste
treatment program. For example, some plants might find that
the most cost-effective waste treatment program would
include incineration of extremely concentrated waste,
biological treatment of intermediate strength waste and
dilution of weak strength wastes with the effluent from the
biological treatment plant. The feasibility of such an
approach should be examined by plants when they consider
treatment systems for achievement of BAT effluent
limitations.
Separation of stormwater runoff is practiced through the
industry and, as discussed previously, this practice often
facilitates the isolation and treatment of contaminated run-
off. The isolation of wastes containing pollutants that may
require specialized treatment is also a demonstrated
practice in the pharmaceutical industry which permits
effective removal of such pollutants as metals, arsenic,
ammonia, cyanide and other chemicals that may be toxic or
inhibitory to biological treatment systems.
Segregation of non-contact cooling water is also practiced
within the industry. This practice not only reduces the
quantity of wastewater that must be treated, but also
facilitates water reuse either prior to or after treatment.
Conditions Which Inhibit Flocculaticn
Floe formation in the activated sludge process is adversely
affected by sulfides, other sulfur compounds, nutrient
imbalance, oxygen deficiency, lew temperatures and organic
acids (notably acetic acid). Although not pollution
parameters identified in this document, these conditions may
result in filamentous or pinpoint floes which could cause
poor separation of activated sludge in secondary clarifiers
of plants in subcategories A and C.
General Toxicity
It is not possible to ascertain the toxicity of a wastewater
by chemical analyses, although toxicity may occasionally be
discovered by the finding of a particular toxicant. A
bioassay using fish, while not ideal, is the best indicator
of total toxicity. For the pharmaceutical industry, the
169
-------
1/2/676
TYPE OF TREATMENT OR DISPOSAL FACILITY
Activated Sludge
Table VII-1
Treatment Technology Survey
Pharmaceutical Industry
NUMBER OF TREATMENT
FACILITIES OBSERVED
DURING FIELD SURVEY
12
Activated Sludge/Polishing Pond
Activated Sludge/Phosphate Precipitation
Bio-Filter/Activated Sludge
Aerated Lagoons
Aerated Lagoon/Settling Pond-Polishing Cascade
Aerated Lagoon/Phosphate Precipitation
Trickling Filters
Evaporation
Thermal Oxidation
Pretreatment/To Municipal Treatment Plant
(H 0 + Oxinite Addition)
To Municipal Treatment
2
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
PLANT NO.
02,05,11,19
15,20,02,14
23,24,25,26*
10,16
14
04,18,21,22
09
08
01
01
17
03,12
* Activated Sludge using Oxygen
-------
bioassay should be an important tool in the detection and
control of toxicity.
Since a bioassay is a relatively expensive test, it is not
feasible to make it a required test at frequent intervals.
If a test is made at semi-annual or quarterly intervals, or
even monthly, it will not be effective in detecting
occasional discharges of poisons. A continuous bioassay is
a feasible technique, requiring only that the effluent or a
portion of the effluent be run through a suitable pond in
which the fish are kept.
End-of-pipe Control Technology
Table VII-1 indicates the types of wastewater treatment
technology observed during the survey and the treatment
systems identified by consultation with EPA regional
offices. End-of-pipe control technology in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category relies
heavily upon the use of biological treatment methods.
Primary treatment most often consists cf equalization basins
to minimize shock organic loads, neutralization to ensure
optimum conditions and clarifiers to remove solids. Other
primary treatment methods observed include cooling of waste
and use of roughing filters to reduce organic loadings.
Effluent polishing was utilized fcy many plants and systems
observed included polishing popds, cascades and sand
filters. Odor control and phosphate removal systems were
also observed. One pharmaceutical plant (01) manufacturing
subcategory A and C products utilized thermal oxidation and
a liquid evaporation process to treat its wastewaters. NO
activated carbon adsorption systems were observed treating
pharmaceutical wastewaters although the literature indicates
that some applications are in existence.
Though the present practice is to select a biological
treatment method as an end-of-pipe treatment, other
treatment techniques are emerging with good potential. The
evaporation and the thermal oxidation of strong waste water
streams are becoming more attractive for those wastewaters
which have significant fuel value. In some cases, high fuel
requirements would discourage the use of such techniques.
Deep-well injection and ocean disposal are being practiced
for strong chemical wastes, but recent regulations limit the
use of ocean discharge and deep-well injection because of
the potential long-term detrimental effects associated with
these disposal procedures. As a result of Public Law 93-
523, EPA is in the process of developing guidelines which
cover deep-well injection of potentially hazardous
wastewaters. Other techniques, including reverse osmosis,
171
-------
12/6/76
NJ
TABLE VII - 2a
Summary of Statistical Analysis of
Historical Data
Effluent BOD mg/1
Plant Sub-
No. cat Pin P,n Pqn Pq, Pq8 Avg. P9Q/Avg Pg5/Avg P^/Ave DataBase
08 B
11 C
14 E
19 ACD
22* AC
23 BDE
24 DE
1.8
29
0.9
23
16
0.7
4
3.6
51
1.4
57
28
1.2
10
13
163
2.9
157
48
2.2
22
25
194
4.6
205
59
2.5
25
88
276
7.3
290
79
3.0
32
7.7
79
1.8
82
31
1.3
12
1.7
2.1
1.6
1.9
1.5
1.7
1.8
3.2
2.4
2.6
2.5
1.9
1.9
2.1
11.4
3.5
4.1
3.5
2.5
2.3
2.7
Bi-Weekly l/74-10-74a
Bi-Weekly 1/73-8/74
Daily 1/74-9/74
Daily 5/75-12/7^
Daily 1/74-12/75
Weekly 1/74-12/75
Weekly 4/74-3/76
* Includes cooling water
a 10 month period used for statistical analysis only
b 8 month period used for statistical analysis only
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VII - 2b
Summary of Statistical Analysis
of Historical Data
Effluent COD mg/1
Plant
No.
08
11
14
15
22*
M
w 23
24
Sub-
cat
B
C
E
C
AC
BDE
DE
P10
21
234
11
6400
158
29
30
P50
33
382
17
13,400
240
59
53
P90
68
584
26
21,200
320
95
102
P95
126
690
32
25,100
352
98
107
P98
178
785
41
30,100
382
126
115
Avg
43
398
18
14,000
218
62
58
P90/Avg
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.8
Pq,/Avg
2.9
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.8
*98/Avg
4.1
2.0
2.3
2.2
1.8
2.0
2.0
Data Base
Daily 1/74-10-743
Daily 1/73-8/74
Daily 1/74-9/74
Daily 1/73-9/74
Daily 1/74-12/75
Weekly 1/74-12/75
Daily 4/75-3/76
* Includes cooling water
10 month period used for statistical analysis only
-------
12/6/76
24
DE
TABLE VII - 2c
Summary of Statistical Analysis
of Historical Data
Effluent TSS mg/1
Plant
No.
08
11
14
15
19
22*
23
Sub-
cat
B
C
E
C
AGO
AC
BDE
P10
11
24
1.0
52
42
16
9
P50
21
53
3.9
205
92
33
17
P90
40
143
13
755
307
64
36
P95
46
188
18
1460
500
76
40
P98
49
290
27
2140
870
96
50
Avg
23
71
5.9
359
154
35
20
P90/Avg
1.7
2.0
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.8
P95/A,vg
2.0
2.6
3.0
4.1
3.2
2.2
2.0
P98/Avg
2.1
4.1
4.6
6.0
5.6
2.7
2.5
Data Base
Daily 1/74-1Q-743
Daily 1/73-8/74
Daily 1/74-9/74
Daily 1/73-9/74
Daily 5/75-12/75b
Daily 1/75-12/75
Semi-Weekly 1/74-
13
26
58
60
74
28
2.1
2.1
2.6
12/75
Weekly 4/74-3/76
* Includes cooling water
a 10 month period used for statistical analysis only
b 8 month period used for statistical analysis only.
-------
ultrafiltration, ozonization and ion exchange, are being
studied and have good potential. For treating strong
pharmaceutical wastewater, an activated sludge using pure
oxygen System is utilized by a pharmaceutical plant.
One of the initial criteria used to screen pharmaceutical
plants for the field survey was the degree of treatment
provided by the wastewater treatment facilities. During the
survey program historical wastewater treatment plant
performance was obtained when possible. The historical data
were analyzed statistically and the individual plant's
performance evaluated. Summary historical data for effluent
BOD5 in mg/1 is shown in Table VII-2a. Effluent COD and TSS
data are presented in Tables VII-2b and VII-2c respectively.
Differences in performance among different plants of sub-
categories A and C do not appear to be explainable entirely
on the basis of some treatment plants being better designed
or better operated than others. Among plants that have very
competent operators and that are designed according to good
engineering standards for the types of processes used, there
are substantial differences of performance. In the same
plant there are differences from day to day and from month
to month. In determining BPT, plants are not arbitrarily
included or excluded purely on the basis of performance. A
plant has been excluded if poor performance appears to be
traceable to poor design or operation. Plants have been
also excluded that are distinctly non-typical in respect to
the kind of wastewaters treated, or in the use of wastewater
processes that are not well enough established to allow a
conclusion that they are generally applicable.
Specifically, thermal oxidation of strong wastewaters is a
process that could have high fuel costs, which may have
economic impacts greater than justifiable by current fuel
economics and that could have operating problems due to the
salt content of the wastewaters. it may prove to be the
best method of treatment, but this cannot be considered to
be an established fact at this time. An extremely
complicated process, or one that requires the use of land in
amounts not generally available cannot be used as examples
of generally practicable technologies. A large user of land
(Plant 21) is included, however, as an example of
performance of that part of the treatment processes that
preceeds the large final oxidation pond.
Wastewaters from the various subcategories of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category do not
have the same relative organic concentrations in the
influent to the wastewater treatment plant. Subcategories B
and E and generally also D, produce wastewaters with
175
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VII - 3a
Treatment Plant Performance Data
Plant
01 S
02 H
02 H
03 S
04 H
04 S
05 H
05 S
08 H
08 S
09 H
09 S
10 S
11 H
11 S
12 S
14 H
14 S
15 II
15 S
Subcat.
AC
A
C
BD
AC
AC
DE
DE
B
B
A
A
C
C
C
B
E
E
C
C
Flow
cu m/day
2297
923
1530
3840
5190
220
719
473
1570
2060
6820
4960
3420
89
231
184
159
BOD (mg/1)
Na
360
360
2
350
5
15
4
157
3
1
1
4
106
4
3
96
2
270
2
Infl.
4250
5830
178
1870
1307
364
46.3
19
1150
3150
1220
894
2220
25
67
100
10,000
Effl.
308
525
b
370
155
12.2
3.5
7.8
5.8
49
26
47
79
202
b
1.8
13
2,000
% Rmvl.
99
93
91
80 c
88
99
83
70
96
99
96
91
91
97
87
80
Infl.
7760
15,600
416
3180
641
118
77
2120
6700
2800
2634
3670
46
197
235
20,900
14,800
COD (mg/1)
Effl.
1530
3280
b
632
61
28
50.5
48
278
317
1350
398
650
b
18
32
14,000
3680
% Rmvl.
80
79
80
96
57
38
87
95
52
85
82
91
84
33
75
TSS
Effl. mg/1
666
362
142
15.
6.
22.
30
134
4
122
71
60
5.
10
359
47
4
2
2
9
(a) Number of composite samples from
(b) Wastewaters pass (sometimes with
(H)-Historical company data; S:
each station for each type of analysis.
pretreatment) to a municipal treatment system.
•• Field survey data
-------
relatively low concentrations of organic matter, mostly in
forms susceptible to treatment by either activated sludge or
fixed-film reactors (stone or plastic media filter or
biodiscs). A substantial part of the raw waste load is
likely to be from facilities serving the needs of the
workers and thus is similar to domestic sewage. By
contrast, plants of the A and C subcategories produce
wastewaters that may favor the growth of non-flocculatina
microbes. y
During the survey program, 24-hour composite samples of
influent and effluent of the wastewater treatment plant over
a one to five day period were collected in order to verify
the plants* historical performance data, as well as to
provide a more complete wastewater analytical profile. The
performance characteristics which were observed during the
survey are presented in Table VII-3a.
Of the twenty-three treatment plants visited, at least
seventeen treated multiple subcategory wastes. See Table
VII-3a. Where subcategory A and/or C wastes are present
with wastes of the other subcategories, they generally
dominate the characteristics of the total waste stream
because of their high concentrations and high RWL's.
Historical treatment plant data were reviewed in order to
quantify treatment efficiencies which could then be applied
to typical raw waste loads for each sutcategory to develop
effluent limitations and guidelines.
To identify the treatment efficiencies that should be
applicable to this category, all cf the treatment plant data
for plants in this category (Table VIi-3a) were analyzed.
Only data from secondary biological treatment plants
(activated sludge or equivalent technology) have been
reviewed to indicate the level of treatment that is being
achieved by current treatment plants in this industry.
Initially, the treatment plant performance data were
evaluated to determine if there are different performance
data for the different subcategories. The evaluation
indicated that there are not sufficient historical data in
the respective subcategories to warrant different removal
efficiencies for each sutcategcry. Therefore, all of the
Historical treatment plant performance data are utilized to
establish realistic treatment plant efficiencies that can be
expected in this category. Data from thirteen plants have
been used. ^
177
-------
TABLE VII - 3b
Treatment Plant Performance Data
12/6/76
Plant
16 H
17 S
18 S
19 H
19 S
20 S
21 H
21 S
22 H
M 22 S
w 23 H
23 S
24 H
24 S
25 H
25 S
26 H
26 S
Sub cat.
BE
BDE
D
ACD
ACD
A
AC
AC
AC
AC
BDE
BDE
DE
DE
AC
AC
ABCDE
ABCDE
Flow
cu m/day
220
2650
284
2350
2850
946
4600
4600
5024
1623
345
332
329
290
1500
1015
4340
Na
9
3
2
360
2
4
360
1
89
1
94
2
105
3
250
2
360
1
BOD (mg/1)
Infl.
106
525
748
2920
3110
1380
1330
2536
2400
21.2
11
195
90
795
1240
1150
Effl.
4.4
b
59
90
134
90
66
178
14
1.4
2
12.3
8
252
280
93
48
% Rmvl.
96
92
97
96
93
94d
95
93
99
93
82
94
91
b
65b
92
96
Infl.
854
1670
6800
4380
3260
5210
5270
105
98
304
5300
2540
COD (rag/1)
Effl.
b
290
680
1296
1140
130Q
178
68
67
58
82
1487
4065
211
% Rmvl.
83
90
70
65
75
97
35
32
73
b
23b
92
TSS
Effl. mg/1
2
296
210
380
147
746
197
19
18
28.5
29
937
177
153
(a) Number of composite samples from each station for each type of analysis.
(b) Wastewaters pass (sometimes with pretreatment) to a municipal treatment system.
(c) This estimate of efficiency is a minimum, because the effluent samples include an incremental load
due to added cooling waters.
(d) 93% efficiency for treatment by the extended aeration activated sludge plant. Further treatment by a
biofilter increases BOD removal to 96% and oxidation pond increases it to 99+%.
H = Historical company data;
Field survey data
-------
The legislative history indicates that exemplary plants
shall be used to determine effluent limitations and where
possible, the average of the best plants shall be used as a
basis for such limitations. Because of the variation in the
data, it was necessary to develop a reasonable procedure to
identify the exemplary treatment plants.
The wastes from this category are organic and biological-
they will exert an oxygen demand in a stream or a treatment
plant. A key pollutant parameter is the parameter that
measures the biological oxygen demand, i.e., BOD. The
eleven exemplary plants have been identified from the
following profile of biological treatment systems. Only
those plants that had high treatment efficiencies and for
which representative historical data are available
(identified by asterisks in Table VII-3b) are used in
developing the effluent limitations. Furthermore, this BOD5
reduction (percent removal) could be accomplished by an?
number of treatment steps or any kind of wastewater
treatment technology (physical, chemical, biological or any
combination of these). Therefore, the identification of
exemplary treatment plants was made on the basis of BOD5
removals at the thirteen treatment plants. The historical
BOD5 data were arrayed in descending order of BOD5 removal
efficiencies, along with field survey data, (Table" VII-3b)
to delineate any distinctive pattern. The array indicated a
natural break in the BOD5 data with eleven of the thirteen
treatment plants with historical data achieving 91 percent
or greater BODji removals. On this basis, it is appropriate
to consider all of the plants achieving 91 percent BOD5
removal or greater to be exemplary plants and to consider"
all of the historical data from these plants in determining
reasonable treatment plant efficiencies to be used in
establishing effluent limitations.
In keeping with the intent of the Act and the legislative
history of basing effluent limitations on the average of the
results from the best or exemplary plants, the reasonable
treatment plant efficiencies are obtained by using the
average of the BOD5, COD and TSS data from the eleven
exemplary plants identified in Table VIl-3b.
On the basis of this analysis, six of the eleven exemplary
plants will need to increase their BOC5 performance and one
will need to increase its COD removal.
From historical performance data for the chosen exemplary
biological treatment plants, the following treatment
efficiencies are selected as being applicable. The average
efficiencies of the best treatment plants within a
179
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VII-3C
ARRAY OF TREATMENT PLANT PERFORMANCE DATA
Plant No.
Subcategory
Removal
(Percent)
COD
Removal
(Percent)
TSS in
Effluent
(mg/1)
Number of
Samples
05
09
19*
14*
10
16*
24*
21*
02*
20
22*
23*
18
26*
02*
11*
DE
A
ACD
E
C
BE
DE
AC
A
A
AC
BDE
D
ABCDE
C
C
99
99
97
97
96
96
94
94
93
93
93
93
92
92
91
91
96
95
91
52
80
70
75
35
83
79
85
6.2
4
296
6
122
28
147
666
380
197
18
2
177
362
71
4
1
360
96
4
9
105
360
360
4
89
94
2
360
360
106
08
04
15
25
B
AC
C
AC
83
80
80
65
57
75
23
22
47
157
350
2
2
Average values for the eleven plants identified as exemplary:
BOD5 Removal — 94%
COD Removal — 75%
Effluent TSS —
A, C
B, D, E
274
17.3
Exemplary Plants (with historical data)
180
-------
SS ^ I* H^ ^ ^tablished as the removal technology
that should be applied to these sutcategories. The average
values from an array of eleven plants identified as the best
follows*** treatment plants for a11 subcategories are as
BODJ5 removal — 94%
COD removal — 74%
Effluent TSS ~ 274 mg/i for subcategories A & c
17.3 mg/1 for subcategories B, D & E
However, the Agency decided to lower the BODS percent
removal from 94 to 90 in this interim final reg5lat££ ±n
oJnfJ *°.lessen the potential economic impact in ?he form of
capital investment in subcategories A and c. The decision
to extend the 90% reduction to all subcategories is based on
faciii^fo Y characteristic of complex manufacturing
teSilpiJ Covered by more than one subcategory and
treatment of combined wastes in which that attributable to a
specific process could not readily te identified.
In order to arrive at the 52 mg/1 maximum value for the
average of daily TSS values for any calendar month for
subcategories B D and E, exemplary plants number n. §4 fnd
23 are averaged and a variability factor of 3.0 has been
applied. This variability factor represents the 99 percen?
probability to long term average ratio. Percent
Although plant 02 is considered to be an exemplary plant for
the purpose of calculating BOD5 and COD removal
efficiencies, this plant does not qualify as an exempllrv
andnothfrr , TSJ ef f luents • Additional review o? thiJ^ant
and other plants in subcategories A and c is indicated
before a maximum value for the average of daily TSS values
for any calendar month can be indicated. Furthermore the
maximum TSS value for any one day has been defeSed for M
subcategories until additional data has teen collected
validated and statistically analyzed. collected,
floccuiator/clarifiers with polymer addition have been
eruen?, °£?r industries to reduce TSS in activated sludge
effluents, this process should also be applicable in the
in order to facilitate the economic analysis of the proposed
effluent standards, model biological treatment systems have
been developed for each subcategory. The prime design
181
-------
12/6/76
Table VI I -4
Summary of COD Carbon tsotherm Tests
Performed on Biologtcal Treatment Plant Effluent
Pharmaceutical fndustry
P1ant No- Subcategory Carbon Exhaustion Rate
19
08
14
11
20
05
A&CI
B
E
Cl
A
D&E
Ibs. COD Removed
Ib. Carbon
1.22
Test Not Conclus
Test Not Conclus
0.45
0.40
Test Not Conclus
Ibs.
tooo
2
ive
i ve
11
5
ive
Carbon
gal ,
• 98
.3
.4
Removal Observed
IffF
84
71
81
182
-------
12/6/76
Table Vtl -5
Summary of BQDs Carbon tsotherro Tests:
Performed On Biological Treatment Plant Effluent
Pharmaceutical Industry
Plant No. Subcategory Carbon Exhaustion Rate Highest Soluble BOD
1bs, BOP5 Removed"Ibs. Carbon Removal Observed
Ib. Carbon 1000 gal.T%T
19 ASCj 0.021 8.74 77
08 B 0.011 3.79 80
14 E Test not conclusive
11 C] Test not conclusive
20 A Test not conclusive
05 D&E Test not conclusive
183
-------
12/6/76
Table Vtl -6
Summary of TQC Carbon tsotherro Tests
Performed on Biological Treatment Plant Effluent
Pharmaceutical industry
Plant No. Subcategory Carbon Exhaustion Rate Highest Soluble TOC
Ibs. TOG RemovedIbs. Carbon Removal Observed
1b. Carbon 1000 gal . l%]
11 C 0.68 2.8 83
20 A 0.25 2.3 77
05 D&E Test not conclusive
184
-------
FIGURE VII-2
Activated Carbon Adsorption
Schematic
12/6/76
BACK WASH
HOLDING TANK
CARBON
FILL CHAMBER
RETURN TO
AERATION BASIN
FILTER INLET
WELL
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
PLANT EFFLUENT
CO
ui
T
- FROM CARBON COLUMN
BACK WASHING
FILTER WATER
HOLDING TANK
DUAL MEDIA
FILTERS
BACK WASH
PUMPS
-!>**
-O4-*
CARBON COLUMN
FEED PUMPS
ixl-
EDUCTOR
PUMPS
CARBON COLUMNS
REGENERATED
CARBON WASH
TANK
SPENT CARBON
DEWATERING
TANK
/uuinfun
•EFFLUENT
ALTERNATE
CARBON
MAKEUP
REGENERATION
FURNACE
QUENCH TANK
CARBONS"^
PUMPS
MAKEUP CARBON
CARBON
SLURRY
BIN
-------
parameter in BPT and NSPS treatment models is BOD5. removal,
whereas COD and TSS removal are considered as secondary
design parameters. In the case of EAT treatment models, COD
and TSS are the prime design parameters.
The use of biological treatment models for BPT is done only
to facilitate the economic analysis and is not to be thought
of as the only technology capable of meeting the effluent
limitations, guidelines and standards of performance
presented in this report.
Activated Carbon Adsorption
No activated carbon treatment systems were observed during
the survey. Consequently, to investigate the possibilities
of using activated carbon technology on the effluents from
biological treatment plants treating pharmaceutical
wastewaters, a series of carbon isotherms were run at
standard conditions using a contact time of 30 minutes. The
results of the carbon isotherm tests are presented in Tables
VII-4, VII-5 and VII-6. Average performance values for
subcategories A and C are as follows:
Highest Pollutant
Parameter Carbon Exhaustion Rate Removal Observed
(Ibs removed/lb carbon) (percent)
COD 0.69 80
BODJJ 0.02 77
TOC 0.48 80
Due to the limited number of tests, the number of
inconclusive carbon isotherm (equilibrium) tests and the
high variability of subcategory C wastes, it does not appear
practical at this time to transfer this technology from
other related industries based on this preliminary testing
and to set effluent limitations on the possible use of this
technology. However, for completeness, a schematic for an
activated carbon adsorption system is shown in Figure VII-2.
Since pilot plant continuous column tests on a range of
chemical synthesis wastes would be necessary to demonstrate
activated carbon performance on these wastes, fixed film
biological treatment (trickling filters or biodiscs) have
been chosen to meet the BAT limits in sutcategories A and C.
Each tertiary biological reactor and its associated final
clarifier follow the biological secondary process (activated
sludge or biological filter system) and precede multi-media
filtration followed by final effluent chlorination. Where
plant sites include large areas of vacant flat land, an
186
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VII - 7
RESULTS OF STUDIES OF FILTRATION OF
EFFLUENT FROM SECONDARY BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT *
Location
Type of
Filter
Infl.
Source
Media
Media Bed Hydr.
Size Depth Loading
. -— , ram inches eom/ft
Hanover Park
Illinois
i— i
CO
Bedford Twp.
Michigan
Ann Arbor
Michigan
State College
Pa.
Pressure
downf low
Pressure
Jownf low
Pressure
downflow
Pressure
Act.
si.
Act.
si.
Act.
si.
Act.
si.
Ccoal
(Sand
Multi-
media
Multi-
media
Sand
1.4 - 1.8 24)
0.8-1.0 12J
__
__
84
Average of eight
2
4
6
8
10
6
3-12
Suspended Solids
In
mg/1
16
15
16
13
18
15
42
6
Out
mg/1
7
5
6
6
8
3
5
1
removal efficiencies -
Removal
56
67
62
54
55
80
88
85
68%
Run
Length
(Hours)
90
15
22
31
12
i q
6
* From Table 9-1, Process Design Manual for Suspended Solids Removal
EPA 625/1-75-003 - Jan. 1975.
** Total bed depth = 36 inches
-------
oxidation pond holding a few days of average plant flow can
be substituted for the final biological reactor and
clarifier with similar results. In freezing climates, the
final oxidation device must be chosen after proper
consideration of mechanical problems caused by ice
accumulations.
BOD removal of 80% is used in sizing biological reactors for
the tertiary treatment steps in sutcategones A and C. This
efficiency takes into account the increased difficulty in
biologically oxidizing a waste which has already undergone
secondary treatment, as compared with a waste which has
received only primary treatment.
Multi-Media Filtration
While multi-media filtration for final effluent polishing
was not observed during the plant survey, the removal of
suspended matter by filtration is subject to transfer of
technology from water and waste treatment practice in a wide
variety of process industries.
Results of multi-media and pressure sand filtration tests
reoorted in Table 9-1 of EPA "Process Design Manual for
Suspended Solids Removal" are briefed in Table VII-7 to show
filter performance using secondary sewage effluent. The
average of eight tests at various leading rates shows 68%
TSS removal. Because pharmaceutical waste effluent,
particularly in the C subcategory, may contain finely
divided suspended matter, a 6 OX reduction of TSS by
filtration has been chosen.
The effluent limitations that must be achieved by all Plants
bv 1 July, 1977 through the application of the Best
Practicable control Technology Currently Available (BPT) are
baled upon an average of the best performance achievements
of existing exemplary plants.
When multi-media filtration is used, as in the BAT and NSPS
models, reductions in BOD and COD may cccur, due to Partxal
removal of organic matter comprising the TSS. Such
reductions in concentration are related to TSS removal by
factors to be applied to the reduction of TSS concentration
by filtration.
These factors have been developed from theoretical oxygen
requirements needed to oxidize assorted organic matter found
in activated sludge solids. (See development of supporting
logic in section X?) The factors are 0.5 times TSS removed
(for BOD5) and 1.2 times TSS removed (for COD).
188
-------
SECTION VIII
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
General
In order to evaluate the economic impact of treatment on a
uniform basis, end-of-pipe treatment models which will
provide the desired level of treatment were proposed for
each industrial subcategory. In-plant control measures have
not been evaluated because the cost, energy and non-water
quality aspects of in-plant controls are intimately related
to the specific processes for which they are developed.
Although there are general cost and energy requirements for
equipment items, these correlations are usually expressed in
terms of specific design parameters. Such parameters are
related to the production rate and other specific considera-
tions at a particular production site.
In the manufacture of a single product there is a wide
variety of process plant sizes and unit operations. Many
detailed designs might be required tc develop a meaningful
understanding of the economic impact of process
modifications. Such a development is really not necessary,
however, because the end-of-pipe models are capable of
attaining the recommended effluent limitations at the RWLfs
within the subcategories of this industry.
The major non-water quality consideration associated with
in-process control measures is the means of ultimate
disposal of wastes. As the volume of the process RWL is
reduced, alternative disposal techniques such as in-
cineration, pyrolysis and evaporation become more feasible.
Recent regulations tend to limit the use of ocean discharge
and deep-well injection because of the potential long-term
detrimental effects associated with these disposal
procedures. Incineration and evaporation are viable
alternatives for concentrated waste streams. Considerations
involving air pollution and auxiliary fuel requirements,
depending on the heating value of the waste, must be
evaluated individually for each situation.
Other non-water quality aspects such as noise levels will
not be perceptibly affected by the proposed wastewater
treatment systems. Most pharmaceutical plants can generate
fairly high noise levels. (85-95 decibels within the
battery limits because of equipment such as pumps,
compressors, steam jets, flare stacks, etc.) Equipment
189
-------
associated with in-process and end-of-pipe control systems
would not add significantly to these noise levels.
Extensive annual and capital cost estimates have been
prepared for the end-of-pipe treatment models for this
industry to evaluate the economic impact of the proposed
effluent limitations and guidelines. The capital costs were
generated at a ±25* confidence level as follows. Installed
equipment costs, exclusive of site preparation and certain
other ancillary work, were obtained by quotations from
vendors and verified from in-house experience. To the total
of these costs were added certain percentages to cover the
missing items of work. These are:
Piping at 20%
Electrical at 14%
Instrumentation at 8%
Site preparation at 6%
Addition of the cost of the land (at $15,000/acre) yielded a
nominal in place cost for the plant. Actual capital cost
was then computed by adding a further 30% for engineering
and contingencies.
The above calculations were made using equipment
appropriately sized for the hydraulic capacity and the RWL
developed for each subcategory. In addition, the data were
extended to higher and lower hydraulic capacities
appropriate for each subcategory.
Cost data are presented in Section VIII and Supplement A.
Annual costs are computed using the following cost basis:
Item cost allocation
Capital Recovery
plus Return 10 yrs at 10 percent
Operations and Includes labor and supervision.
Maintenance chemicals, sludge hauling and dis-
posal, insurance and taxes (computed
at 3 percent of the capital cost),
and maintenance (computed at 5 per-
cent of the capital cost).
Energy and Power Based on $0.03/kw hr for electrical
power.
The 10-year period used for capital recovery is that which
is presently acceptable under current Internal Revenue
190
-------
Service regulations pertaining to industrial pollution
control equipment.
The following is a qualitative as well as a quantitative
discussion of the possible effects that variations in
treatment technology or design criteria could have on the
total capital costs and annual costs.
Technology or Design Criteria
1. Use aerated lagoons and
sludge de-watering lagoons
in place of the proposed
treatment system.
2. Use earthen basins with
a plastic liner in place
of reinforced concrete con-
struction and floating
aerators.
3. Place all treatment tankage
above grade to minimize
excavation, especially if
a pumping station is re-
quired in any case. Use
all-steel tankage to
minimize capital cost.
U. Minimize flows and maximize
concentrations througii-^&x-^
tensive in-plant recovery and
water conservation, so that
other treatment technologies,
e.g., incineration, may be
economically competitive.
Capital
Cost Differential
The cost reduction
could be 20 to 40 per-
cent of the proposed
figures.
Cost reduction could
be 20 to 30 percent
of the total cost.
3. Cost savings would
depend on the in-
dividual situation.
Cost differential would
depend on a number of
items, e.g., age of
plant, accessibility
to process piping,
local air pollution
standards, etc.
Effects of Treatment Plant size and RWI upon Capital costs
Waste treatment plant capacities within each subcategory
vary over wide ranges depending upon the production
capacities of the operation served. Annual costs in this
document have been developed for models which represent the
average capacities and average raw waste loads of waste
treatment plants considered exemplary in each subcategory.
Because capital costs vary with capacity and with raw waste
load in a non-liner relationship, each model plant has been
scaled up and down to cover the capacity range of plants
reviewed, and to accommodate raw EOD5 and TSS loads of 0.5
191
-------
12/6/76
vo
NSPS
BAT
TABLE VIII - 1
BPT, NSPS and BAT Waste Treatment Cost Models - Pharmaceutical Industry
Component
Equalization Facilities
Neutralization Facilities
Primary Clarifiers (2)
Aeration Facilities (A.B.)
Nutrient Addition Fac.
Secondary Clarifiers (2)
Flow Measurement & Monitoring
Sludge Thickening Facilities
Aerobic Sludge Digestion
Vacuum Filtration (Sludge)
Sludge to Landfill or farming
Trickling Filter
Final Clarifiers (2)
Diversion Basin
Polishing Pond
Effluent Chlorination
Multi-Media Filtration (after BPT) X
Trickling Filter
Final Clarifiers
(2)
Multi-Media Filtration
(all following BPT Treatment)
Sub category
A B C D E
with A.B. separate with A.B. separate separate
X
X
X (4 days) X
X X
X X
X X
X
X X
X
X (dry) X (wet)
X
X
X X
T) X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X (4 days) X X
XXX
XXX
XXX
X
XXX
X X
X (dry) X (dry) X (wet)
X(lst stage)
X
X
X
XXX
XXX
X(2nd stage)
XXX
-------
and 2 times the averages. These relationships have been
expressed as multi-dimensional equations which yield
estimated capital costs for various combinations of
hydraulic capacity, BOD5 and TSS for each subcategory.
These equations for BPT levels of treatment are presented in
Table vill-4. Annual costs have been detailed only for the
five average capacity models having average raw waste loads,
as shown in Tables VIII 7 through 12.
Original cost data were computed in terms of 1972 dollars
which corresponds to an Engineering News Record (ENR)
Construction Index of 1780. Costs have been updated in 1976
by applying factors from 1.3 to 1.6, depending upon the
relative proportions of construction materials, labor and
,
S^?™1* •equiFment involved in each plant component,
designed, installed and ready to operate. Final capital
costs of the models are expressed in terms of May 1976
^M^TT^ th\ P1 construction index was 2330. See
Table VIIl-4 for tabulation of ENR indices.
The design considerations for the model treatment systems
(namely, the influent RWL) have been selected so that they
represent the average RWL expected within each subcateqory.
This generated cost data which would be representative when
applied to most of the RWL data within a particular
subcategory. Activated sludge is proposed in Section VII as
the BPT treatment system for subcategories A, B, C, D and E
supplemented in the subcategory c model by tertiary
trickling filtration with final clarification. The
activated sludge plant designs have been varied to generate
cost-effectiveness data for each subcategory. BPT treatment
na rti0n iS Fr°P°sed in Section VII as
NSP t e n econ
NSPS treatment for subcategories A, E, c, D and E BAT
the
xcept
"
treatment is the same as NSPS treatment for all
reamen or all
subcategories except that trickling filtration and final
s^ategory°A .odel?" """** 8lUd* tr**^ in the
BPT Cost Model
General flow diagrams for the BPT wastewater treatment
facilities for subcategories A, B, c, D and E are shown in
"
«abi H pre
a?S S * m ffch sub<=ategory model treatment facility,
listed in Table VIII-1. A summary of the general
basis is presented in Table VIII-2.
The following is a brief discussion of the treatment
technology available and the rationale for selection of
unit processes included.
193
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 1
Pharmaceutical Industry
BPT Cost Model - Subcategories A and C*
Lime
feed
Influent
Secondary
Flocculator-
Clarifiers
\
Aeration Basin
Neutralization
Basin
Primary
Flocculator-
Clarifiers
Trick. Filter for
To polishing pond
for A only
Chlorination
Final Clari-
fiers (2)
C only
Monitoring
Affluent
Polishing Pond
Return for
Vacuum Filter
Sludge Hauling
Retreatment
* C includes trickling filter and
final clarifiers after act. sludge
treatment
"A" secondary effluent passes
directly to polishing pond.
Diversion Basin
(Normally Empty)
-------
12/6/76
Fig. VIII - 2
Pharmaceutical Industry
BPT Cost Model - Subcategories B, D and E
Influent
Aerated
Equalization Basin
Vacuum Filter (D only)
Sludge Hauling
Secondary
Flocculator-
Clarifiers
-------
12/6/76
Table VIII- 2a
BPT Cost Model Design Summary
Pharmaceutical Industry
Subcategories A,B,C, D and E
Treatment System Hydraulic Loading
(Average design capacities)
Subcategory Hydraulic Loading
(cu m/day)fgpd)
A 1.162 307,000
B 75.7 20,000
c 3,058 808,000
D 265 70,000
E 113.6 30,000
Equalization
For plants with less than 24-hour/day and 7 day/week production, a
minimum aerated holding time of 1.5 days is provided, with continuous
discharge from the equalization basin over 24 hours. For plants
with less than 24-hour/day and 5 days/week production, 2-day equaliza-
tion is provided. Discharge from the basin will be continuous over
the seven days. For plants in subcategories A and C, which typically
operate 7 days per week, 24 hours per day, equalization is provided
within the four-day aeration basins, which are arranged for optional
series or parallel flow. Mixing of acids and alkaline wastes within
the four-day basins, together with the large volume of diluting
material, make corrosion resistant linings un-necessary in A and
C basins. Because .extremes of pH are not expected in B, D or E
wastes, plain concrete walls and bottoms are adequate in B, D and
E equalization basins.
Neutralization
The two-stage neutralization basin is sized on the basis of an average
detention time of 20 minutes. The size of lime and acid handling
facilities is determined according to acidity/alkalinity data collected
during the survey. Bulk lime-storage facilities (18 kkg or 20 tons) or bag
196
-------
12/6/76
Table VIII_ ?h
ist0^S ls,Pro0vlded 3 depending on plant size. Sulfuric acid storage
is either by 0.21 mj (55-gallon) drums or in carbon-steel tanks. L±
carbon-steel tanks. Lime or acid
slurryadd ' ac asn- "«
slurry is added to the neutralization basin from a volumetric feeder.
Acid is supplied by positive displacement metering pumps.
Primary Flocculator-clarifiers
TanH fJ°CC^a5or-clarifiers are provided only for subcategories
A and C, in which raw influent TSS typically exceed 200 mg/1. Clarifiers
are circular, with design overflow rates of 24.4 m3/day/m2 (60
Nutrient Addition
Aeration Basin
Aerators were selected on the basis of the following:
Oxygen Utilization: -, n v. n /, „„„
1.0 kg 02/kg BOD removed
-------
12/6/76
Table VIIT -2c
Secondary Flocculator-Clarifiers
The design basis for secondary flocculator-claKLfiers is the same as for
primary units, with an overflow rate of 24.4 m /day/m2 (600 gpd/sq
ft). Feed facilities for polymer addition are provided. Clarifiers are furnished
in duplicate, with adjustable sludge wasting facilities on the under-
flow return.
Sludge Thickener
The thickene^ provided was designed on the basis of a solids loading
of 29.3 kg/m /day (6 Ibs/sq ft/day). Thickeners are not included for
subcategories B, D, and E.
Aerobic Digester
The size of the aerobic digester is based on a hydraulic detention
time of 20 days. The sije of the aerator-mixers was based on an oxygen
requirement of 1.6 kg 0 /kg VSS destroyed and a mixing requirement of
0.044 HP/mJ (165 HP/million gallons) of digester volume.
Vacuum Filtration
The size of the vacuum filters was based on a cake yield of 9.8 kg/m2/hr
(2 Ibs/sq ft/hr) for biological sludge, and 19.5 kg/in / hr (4 Ibs/sq ft/hr)
for combined primary and biological sludge. Maximum running times of
16 hours for large plants and 8 hours for small plants are used. The
polymer system was sized to deliver up to 9.1 kg (20 Ibs) of polymer
per ton of dry solids.
Final Sludge Disposal
For all plants, sludge is disposed of at a sanitary landfill. Sludge
from B and E plants is hauled without dewatering, and could be
alternately spread on nearby agricultural land.
Design Philosophy
Individual units within the plant have been sized and arranged so that
they may be taken out of operation for maintenance without seriously
disrupting the operation of the plant. Plants have been designed
with maximum flexibility by providing a choice of operating options.
Diversion Basins
Empty earthen basins to hold 2 days average flow are provided for
A and C plants, to receive effluent which exceeds the maximum permissible
discharge limitations. A manually controlled pump is provided to return
the unacceptable effluent to an appropriate process component for re-
treatment. In emergencies these basins could accept temporary overloads
or inadequately treated wastes at any stage of treatment.
198
-------
12/6/76
Table VIII - 2d
Tertiary Treatment
To achieve the required BOD and COD reductions in the often complex
wastes of Subcategory C, a fixed film oxidizing reactor with final
clarification is used following the activated sludge process. In
the C model a lightly loaded (.30 kg BOD/day per cu m) trickling
filter, 3.7 meters deep, is included, to promote direct contact
oxidation of non-flocculating growths, followed by parallel final
clarifiers operating at 24.4 m3/day/m2. BPT Models for other sub-
categories do not include tertiary treatment, although it is shown
looo^6 A M°del 3t a h±8her level of treatment (BAT - to be achieved in
1983).
Polishing Ponds
Primarily for quiescent settling of persistent TSS, deep ponds of
up to 2 days detention are included in the A and C models. Accumu-
lated solids are to be removed by pumping from multiple bottom draw-
of fs.
Effluent Chlorination
Since human wastes are normally present, all models include manually
adjusted solution feed gas chlorination, with 30 minute contact time
at average flow, to control pathogens.
199
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VIII - 3
Typical BPT End of Pipe Waste Treatment Requirements
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategories A, B, C, D, E
Examples Used in Models
Sub- Product Flow
cateeorv kkg/day cu m/day
to
o
o
A
B
C
D
E
1.54 x 103 1162
.236 x 103 76
18.75 x 103 3058
8.8 x 103 265
— * 114
Infl. BOD
mg/1
4400
225
4560
659
210
Infl. COD
mg/1
10,120
653
10,488
1911
609
BOD Removal
%
90
90
90
90
90
Effl.
mg/1
440
23
456
66
21
Effl.
kg/day
511
1.7
1395
175
2.4
COD Removal
%
74
74
74
74
74
Effl.
mg/1
2631
170
2727
497
158
Effl.
kg /day
3057
12.9
8339
132
18
TSS
Effl. Limit
mg/1
105
52
105
52
52
* No tangible product in research type facilities
-------
Rationale for Selection of Unit Treatment Processes
Subcateqories A B C D and E
Equalization facilities are provided in order to minimize
fluctuations in the organic loading to the treatment plant,
as well as to absorb slug loads from reactor cleanouts and
accidental spills, and to minimize the usage of
neutralization chemicals. On the basis of average flow,
two- day detention time is provided for subcategory B, D, and
E flows. The larger detention time is provided to allow for
the hydraulic and organic variability inherent in
manufacturing facilities operating less than 24 hours per
day and seven days per week. The added detention time will
provide for continuous seven days per week operation of the
wastewater treatment facilities.
In subcategories A and C the equalization function has been
combined with aeration in the four-day aeration basins,
which are arranged in at least two cells with provision for
optional series or parallel flow.
Depending on the individual plant's product mix, it may be
necessary to neutralize the wastewater after equalization to
make it more amenable to biological treatment.
Neutralization facilities are provided for subcategory A and
C wastes; however, neutralization is not required for wastes
in subcategories B, D and E.
Primary clarification units are included for subcategories A
and C; however, they are not included in subcategory B, D
and E facilities because the TSS, RWL data indicated it
would not be necessary to remove TSS before biological
treatment.
The subcategory C model includes trickling filtration and
final clarification following the secondary biological
treatment to remove the additional EOD5 needed to achieve
94% BODjj reductions.
For all subcategories, a single-stage activated sludge
process has been selected for the model treatment systems
because of its demonstrated ability to efficiently treat
pharmaceutical wastes.
However, the single stage activated sludge treatment in the
subcategory C model is followed by a fixed film oxidation
reactor (trickling filter) and final clarifiers for the
following reasons:
201
-------
12/6/76
to
o
to
• YEAR
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
TABLE VIII - 4
ENGINEERING NEWS - RECORD (ENR) INDICES
Jan;
917.94
947.56
987.94
1039.05
1107.37
1216.13
1308.61
1465.07
'
1837.87
1939.47
2103.00
2300.42
Feb.
92O.40
957.43
997.43
1040.67
1113.63
1229.56
1310. 9C
1466.85
1849.70
1939.74=
2127.7:
2309.97
t
Mar.
922.41
957.70
998.32
1043.31
1117.15
1238.14
1314.45
1494. Of
1858.96
1940.19
2127.6!
2317.14
Apr.
926.27
957.43
1006.06
1043.54
1123.73
1248.85
1329. 2J
1511. 4C
1706.89
1873.6?
1961.25
2135.0:
2327.33
May
929.74
957.92
1014.03
1059120
1140.31
1258.33
1345.36
1542.95
1735.15
1880.26
1960.88
2163.72
2356.76
June
935.42
969.3'-
1028.6:
1067. 8f
1152.7!
1284. 9(
1368. 6C
1575.05
1760.78
1896.21
1993.47
2205.00
2409.51
July
944.97
977.08
1030.56
1078.45
1159.04
1282.77
1413.9]
1597.8
1771.56
1901.24
2041.36
2247.65
2413.60
Aug.
947.. 92
984.16
1033.37
1089.1'
1169.68
1292. 2C
1418.4<;
1614.78
1776.80
1920.79
2075.49
2274.3
2444.94
Sept.
947. 3C
986. 2C
1033 . 7::
1092.22
1184. 2C
1285. 2'-.
1422.54
1639.64
1785.25
1929.03
2088.82
2275.34
2468.38
Oct.
947.74
986.18
032. 40
1096.22
1189.08
1299.3.1
1433. 6<
1642.59
1793.75
1933.19
2094.74
2293.03
2478.22
Nov.
948.25
985.83
1032.71
1096.74
1190.73
1305.23
1445.13
1644.06
1807.60
1934.85
2094.06
2291.65
Dec.
948.12
987.7-
1033.71
1098.39
1200.82
1304.76
1445JD8
1654.75
1815.86
1938. 84
2098.26
2297.15
ANNUAL
INDEX
936.38
971.22
1019.03
1070.40
1154.04
1270.46
1379.66
1570.57
1752.23
1896.74
2019.31
j _______
2211.77
Source: Engineering News-Record, McGraw-Hill,
Base Year IS13=100 .
Treatment Optimization Research Program
Advanced Waste Treatment Research Laboratory
-------
12/6/76
Table VIII-5
BAT Cost Model Design Summary
Pharmaceutical Industry
Subcategories A, B, C, D, and E
Trickling Filter (1 stage in Plant A. Add 2nd stage in Plant C)
The tertiary trickling filter in the subcategory A plant is a 3.66 m
(12 ft) deep rock filter designed for 75% BOD removal at ,0.297 kg BOD pei
day per cubic meter (0.5 Ib/cu yd) of 2" to 4" rock. Recirculation pumps
for 2 to 1 recirculation are provided, but normal recirculation is
1 to 1. It is recognized that BOD removal becomes more difficult
as the degree of prior treatment increases.
Final Clarifiers (In plant A only)
Clarifiers following the tertiary trickling filter are furnished
as two parallel units, each designed for 24.4 m /day/m2 (600 gpd/
sq ft) overflow rate, as in the primary and secondary elarifiers.
Multi-Media Filtration (in plants A,B,C,D,and E)
Multiple pressure filters are provided, sized for average hydraulic loading
of 0.122 m /min/m2 (3 gpm/sq ft). -The filter media are 61 cm (24")
of anthracite (1 mm effective size) over 30.5 cm (12") of sand (0.4 to 0.5
mm effective size).
Backwash Facilities (in plants A,B,C,D and E)
Q 9
Backwash facilities provide rates up to 0.813 m /min/m (20 gpm/
sq ft) and a total backwash cycle up to 10 min. -duration. Backwash water is
taken from the. chlorine contact chamber and backwash waste is directed
to the aeration basin, to avoid hydraulic surging of elarifiers.
Placement in System
The tertiary trickling filter and final elarifiers in the A plant are
to follow the BPT secondary clarifier. The multi-media filters are
to follow the polishing ponds in A and C plants, and the secondary
elarifiers of B, D, and E plants, with suitable flow regulation of the
filter influent. In the C model a second stage trickling filter is inserted
in the BPT system between 1st stage trickling filter and final clarifier.
203
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VIII - 6
NSPS Treatment System Design Summary
Pharmaceutical Industry
Subcategories A,B,C,D and E
Multi-Media Filtration
Multiple pressure filters are provided, sized for average hydraulic
loading of 0.122 m /min/m2 (3 gpm/sq ft). The filter media
are 61 cm (24") of anthracite (1 mm effective size) over 30.5 cm (12")
of sand (0.4 to 0.5 mm effective size.),
Backwash Facilities
3 2
Backwash facilities provide rates up to 0.813 m /min/m (20 gpm/sq ft) and
a total backwash cycle up to 10 min. duration. Backwash water is taken
from the chlorine contact chamber and backwash waste is directed
to the aeration basin, to avoid hydraulic surging of clarifiers.
Placement in system
The multi-media filters are to be inserted between the secondary
clarifiers and effluent monitoring facilities in the BPT systems of sub-
categories B, D & E ahead of final chlorination.
In subcategories A and C filters follow the polishing pond, which
provides filter influent storage.
204
-------
1. Subcategory C wastes and combinations of
subcategories A and C wastes produce RWL's significantly
higher than RWL's in the other subcategories.
2. Some components of subcategory C wastes tend to
form non-flocculating organisms which resist gravity
separation and hence hinder sludge recirculation in the
activated sludge process.
3. Fixed film reactors provide intimate contact
between organisms and load in a manner which promotes
oxidation of single cell non-flocculating organisms.
4. Conditions are highly favorable for nitrification
of ammonia which is often present in subcategory C
wastes.
All treatment processes require sludge disposal. In the
biological process, for every pound of BOD removed from a
wastewater, approximately 0.6 pound of TSS (biological
solids) is produced which must be removed from the system.
BAT Cost Model
The BAT treatment model used for economic evaluation of the
proposed limitations for subcategory A includes the BPT
treatment model followed by trickling filtration, final
clarification and multi-media filtration. In subcategory C
the BAT model consists of adding multi-media filtration to
the BPT system, which already includes tertiary trickling
filtration and final clarification. Typical flow diagrams
for the selected model treatment facilities are shown in
Figures VIII-3 series. A summary of the general design
basis is presented in Table VIII-5. Treatment facilities
for subcategories B, D and E exclude the final trickling
filter and clarifier, but include multi-media filtration.
NSPS Cost Model
The NSPS end-of-pipe treatment model used for economic
evaluation of the proposed limitations for subcategories A,
B, C, D and E includes the BPT treatment model followed by
multi-media filtration. A typical flow diagram for the
selected model treatment facilities is shown in Figure VIII-
4. A summary of the design basis is presented in Table
VIII-6.
205
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 3 a
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
BAT COST MODEL
SUBCATEGORIES A & C
Tertiary (1st stage for A)
trickling (2nd stage filter for C
actually follows 1st
stage filter in BPT)*
Final Clarifier (2)
filter
To aeration
basin
to
o
To trick
Filter
for "A"
only
From last
clarifier
in BPT *
Chlorination
Multi media
filter
Polishing Pond
(part of BPT)
Return for re-treatment
Diversion Basin (Normally empty)
-------
K)
O
Backwash to
Aeration Basin
BPT Effluent
-N-
Multi media
Filters
Fig. VIII - 3 b
Pharmaceutical Industry
BAT Cost Model - Subcategories B, D, E
Chlorination
12/6/76
Monitoring
Effluen
Contact Chamber
0
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII-4
NSPS COST MODEL
SUBCATEGORIES A, B, C, D, AND E
Back-wash to
Aeration Basin
(A & C) BPT
Effl. from
polishing pond
-H-
(B, D & E) BPT
Effl. from sec.
clarifiers
O
00
Multi-
media
Filters
Chlorination
r M
u —
i — ^
Backwash Water
[-}
Monitoring
Effluei
Contact Chamber
Q
-------
Cost
Capital and annual cost data have been prepared for each of
these proposed treatment systems in accordance with the
considerations outlined in the General part of this section?
atLSS re^rements for implementing the proposed efflmi
standards are presented in Tables VIII-7 through VIII-12
Summaries of capital costs for the various subcategories are
presented in Tables VIII-14 through VI11-18.
A discussion of the possible effects that variations in
deSign Cr±teria ~S"^£ on
±S P—ted in the preceding
Wastes from certain plants within subcategories A and C mav
be amenable to sludge incineration becauL of the lar^e
quantities of sludge produced. However, if additio'nfl
energy in the form of auxiliary boiler fuel is required ?or
JnSn^^°n t!?iS altemative is discouraged. sludge
~™ *tl0n K°StS W6re n0t evaluated for thSse specific
cases in subcategories A and cr because the articular
Before comparing the variations in costs between each
subcategory, the following discussion is presenteHo helo
unit
oan Organically Hydraulically and
Dependent - Dependent Organically Dependent
Pump station Thickener Aeration basin
Sludge recycle pump
Clarifier
Diversion basin
Polishing pond
209
-------
12/6/76
NJ
H
O
TABLE VIII-7
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
BPT, NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations
(ENR 2330 - May 1976 Costs)
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategory A
Production 1.54.x 10 kg/day
Production Days Per Year
Wastewater Flow - cu m/day
(gpd)
BOD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
- kg/day
3
COD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
Annual Costs
Capital Recovery plus return at 10% @ 10 yrs.
Operating + Maintenance
Energy + Power
Total Annual Cost
Effluent
RWL
365
1162
307,000
—
4400
5113
___
10,120
BPT
365
1162
307,000
90
440
511
74
2631
$ 4,260,700
694,500
589,500
122,000
NSPS2
365
1162
307,000
91
396
460
76
2429
$ 220,000
35,900
29,100
1,000
BAT
365
1162
307,000
97
132
153
80
2024
$ 710,100
115,700
85,500
3,000
$ 1,406,000
$ 66,000
204,200
^From Table VII1-14
Incremental cost over BPT cost
Influent COD = 2.3 x influent BOD
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VII1-8
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
BPT, NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations
(ENR 2330 - May 1976 Cos.ts.)
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategory B
Production 0.236 x 10 kg/day
Production Days Per Year 3
Wastewater Flow - cu m/day
(gpd)
BOD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
- kg/day BOD
COD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
Annual Cost
Capital Recovery plus return at 10% @ 10 yrs.
Operating + Maintenance
Energy + Power
Total Annual Costs
Effluent
RWL
260
76
20,000
225
17
653
BPT
260
76
20,000
90
23
1.7
74
170
$ 908,400
148,100
115,400
2,000
NSPS2
260
76
20,000
93
16
U.5
75
163
$ 56,000
9100
16,000
200
BAT2
260
76
20,000
93
16
0.5
75
163
$ 56,000
9100
16,000
200
$ 265,500
$ 25,300 $ 25,300
2From Table VIII-15
^Incremental cost over BPT cost
^Treatment plant operates 365 days/yr
Influent COD = 2.9 x Influent BOD
-------
TABLE VIII-9
12/6/76
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
BPT, NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations
(ENR 2330 - May 1976 Costs)
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategory C
Production 18.75 x 10 kg/day
Production Days Per Year
Wastewater Flow - cu in/day
(gpd)
BOD Design Basis - % removal
- ng/1
- kg/day BOD
COD Design Basis3 - % removal
- mg/1
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS !
Annual Costs
Capital Recovery plus return at 10% @ 10 yrs
Operating + Maintenance
Energy + Power
Total Annual Cost
Effluent
RWL
365
3058
808,000
4560
13,945
10,488
BPT
365
3058
808,000
90
456
1395
74
2727
$ 8,137,300
1,326,400
945,700
264,000
NSPS2
365
3058
808,000
91
410
1265
76
2519
$ 380,000
62,000
42,000
6,000
BA£2
365
3058
808,000
97
137
418
80
2098
$ 1,272,600
207,400
113,300
8,000
$ 2,536,100
$ 110,000
$ 328,700
2From Table VIII-16
^Incremental cost over BPT cost
Influent COD = 2.3 x influent BOD
-------
TABLE VIII -11
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
BPT, NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations
(ENR 2330 - May 1976 Costs)
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategory D
12/6/76
Effluent
NJ
\~>
U)
Production 8.8 x 103 kg/day
Production Days Per Year3
Wastewater Flow - cu in/day
(gpd)
BOD Design Basis - % removal5
- mg/1
- kg/day
COD Design Basis4 - % removal
- mg/1
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
Annual Costs
Capital Recovery plus return at 10% @ 10 yrs.
Operating + Maintenance
Energy + Power
Total Annual Cost
1 - From Table VIII-17
2 - Incremental cost over BPT cost
3 - Treatment plant operates 365 days/year
4 - Influent COD - 2.9 x influent BOD
5 - Calculations show 90.9%BOD removal based on incremental removal with TSS
RWL BPT
260 260
265 265
70,000 70,000
90
659 66
!75 17.5
74
1911 497
$ 1,444,200
235,400
118,600
15,000
$ 369,000
NSPS2
260
265
70,000
91
46
12.3
75
478
$ 98,000
16,100
19,300
300
$ 35,700
BAT2
260
265
70,000
91
46
12.3
75
478
$ 98,000
16,100
19,300
300
$ 35,700
-------
12/6/76
TABLE VIII-12
WASTEWATER TREATMENT COSTS FOR
BPT, NSPS and BAT Effluent Limitations
(ENR 2330 - May 1976 Costs)
Pharmaceutical Industry - Subcategory E
Production Days Per Year
Wastewater Flow - cu m/day
to (gpd)
BOD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
- kg/day
COD Design Basis - % removal
- mg/1
TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS
Annual Costs
Capital Recovery plus return at 10% @ 10 yrs.
Operating + Maintenance
Energy + Power
Total Annual Cost
Effluent
RWL BPT
0-3654 260
114 114
30,000 30,000
90
210 21
24 2.4
74
609 158
$ 961,400
156,700
120,400
3,600
NSPS2
260
114
30,000
93
15
0.7
75
152
$ 58,000
9500
16,100
300
BAT2
260
114
30,000
93
15
0.7
75
15Z
$ 58,000
9500
16,100
300
$ 281,200
$ 25,900
$ 25,900
Table VII1-18
-Incremental cost over BPT cost
Treatment plant operates 365 days/yr
^.365 days/yr for large animals
Influent COD = 2.9 x influent BOD
-------
12/6/76
Ul
TABLE VIII-13
CAPITAL, AND ANNUAL O&M COSTS PER UNIT OF WASTE FLOW FOR TYPICAL PHARMACEUTICAL
INDUSTRY MODEL TREATMENT PLANTS
BPT Model Plant Costs
Sub-
category
A
B
C
D
E
Flow
cu m/day
(Rpd)
1,162
(307,000)
75.7
(20,000)
3,058
808,000
265
(70,000)
113.6
(30,000)
Capital
$/cu m/d
($/gpd)
3,667
(13.9)
12,000
(45.4)
2,661
(10.1)
5,450
(20.6)
8,463
(32)
Annual O&M
$/cu m/d
($/gpd)
612.3
(2.32)
1,551
(5.87)
395.6
(1.50)
504.2
(1.91)
1091.5
(4.13)
NSPS Model
Capital
$/cu m/d
($/gpd)
189.3
(0.72)
739.8
(2.80)
124.3
(0.47)
369.8
(4.9)
510.6
(1.93)
Plant Costs ^
Annual O&M*2'
$/cu m/d
($/gpd)
25.90
(0.10)
214
(0.81)
15.7
(.06)
73.96
(0.28)
144.36
(0.55)
BAT Model Plant Costs (1)
Capital
$/cu m/d
($/gpd)
611
(2.31)
416.2
(1.58)
Annual O&M
$/cu m/d
($/KPd)
76.16
(0.29)
(3)*
39.65
(0.15)
(3)*
(3)*
(1) Incremental costs over BPT Model
(2) Annual O*M includes chemicals, labor, maintenance, taxes, insurance and energy (no capital recovery)
(3)* BAT limitations are met by NSPS treatment
-------
The annual cost associated with hydraulically dependent unit
processes is not a function of effluent level. On the other
hand, the sizing of the organically dependent units should
theoretically vary in direct proportion to the effluent
level, e.g., reducing the BOD removal from 95 to 85 percent
should reduce the sizes of the sludge handling equipment by
approximately 10 percent. However, there are two
complicating factors: 1) relatively few sizes of equipment
are commercially available; and 2) capacity ranges are
broad. These two factors, especially in regard to vacuum
filters, tend to negate differentials in capital cost with
decreasing treatment levels. In other words, the smallest
equipment size commercially available is considerably
oversized for the calculated load.
The relationship between design-varying contaminant levels
and the design of aeration basins and oxygen transfer
equipment is somewhat more complex. The levels are
dependent on the hydraulic flow, organic concentration,
sludge settleability and the relationship between mixing and
oxygen requirements. For example, to reach a particular ef-
fluent level, a particular detention time at a given mixed-
liquor concentration will be required. The oxygen transfer
capacity of the aerators may or may not be sufficient to
keep the mixed liquor suspended solids in suspension within
the aeration basin. Therefore, required horsepower would be
increased to fulfill a solids mixing requirement. On the
other hand, the oxygen requirements may be such that the
manufacturer's recommended aerator minimum spacing and water
depth requirements would require that the basin volume be
increased to accommodate oxygen transfer requirements.
Costs abstracted from Tables VIII-7 through VIII-12 are
presented in Table VIII-13 on a per gallon basis. As
expected, the estimated total capital and operation and
maintenance costs for subcategory A and C are the highest in
terms of dollars but the lowest in terms of a per gallon
basis. This reflects the high wastewater flows that charac-
terize these two subcategories. In addition, these
wastewaters typically contain high concentrations of organic
material, which require relatively long aeration times and
more extensive sludge handling facilities.
The cost per gallon figures presented in Figure VIII-13
decrease with increasing flows, illustrating treatment
system economies of scale.
216
-------
TABLE VIII - 14
12/6/76
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS FOR BPT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
(90% Removal)
Capital Cost (ENR 2330 May 1976 Costs) Subcategory A - 1162 cu m /day (.307 MGD)
Unit Processes
Avg. Infl. BOD = 4400 mg/1
Avg. Infl. TSS = 3290 mg/1
Low Lift Pump Station 2 pumps-ea. 22 I/sec (350gpm
Equalization Basin
Equalization Basin Mixers
Neutralization Tanks 2 - 8.3 cu m (2200 gal)
Lime Addition Facilities -3 metric ton/day
Sulphuric Acid Addition Facilities
Primary Flocculator Clarifier 2 - 6.1 m (20 ft) di
Sludge Pumps 3 units
Aeration Basins 4 da7s 4655 cu m (1.23 mg)
Aeration Basin Aerators 4 - 10° HP fixed
Secondary Flocculator Clarifier 2 ~ 6<1 m (20nfsP
Recycle Pumps 5 units
Nutrient Addition Facilities
Polymer Addition Facilities
Sludge Thickener 10.7 m (39 ft) dia
Aerobic Digester 2309 cu m (.61 MG)
Digester Aerators 4 - 60 HP fixed
Sludge Pumps 2 units
Vacuum Filter 2 units ea. 18.4 sq. m (198 sq ft)
Chlorination
Flow Measurement & Sampling
Control Building
Diversion Basin 2323 cu m (0.61 mg)
Polishing Pond 2 days
)$ 70,000
19,500
101,000
1. 128,000
14,400
240,000
210,000
128,000
27,000
35,000
16,000
90,000
185,000
147,200
17,600
450,000
34,500
24,000
188,500
20,000
22,000
TOTAL SUBCATEGORY A (In place Constr. Cost)
(90% BOD Removal)
217
2,167.700
Piping 20% of A
Electrical 14% of A
Instrumentation 8% of A
Sitework 6% of A
Subtotal B (Miscellaneous Construction) 48% of A
Engineering 15% of A & B
Contingencies 15% of A & B
Subtotal C (Eng'g & Contingencies) 30% of A+B
Land fi Acres @ $15,000
1,040,496
962,458
90,000
••'•••' • •
$4,260,654
-------
TABLE VIII - 15
12/6/76
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS FOR BPT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PH,
Capital Cost (ENR 2330 May 1976 Costs)
Unit Processes
-_ICAL INDUSTRY
OD Removal\ubcategorv B 75.7 cu m/day (.02 MGD)
Avg. InfT. BOD = 225 mg/1
Avg. Infl. TSS = 80 mg/1
Low Lift Pump Station 2-6.3 I/sec (100 gpm)
Equalization Basin 151.4 cu m (40,000 gal)
Equalization Basin Mixers 3 - 2 HP floating
Neutralization Tanks
Lime Addition Facilities
Sulphuric Acid Addition Facilities
Primary Flocculator Clarifier
Sludge Pumps
Aeration Basins 56.8 cu m (15,000 gal)
Aeration Basin Aerators 2 - 2 HP floating
Secondary Flocculator Clarifier * Sq(?00 sq
Recycle Pumps 3 units
Nutrient Addition Facilities
Polymer Addition Facilities
Sludge Thickener
Aerobic Digester 23.3 cu m (6700 bal)
Digester Aerators 2 - 2 HP
Sludge Pumps 2 units
Vacuum Filter
Chlorination
Flow Measurement & Sampling
Control Building
Diversion Basin
Polishing Pond
$ 40,000
38,000
14,500
30,000
9,700
:t) 56,000
11,200
12,300
16,000
20,000
29,000
14,400
24,300
21,800
124,800
Subtotal A (Unit Process Components in Place)
462,000
20% of A
Electrical
14% of A
Ins t rument ation
of A
Sitework
6% of A
Subtotal B (Miscellaneous Construction) ^8% of A
15% of A & B
TOTAL SUBCATEGORY
B (In place Constr. Cost)
(90% BOD Removal)
221,760
Contingencies
Subtotal C (Eng'g &
Land i ^
15% of A & B
Contingencies) in 2 nf A+R
Acres @ $15,000
205,128
19,500
$ 908,388
218
-------
TABLE VIII-16
12/6/76
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS FOR BPT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
90% BOD Removal of whichPHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
Capital Cost (ENR 2330 May 1976 Costs) Subcategory C 3058 cu m/day (.808 MGD)
f ^ ?« ' JS = £5°
Avge. Infl. TSS = 447 m
Unit Processes
Low Lift Pump Station
Diversion Basin 6131 cu m (1.62 mg)
Control- Bldg.
Neutralization Tanks 2 ea 17 cu m (4500 gal)
Lime Addition Facilities (.82 met T) .9 TPD
Sulphuric Acid Addition Facilities
Primary Flocculator Clarifier && ' (5o ft)dia
Sludge Pumps 3 units
Aeration Basins 4 days 12,225 cu m (3.23 mg)
Aeration Basin Aerators 10-100 HP
Secondary Flocculator Clarifier
Recycle Pumps 3 units
Nutrient Addition Facilities
Polymer Addition Facilities
Sludge Thickener 12.5 m (41 ft) dia
Aerobic Digester 3520 cu m (.93 mg)
Digester Aerators 8 50 HP fixed
Sludge Pumps 2 units
Vacuum Filter 2 units ea 20 sq m (316 sq ft)
Chlorination
Flow Measurement & Sampling
Trickling Filter 23 m (75 ft) dia x 3.6 m
Final Clarifier 2 ea - 9.1 m(30 ft) dia
Polishing Pond 2 days
$ 142,000
36,000
325,000
34,500
142,000
24,000
260,000
14,400
420,000
525,000
260,000
14,400
70,000
16,000
106,500
220,000
256,000
11,200
600,000
48,000
28,000
315,000
260,000
29,000
Subtotal A (Unit Process Components in Place)
$ 4,167,000
20% of A
Electrical
14% of A
Instrumentation 8% of A
Sitework
6% of A
Subtotal B (Miscellaneous Construction) 48% of A
Engineering 15% of A & B
Contingencies 15% of A & B
Subtotal C (Eng'g & Contingencies)
Land 8 Acres @ $15.000
Qf A+fl
TOTAL SUBCATEGORY C
(90% BOD Removal)
(In place Constr. Cost)
219
2,000,160
1,850,050
120,000
$ 8,137,310
-------
TABLE VIII - 17
12/6/76
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS FOR BPT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
(90% BOD Removal) u
Capital Cost (ENR 2330 May 1976 Costs) Subcate
Avg
Unit Processes Avg
Low Lift Pump Station 2 - ea. 6.3 I/sec (100 gpm)
Equalization Basin 529.9 cu m
Equalization Basin Aerators 3 - 2 HP floating
Neutralization Tanks
Lime Addition Facilities
Sulphuric Acid Addition Facilities
Primary Flocculator Clarif ier
Sludge Pumps
Aeration Basins 280.1 cu m
Aeration Basin Aerators 2 - 10 HP floating
Secondary Flocculator Clarifier (I0 sq ft'
Recycle Pumps 3 units
Nutrient Addition Facilities
Polymer Addition Facilities
Sludge Thickener
Aerobic Digester 196.6 cu m (52,000 gal)
Digester Aerators 4 - 5 HP floating
Sludge Pumps 2 units
Vacuum Filter .75 sq m (8 sq ft)
Chlorination
Flow Measurement & Sanplin^
Control Building
Diversion Basin
Polishing Pond
Borv D 265 cu m/day (.07 MGD)
. Irifl. BOD = 6!>y mg/1
. Infl. TSS = 106 mg/1
$ 40,000
88,500
14,500
80,000
15,400
56,000
11,200
18,800
16,000
61,000
22,800
14,400
100,000
26,700
21,800
153,400
1 —
Subtotal A (Unit Process Components in Place) '
Piping 20% of A
Electrical 14% of A
Instrumentation 8% of A
Sitework 6% of A
Subtotal B (Miscellaneous Construction) 48% of A
Engineering 15% of A & B
Contingencies 15% of A & B
Subtotal C (Eng'g & Contingencies) 30% of A+B
Land 1.3 Acres @ $15,000
355,440
328,782
19,500
TOTAL SUBCATEGORY D (In place Constr. Cost) $1,444,222
(90% BOD Removal)
220
-------
TABLE VIII - 18
12/6/76
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL COSTS FOR BPT WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
(90% BOD Removal) not t
Capital Cost (ENR 2330 May 1976 Costs) Subcategory E " 11J'b cu m '
Unit Processes
,
Avg. Intl. BOD = 310 mg/1
Avg> Infi. TSs = 132 mg/1
Low Lift Pump Station 2-6.3 I/sec (100 gpm)
Equalization Basin 215-7 cu m (-057 mg)
Equalization Basin Mixers 3 - 2 HP floating
Neutralization Tanks
Lime Addition Facilities
Sulphuric Acid Addition Facilities
Primary Flocculator Clarifier
Sludge Pumps
Aeration Basins 109'7 cu m <-029 m8>
o n up
Aeration Basin Aerators "
2-5. 3 sq m
Secondary Flocculator Clarifier (100 sq ft)
Recycle Pumps 3 units
Nutrient Addition Facilities
Polymer Addition Facilities
Sludge Thickener
Aerobic Digester 47-3 cu m (12,500 gal)
Digester Aerators 2 - 2 HP
Sludge Pumps 2 units
Vacuum Filter
Chlorination
Flow Measurement & Sampling
Control Building
Diversion Basin
Polishing Pond
$ 40,000
47,000
14,500
42,000
29,000
56,000
11,200
12,300
16,000
26,000
9,600
14,400
24,700
21,800
125,000
Subtotal A (Unit Process Components in Place)
Piping 20% of A
Electrical 14% of A
Instrumentation 8% of A
Sitework 6% of A
Subtotal B (Miscellaneous Construction) 48% of A
Engineering 15% of A & B
Contingencies 15% of A & B
Subtotal C (Eng'g & Contingencies) 30% of A+B 217,400
Land 1.3 Acres @ $15,000
489,500
235,000
217,400
19,500
TOTAL SUBCATEGORY E
(In place Constr. Cost)
(90% BOD Removal)
221
$961,400
-------
Energy
For the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry, the primary
energy and power needs for BPT level treatment for all
subcategories are pumps, aerators and vacuum filters. Under
NSPS and BAT energy is needed for additional pumping
equipment in all subcategories. The overall impact on
energy for the industry is expected to be minimal. Energy
requirements associated with treatment and control
technologies are not significant when compared to the total
energy requirements for this industry. The percent of total
operating energy used for wastewater treatment ranged from
3.8 to 7.a% in plants manufacturing products in the A and C
subcagegories. A major use of treatment plant energy is for
sludge incineration: 32% of the enrgy consumed by wastewater
treatment plant operation was required for sludge
incineration in one case: 78% in another case.
Tables VIII-7 through VIII-12 present the cost for energy
and power for each treatment model for BPT, BAT and NSPS.
Sludge
Sludge cake quantities from vacuum filtration corresponding
to each treatment system design are presented in Supplement
A. The following table summarizes the sludge quantities
generated by the model plants:
Sludge Cake Wet Sludge
subcat- cu m/ cu yd/ kg/ Ibs/ cu m/ gal/
egory yr vr day day day day_
A 11,176 14,783 3,447 7,592 — --
n __ -- — — 0.64 168
C 17,035 22,533 5,255 11,575
D 240 317 74 163
E — ~ ~ — 0.94 312
Non-water Quality Aspects
The major non-water quality aspects of the proposed effluent
limitations and guidelines are ultimate sludge disposal and
noise and air pollution.
The BPT treatment model proposes sludge disposal by
landfilling of the dewatered digested biological sludge for
subcategories A, B, C, D and E with the possibility of
utilizing wet sludge in nearby farming operations. If
practiced correctly, landfilling of the digested biological
sludge does not create health hazards or nuisance
222
-------
conditions, sludge incineration is a viable alternative.
but not included in the treatment model due to high fuel
requirements and high cost. Sludge incineration is
practiced by some plants where sludge is incinerated along
with other solid waste and strong waste streams with high
fuel value, reducing the auxiliary fuel requirement to a
minimal level. High inert content wastes such as filter
cakes which contain heavy metals or corrosives should be
placed in a chemical waste landfill. Characteristics of a
chemical waste landfill are described in EPA publication,
Landfill Disposal of Hazardous Wastes; A REview of
Literature and KNown Approaches (EPA/530/SW-165)~I This
publication is available from Solids Waste Information, U.S
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
Noise levels will not be appreciably affected with the
implementation of the proposed treatment models. Most
pharmaceutical plants generate relatively high noise levels
and the pumps, aerators, mixers, etc. associated with end-
ot-pipe treatment plants will not add significantly to these
noise levels.
Odor should not be a problem for an activated sludge plant
if the plant is designed and operated properly. Covering of
the aeration basin for odor control is practiced in some
plants.
In addition to the cost information shown in this section
the Economic Analysis Section of EPA will issue an economic
document covering the economic and inflationary impact
analysis of the pharmaceutical regulation published in the
2^5 HRTStef T 11/17/76« ^quests for this document
should be directed to the Office of Planning and Evaluation,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460.
This publication is issued to satisfy Executive Order 11821.
Executive order 11821 (November 27, 1974) requires thai
manor proposals for legislation and promulgation of
regulations and rules by Agencies of the executive branch be
accompanied by a statement certifying that the inflationary
impact of the proposal has been evaluated. The
Administrator has directed that all regulatory actions that
lo re".in (1) annualized costs of more than
$100
oi. ,
, (2) additional cost of production more than 5%
of the selling price, or (3) an energy consumption increase
barrelS °f Oil Fe
impact statement.
223
-------
K«,
v
LOGARITHMIC »2 X 3 CYCLES
KEUFFEL ft ESSER CO. HAOE IN USA
46 7323
12/6/76
5 6 7891
7891
10,000
Treatment Plant Capacity
m3/day
-------
.FIGURE VIH - 6
EQUALIZATION BASIN
12/6/76
Cn
CO
•z.
1.000,^10
>
>
)
)
100.000
1
10,000
I — 1 r-
x
1 -
X
s*
*x
-1
X
x
X
x
^
1
1.5
^
10.000 100.000
+"-
(
w
X
x
EA
/COP
x
x
RTfr
vIC.
i
X
X*'
HEP
Lll\
X
x
0
Er
<-
-
- . — — , —
X
,X
EQUAL
i
M
(1
X
IZATIOr
ENR 17
1
JGUST.
ay 19 7<
SNR 23:
X
x
\l BAS
30
r
1972
JO)
x
x
IN
X
X
'
X
I
(X
x
I
-
4—-
Ix
r
p
1
1,000,000 10,0000
r; VOLUME, GAL.
-------
FIGURE VIE - 7
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CLARIFIER
INCLUDING MECHANISM
12/6/76
1.000.000
to
p
V)
O
O
2 100,000
<
CO
10,000
RECTANGULAR
CIRCULAR
PRIMARY & SECONDARY CLARIFIER
INCLUDING MECHANISM
. ENR: 1780
AUGUST. 1972
May 1976
(SUE ,?33fl)
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
SURFACE AREA, Ft2
-------
NJ
M
100,000
q
Q
10,000
1,000
10,000
FIGURE VIII - 8
NEUTRALIZATION TANKS INCLUDING MIXERS
12/6/76
(Two Units)
NEUTRALIZATION TANKS
[INCLUDING MIXERS
100,000
1,000,000
10,000,000
FLO'.V RATE, GPD
-------
FIGURE VIII - 9
NEUTRALIZATION LIME CHEMICAL ADDITION
FACILITIES INCLUDING STORAGE, FEEDING
SLAKING, PUMPS, AND MIXERS.
12/6/76
1,000,000
NJ
to
00
t-
oo
o
u
in
100,000
10,000
<
/
/
/
f
/
1
/
/ ,
' /
/
S
/
\s
/
/
S
/
f
/
/
\
/
\
/
/
//
C- Ca(OH)2
— 1 DRY STOR/
NEUT
/
''/
/
VGE.
'
, CaO
-JLIMESLAKir
RALIZA
rioN
LIM!
MG
CHEMICAL ADDITION FACILITIES
INCLUDING STORAGE, FEEDING,
SLAKING, PUMPS, MIXERS
ENR 1780
AUGUST, 197
May 1976 1
(ENR 2330]
2
0.01
0.1
1.0
10.0
LIME FEED RATE, TONS'DAY
-------
FIGURE VIII - 10
AERATION BASIN - CONCRETE BASINS
12/6/76
1,000,000
ro
to
VO
O
O
100,000
10,000
CONCRETE
10,000
AERATION BASIN
CONCRETE BASINS
ENR: .1780 |
- AUGUST, 1972 —
- May 1976
(ENR 2330)
100,000
1,000,000
10,000,000
BASIN VOLUME, GAL.
-------
oez
INSTALLED COST, S
o
2
w
H
ffi
H
2
1
n
o
2
n
t-
CTl
CT>
-------
FIGURE VIII - 12
FIXED-MOUNTED AERATORS
12/6/76
100,000
to
u>
cc
LJU
0.
h-
g 10,000
O
Q
OJ
1.000
-i SINGLE-SPEED
z
z
TWO-SPEED
FIXED-MOUNTED AERATORS
I I
ENR 1780
AUGUST, 1972
May 1976
(ENR 233
10
100
1,000
AERATOR HORSFPOr. FR PER UNIT
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 13
FLOATING AERATORS
100,000
NJ
u>
to
<£
tu
o_
00
O
O
Q
LU
10.000
1,000
FLOATING AERATORS]
INCLUDING ANCHORS AND CABLES
MAY 1976 (ENR 2330)
10
100
1,000
AERATOR HORSEPOWER PER UNIT
-------
FIGURE VIII - 14
VACUUM FILTERS INCLUDING PUMPS,
RECEIVERS, CONVEYOR & BUILDING
12/6/76
KJ
CO
CO
1,000,000
CO
O
cj
Q
LU
to
2
100,000
10,000
-VACUUM FILTERS
INCLUDING PUMPS, RECEIVERS,
CONVEYOR,& BUILDING
— ENR 1780-
AUGUST, 1972
May 1976
-(ENR 2330)
10
100
1,000
VACUUM FILTER SURFACE f,REA FT2
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 15
MULTI-MEDIA FILTERS INCLUDING FEED
WELL, PUMPS & SUMP
to
U)
CO
o
o
2
300,000 r [ T
100,000
10,000
L
,„
-
/
10,000
*
xx
.x
^x^
X
x'l
X*
s
x
/
x
x
x
x
X
*A
^^
x^
MULTI-P
INCLUD
1 PUM
~ 1 r
'M
1
Ma
(E
s*
/^
/
i/IEDIA F
ING FEE
?S, & SI
i
MR: 178
GUST,!
•f 1976
IR 233
X
X
ILTEF
D WE
JMP
i
0
372 —
))
**-
s
(S
LL,
x
x^
100,000 , | 1,000,000
1 ci rvv a ATP r:r-n
~~[
x
10,000,000
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 16
CHLORINATION FACILITIES INCLUDING
CONTACT TANK, FEED, STORAGE, HANDLING
to
Ul
CHLORINATION FACILITIES
[INCLUDING CONTACT TANK
'FEED, STORAGE, HAND LING
j ENR: 1780
1 AUGUST, 1972
10,000.000
FLOW RATE, GPD
-------
12/6/76
FIGURE VIII - 17
LOW LIFT PUMP STATION INCLUDES
STRUCTURE, PUMPS, PIPING, CONTROLS,
BAR SCREENS, ELECTRICAL, HEATING, AND
EARTHWORK.
1,000,000
100,000
o
u
x"-
^—
^
x"^
,— •-
^
^*
•^
U-^
^
^^0
{
,
x'
u**
,»-*•
i
,x*
^
x*
_x"r
-x^
-
INCLU
CONTRC
LOW LIFT
3ES STRL
3LS, BAR
HEATIN
• Ef
(EN
/
PUMP
JCTUR
SCREi
3, EAR
t
>JR 17
3UST,
1976
R 23:
x
s
/
/
STATION
E, PUMPS, PI
EN(S), ELECT
THWORK
i
80
1972
JO)
/
Pll\
Rl
/
G,
CA
/
L,
innnnno 10,000,000
10,000
100.UOO
FLOW RATE, GPD
236
-------
SECTION IX
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE (EPT)
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Based on the information contained in Sections III through
VIII of this report, effluent limitations and guidelines
commensurate with the Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available are presented in Table IX-1. The
effluent limitations and guidelines specify required percent
reduction of BODI5 and COD, based on removals attainable
through the application of BPT pollution control technology
described in Section VII of this report. It should be
emphasized that the removal efficiencies selected for
determining BPT effluent limitations guidelines represent
average historical values of exemplary waste treatment
facilities within the pharmaceutical manufacturing point
source category. For subcategories A and C, model BPT waste
treatment technology includes equalization as part of the
aeration facilities, neutralization, biological treatment,
polishing pond and chlorination, with an empty diversion
basin. In the subcategory C model a trickling filter and
final clarification follow the usual secondary biological
treatment, sludge is digested, filtered and hauled to a
landfill. For subcategories B, D and E the BPT model
includes aerated equalization, biological treatment and
final chlorination, with aerobic sludge digestion before
disposal on land.
Historical data and observations during plant visits show
wide variations in TSS reduction, particularly in
subcategories A and C. Although polymer addition has been
used successfully to reduce TSS in other industrial wastes,
there is limited evidence to show that polymer addition will
consistently yield predictable results with the highly
variable types of subcategory A and C pharmaceutical wastes.
The recommended limits in Table IX-1 are realistic values
based on exemplary performance. However, it is not the
intent of these effluent limitations and guidelines to
specify either the unit wastewater flow which must be
achieved, or the wastewater treatment practices which must
be employed, at the individual pharmaceutical plants.
Because of the variations of RWL between and within
subcategories (Section V) it was not possible to put the BPT
effluent limitations on a per unit of production basis.
These variations are caused in part because of the non-
237
-------
continuous nature of many of the production processes, the
different raw material/product ratios, the wide range in
yields and the different technologies that are used to
produce the same product. Therefore, the removal
efficiencies identified in Section VII are to be applied to
the waste loads entering the treatment facility.
In achieving the effluent limitations for the pharmaceutical
manufacturing point source category, these concepts should
be followed:
1. The pharmaceutical plant shall provide a wastewater
treatment plant to reduce the concentrations of
pollutants to the lowest possible level in the effluent.
2. The noted percentage removals of BOD5 and COD and
effluent TSS concentration shall be attained in the
treatment plant. Percentage removals shall be
calculated on the basis of monthly average kilograms per
day of pollutant into and out of the plant. Removal of
mycelia, evaporation of spent broth for disposal
otherwise than to the wastewater system, stripping
organic solvents out of waste streams, recovery or
removal of any materials from the wastes, incineration
of liquids able to support combustion, or the hauling
away of part of the wastes shall not be considered as a
part of the wastewater treatment system for the purposes
of calculating the wastewater treatment plant
efficiency.
3. Wastewater streams other than the main process streams
and sanitary wastes, i.e. cooling waters, surface
drainage, etc., shall be considered as separate
discharges if they are not mixed with the process
wastewater stream before its final discharge.
H. If different process streams and/or sanitary wastes are
treated in different wastewater plants and the effluents
are mixed before they discharge, the entire system shall
be treated as one plant, but if the wastes discharge
separately, then each plant must meet the performance
requirements.
As indicated in Section VII, the following treatment
efficiencies, based on historical treatment plant data were
selected as being applicable for the determination of BPT
effluent limitations and guidelines for all subcategories:
238
-------
BOD5 - 9Wt removal efficiency
COD - 1H% removal efficiency
? ,BOD^ Deduction (percent removal) could be
accomplished by any number of treatment steps or any kind of
wastewater treatment technology (physical* Chemical
biological or any combination of these). cnemical,
However, the Agency decided to lower the BODS percent
^
es ooL C5ara^terist^ of complex manufacturng
ri J f covejed b* more than one subcategory and
treatment of combined wastes in which that attributable to a
specific process could not readily be identified?
Effluent TSS ~ 274 mg/1 for subcategories A S c
17.3 mg/1 for subcategories B, D & E
in order to arrive at the 52 mg/1 maximum value for the
average of daily TSS values for any calendar month fSr sub-
categories B D and E, exemplary plants number U, 24 and 23
?his aVva?i!bia^ a V?rifllity faCt°r °f 3-° wa^
t ,_.yariaoility factor represents the 99
probability to long term average ratio.
that are used as exemplary plants for BOD5
A ?"d c ^°P^ fro., 27« mg/i to 178
«-Pl«*
239
-------
Table IX
Trial Calculation - Effluent TSS for Subcategory A and C
Exemplary Plants Without Plant #2
Plant Subcategory Eff. TSS mq/1
19 A C D 296
21 AC 147
22 AC 197
26 A B C D E 177
11 C 71
Average = 178
The above TSS limitations for BPT were derived by using a
similar logic path that was employed to generate the BOD5
and COD removal efficiencies. Although the data shows high
TSS values for subcategories A and Cr it is believed that
the TSS limitation could fce reduced to 100 mg/1
concentration where there is a significant content of
chemical synthesis waste and fermentation wastes and to 20
mg/1 where the influent is essentially free of chemical
synthesis waste and fermentation waste.
When these BOD5 and COD removal efficiencies are applied to
influent BODJ5 and COD values of a specific plant the
remainders are those values which are the proposed BPT
effluent limitations, regardless of Subcategory. The
limitations are not to be exceeded by the average of 30
daily analyses of a specific effluent when sampled for 30
consecutive days.
Although the BPT regulation published in the Federal
Register and supported by this document does not indicate
the maximum day limitations for BOB5, COD and TSS, it is
expected that the permit writers will handle this issue on a
case by case basis. Similarly, those known pollutants at a
site specific location will be assigned appropriate effluent
limitation values by the permit writer using «*0 CFR 124 and
125. To assist the permit writer in arriving at reasonable
maximum day limitations, daily variability factors and the
ratio of daily variability factors to monthly variability
factors are reported in Table XIII-3 in Section XIII.
240
-------
TABLE IX-la
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products Subcategory
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
wnich may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of the best practicable control technology currently available:
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BODS in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BODS multiplied bv a
variability factor of 3.0. ~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of COD in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 74% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD multiplied bv a
variability factor of 2.2. *
The long term daily average raw waste load for the pollutant BODS
and COD is defined as the average daily mass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
month period within the most recent 36 months, which shall include the
greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the point sources
covered by this subpart of the point source category, calculation of
raw waste loads of BODS and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated with
separable mycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided that
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be included in
calculation of raw waste loads. These practices of removal, disposal
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mvcelia
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration of concentrated
solvent waste streams (including tar still bottoms) and broth
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system. This
regulation does not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loaas in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rather
describes the rationale for determining the permit conditions. These
limits may be achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
241
-------
12/6/76
TABLE IX - Ib
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory B - Extraction Products
Subcategory
The allowable discharge for the pollutant parameters
BOD5 and COD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
correspondinq to the maximum production for a
-------
12/6/76
TABLE IX - Ic
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis
Products Subcategory
11 for the Pollutant parameters
h i Sha11 bS exPress^ i* -"ass ner unit time
shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
wi,.h an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum Eroduction for a qiv^n
pharmaceutical plant,
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 90% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0. ~
|he allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than fn% reduction in the
long _ term daily averaqe raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
Jhe long term dailv average raw waste load for th=>
pollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
I?ass of each pollutant influent to the wastewat«r
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent. 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equitv in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of th« point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and _ COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any wast°
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads-'
provided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reus^
include ^recovery of solvents from waste streams ~and
incineration of concentrated solvent wast- streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation do-s
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any spocific
practice. but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may bp
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of proqrarrs and practices.
The PH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9 0
standard units. *
243
-------
12/6/76
TABLE IX - Id
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory D - Mixing/Compounding and
Formulation Sutcategory
The allowable discharge for the pollutant parameters
BOD5 and COD shall be expressed in mass per unit time
and shall represent the specified wastewater treatment
efficiency in terms of a residual discharge associated
with an influent to the wastewater treatment plant
corresponding to the maximum 2ro<3uction for a
-------
12/6/76
TABLE IX - le
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory E - Research Subcategory
-------
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE (EAT)
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Effluent limitations and guidelines commensurate with the
best available technology economically achievable are
presented in Table x-1. BAT effluent limitations and
guidelines were developed by evaluating those end-of-pipe
modifications which seemed applicable for achieving better
effluent quality. The BAT effluent limitations and
guidelines presented in this section can be attained by
adding various combinations of end-of-pipe technologies
outlined in Section VII. in subcategory A, this consists of
inserting a trickling filter, final clarifier and multi-
media filter between the chlorination facilities and
polishing pond of BPT treatment facilities. BAT effluent
limitations and guidelines for sutcategories B, D and E are
based on the insertion of multi-media filters ahead of the
chlorination facilities of BPT systems. To achieve BAT
performance in subcategory c, a second stage trickling
filter is inserted ahead of the EPT final clarifier and
multi-media filters are inserted ahead of effluent
chlorination.
BAT effluent limitations and guidelines were developed by
the following procedures:
1. Although the BPT treatment models can produce
reasonable levels of BOD5 in the effluents of all
subcategories it is recognized that control of COD and TSS
is somewhat incidental to the reduction of BOD. Hence in
BAT treatment the emphasis should be on improvement in COD
and TSS removal.
2. To attack the more refractory substances such as
solvent residues and organic acids, additional biological
treatment by fixed film reactors is proposed. Tricklinq
filtration and final clarification have already been
included in the BPT system for subcategory C. Further
biological treatment of subcategory A and subcategory c is
necessary to achieve the proposed EAT limitations.
3. Wastewater Filtration Design Consideration, an EPA
Technology Transfer Publication dated July 1974 and Process
Dgsigji Manual for Upgrading Existing Wastewater Treatment
Plants, an EPA Technology Transfer Publicationdated
247
-------
October, 1974, were reviewed. From these sources and from
the contractor's experience in filtration of chemically
treated potable water, it was concluded that multi-media
pressure filters operating in parallel at an average filter
rate of 3 gpm/sq ft for reasonable filtration cycles can
reduce TSS by at least 75%.
4. Although a fixed film biological reactor and its
associated clarifiers have been included in the BPT model
for subcategory Cr the needed TSS stabilization and further
oxidation to reach BAT goals cannot be achieved through
reduction of TSS alone. Therefore, the BAT system for the C
model uses the factorial reduction of EOD and COD incidental
to multi-media filtration and provides the remaining needed
oxidation in a second stage trickling filter.
5. To express TSS limitations as concentrations, the
percent removals were applied to EPT effluent concentrations
found in reviewing the operating results of the exemplary
plants in the subcategory B-D-E groups.
6. To determine maximum day limitations and maximum
thirty day limitations for BODJ3, COD and TSS in each of the
subcategories, variability factors are extracted from Table
XIII-3. Note that the BPT monthly variability factors for
BODjj, COD and TSS published in the Federal Register, Vol.
41, No. 223 on Wednesday, November 17, 1976 are more lenient
than the monthly variability factors reported in Table XIII-
3. This difference occurred because the monthly variability
factors reported in Table XIII-3 are from a larger data base
than was used for the earlier monthly variability factor
reported in the Federal Register.
248
-------
TABLE X-la
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
which may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of tne best practicable control technology currently available:
m»« « effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall be expressed in masJ per unit
time and snail specifically reflect not less than 97% reduction in the
rtctL oTT.T. "" ^ ^^ °f
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
° anv.^lendar m°»th shall be expressed in mass per unit
sPeciflca11* reflect not less than 80% reduction in the
°f C°D ^"iplied by a
and COD ±a°S2f?er!? dai1^ avera9e raw waste load for the pollutant BODS
?£?i V «- i? aS the avera?e dailY ™ass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
*"*** 3
dbyhP^^^
oeT? Stf.10f f -°f B°?l and COD f<" the purpose of9 determining S?DES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated w??h
separable mycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided Sat
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be inclSdJd ir
or reis^?^ *** ™*^ ^^ ' ^^ Practices of removal? SiSposS
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mvcelia
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration o? concen^atJd
coi^S /5Sf ^treamS (includin9 tar still bottoms) anS b?o?h
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system This
lolds^in11 f°acl nnorPdohibit ±nC^±On of such ™tes in Sf^w waste
loacis in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rathpr
"mits mav S ^^^ i^ determining the permit^ondiSona? ?hese
°f SeV6ral °r * C™»^™ thereof
The PH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
249
-------
12/6/76
TABLE X - Ib
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY B
The allowable effluent, discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BODJ in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BCD5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically _reflect not less than 75% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BODj> and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure eguity in regulating discharges from t;he
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BCD5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the jbase numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with ^olvents in those raw waste loads;
jgrovided that residual amounts of jsolvents remaining
after the practice ^f recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents _from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste jstreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several- or a combination thereof
of prograrrs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month .shall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
250
-------
TABLE X - 1C 12/6/76
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCAXEGORY C
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BGD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 97% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BCD5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 80% reduction in the
long term daily Average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BOD5 and COE is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of EOD_5
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with ^solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of ^solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste ^streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not. prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads ±n fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
251
-------
12/6/76
TABLE X - Id
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY D
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily averaqe mass of ECD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
lonq term daily averaqe raw waste content of EOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharqe limitation for the
daily averaqe mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 75% reduction in the
lonq term daily jveraqe raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability _factor of 2.2.
The lonq term daily averaqe raw waste load for the
pollutant EOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within _the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in requlatinq discharqes from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source cateqory, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
and COD for the purpose of determininq NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) jshall exclude any waste
load associated with jsolvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of ^olvents remaininq
after the practice ^f recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents Jrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste ^treams
(includinq tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads jln fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but jrather describes the rationale for
determininq the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of proqrams and practices.
The averaqe of daily TSS values for any calendar
month jshall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0
standard units.
252
-------
12/6/76
TABLE X - le
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATECORY E
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
lonq terrr daily Average raw waste content of BODS
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0. ~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 15% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
jgollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within _the most recent 36 months.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of PODji
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the Jbase numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste
load associated with solvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of ^solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents from waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
cf programs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month shall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
253
-------
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS)
General
The term "new source" is defined in the "Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972" to mean "any
source, the construction of which is commenced after the
publication of proposed regulations prescribing a standard
of performance". Technology applicable to new sources shall
be the Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology
(NSPS), defined by a determination of what higher levels of
pollution control can be attained through the use of
improved production process and/or wastewater treatment
techniques. Thusr in addition to considering the best in-
plant and end-of-pipe control technology, NSPS technology is
to be based upon an analysis of how the level of effluent
may be reduced by changing the production process itself.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
New source performance standards commensurate with NSPS for
the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category are
presented in Table XI-1. These performance standards are
attainable with the end-of-pipe treatment technology
outlined in Section VII, which consists of the addition of
filtration to the treatment system proposed as BPT
technology for subcategories A, B, C, D and E.
For subcategories B, D and E, new source performance
standards are identical to BAT effluent limitations and
guidelines. For subcategory A, the new source performance
standards are based upon additiop of ir.ulti-media filtration
to the proposed BPT systems, without the tertiary oxidation-
clarification steps proposed to meet BAT limitations. The
rationale for determining NSPS limitations is the same as
that applied to BAT treatment in Section X, except that the
tertiary biological oxidation step is omitted. For
subcategory C, new soruce performance standards are based on
multi-media filters following the polishing pond which
provides filter influent storage plus BPT unit operations.
Although specific processes have been mentioned in
connection with estimates of costs for model plants, the use
of other equivalent processes is not precluded.
Applicable daily and monthly variability factors for BODS
COD and TSS can be extracted from Table XIII-3 in
XIII.
255
-------
TABLE Xl-la
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Subcategory A
The following limitations establish the quantity or quality of
pollutants or pollutant properties, controlled by this paragraph,
which may be discharged by a fermentation products plant from a point
source subject to the provisions of this paragraph after application
of the best practicable control technology currently available:
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of BOD5_ in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BODS multiplied by a
variability factor of 3.0. ~~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the daily average
mass of COD in any calendar month shall be expressed in mass per unit
time and shall specifically reflect not less than 76% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD multiplied by a
variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the pollutant BODS
and COD is defined as the average daily mass of each pollutant
influent to the wastewater treatment system over a 12 consecutive
month period within the most recent 36 months, which shall include the
greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the point sources
covered by this subpart of the point source category, calculation of
raw waste_loads of BOD5_ and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES
permit limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the percent
reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste load associated with
separable mycelia and solvents in those raw waste loads; provided that
residual amounts of mycelia and solvents remaining after the practice
of recovery and/or separate disposal or reuse may be included in
calculation of raw waste loads. These practices of removal, disposal
or reuse include physical separation and removal of separable mycelia,
recovery of solvents from waste streams, incineration of concentrated
solvent waste streams (including tar still bottoms) and broth
concentrated for disposal other than to the treatment system. This
regulation does not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific practice, but rather
describes the rationale for determining the permit conditions. These
limits may be achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0 - 9.0 standard units.
256
-------
12/6/76
TABLE XI -lb
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY B
Ihe allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall
f;lyfleCt n0t leSS than S1% "Auction in the
H u raw waste content of EOD5
by a variability factor of 3.0 ~
Ihe allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
niiJif --Vf?a9e *?38S °f C°D in any calendar month shall
lona £™ "X ^fflect not iess than 75* reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2
i «. 1fn™cerm daily avera9e raw waste load for th*
lutant BODJ and COD is defined as the average daily'
JaC? P°Ilutant influent to the wastewater
y em °Ver a 12 consecutive month period
' which sha11 include
uo
30 assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpar? of the ooint
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BOD5
.-rsssr tr^ic
..
S
stInda?S units. W" t- »»•• of 6.0 - ,.o
257
-------
12/6/76
TABLE XI - Ic
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY C
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BCD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 91% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of BCDj>
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 16% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
jgollutant BOD_5 and COD is defined as the average daily
jnass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within jthe most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, Calculation of raw waste loads of BCD^
and CCD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any waste
load associated with jsolvents in those raw waste loads;
provided that residual amounts of jsolvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents Jrom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste jstreams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads _in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but gather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may be
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of programs and practices.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
258
-------
12/6/76
TABLE XI - Id
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES
SUBCATEGORY D
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of BOD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less .than 91* reduction in the
long term daily Average raw waste content of BOD5
multiplied by a variability factor of 3.0. ~
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than 75% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
pollutant BOD5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months, which shall include
the greatest production effort.
To assure equity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
£alculati°» °f raw waste loads of BOD5
*nrf™nu
??»•??• h? PurP°se of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) shall exclude any wastl
load associated with solvents in'those raw wast* loads?
altlr thVn™ ,residuf amounts of solvents reining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
loadS™.""* 6 included in calculation of raw waste
loads These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
inclneratTon°Vefy °f solvents &™ »aste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
not croS?^" iStU1 *0ttoms>« Ihis regulation loes
loads in" f^?i0n f SUCh Wastes in tne raw waste
i«^- ~ t ' n°r does it: ^ndate any specific
practice but rather describes the rationale for
°°nditions. These limits may be
or a
calendar
°f 6'° - *
259
-------
12/6/76
TABLE XI - le
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND CUIDBLIMES
SUBCATECORY E
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of ECD5 in any calendar month shall
specifically reflect not less than <31% reduction in the
lonq term daily average raw waste content of EOD5
multiplied by a variability Jactor of 3.0.
The allowable effluent discharge limitation for the
daily average mass of COD in any calendar month shall
specifically Deflect not less than 15% reduction in the
long term daily average raw waste content of COD
multiplied by a variability factor of 2.2.
The long term daily average raw waste load for the
gollutant BOD_5 and COD is defined as the average daily
mass of each pollutant influent to the wastewater
treatment system over a 12 consecutive month period
within the most recent 36 months.
To assure eguity in regulating discharges from the
point sources covered by this subpart of the point
source category, calculation of raw waste loads of BODJ3
and COD for the purpose of determining NPDES permit
limitations (i.e., the base numbers to which the
percent reductions are applied) _shall exclude any waste
load associated with .solvents in those raw waste loads;
jorovided that residual amounts of solvents remaining
after the practice of recovery and/or separate disposal
or reuse may be included in calculation of raw waste
loads. These practices of removal, disposal or reuse
include recovery of solvents £rom waste streams and
incineration of concentrated solvent waste streams
(including tar still bottoms). This regulation does
not prohibit inclusion of such wastes in the raw waste
loads in fact, nor does it mandate any specific
practice, but rather describes the rationale for
determining the permit conditions. These limits may ce
achieved by any one of several or a combination thereof
of prograirs and practices.
The average of daily TSS values for any calendar
month jshall not exceed 30 mg/1.
The pH shall be within the range of 6.0-9.0
standard units.
260
-------
SECTION XII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
General
Pollutants from specific processes within the pharmaceutical
manufacturing industry may interfere with, pass through, or
worv^f ^ .incompatible with publicly owned treatment
works (municipal system) . The following sections examine
the general wastewater characteristics of the various
J™?® i?S a? the Pretreat«e»t unit operations which may be
applicable to the pharmaceutical manufacturing point source
category.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The majority of the manufacturing plants in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category discharge
their wastewaters into municipal sewage collection system!.
The major sources of wastewaters in the pharmaceutical
industry are product washings, extraction and concentration
procedures and equipment washdown. Wastewaters generated bv
this industry have high concentrations of BODS, COD, TSS and
Jn^S16 °fgai?ics- Wastewaters from some chemical synthesis
and fermentation operations may contain metals (Cu, Ni Ha
etc.) or cyanide and have anti-bacterial constituents , 'which
may exert a toxic effect on biological waste treatment
Ph^S I68' F°5 erm?le' °ne class of Pharmaceutical
™™i ai8 P;°^uced 1S bacteriostats, disinfectants and
compounds used for sterilizing public facilities, hospitals,
Mni',v?ln?e ^heSe Products are' by nature, disinfectants? a
biological treatment system could be deactivated if the raw
effluent from such a manufacturing process was directly
charged to the treatment system at too high a concentration:
Hence, it may be necessary to equalize or chemically treat
process effluents. This pretreated effluent, in certain
circumstances, should then be acceptable for treatment in a
conventional municipal system.
t0 the desi^ of a pretreatment
recexve Pharmaceutical plant effluent are
nr r B°D5 .Ioadin9s< high chlorine demand,
presence of surface-active agents and the lack of required
nutrients which may characterize the wastewater. •ce<3uirea
in view of the wastewater characteristics discussed above,
i™nafHC°?ClUd? that certain Production techniques could be
grouped together on the basis of pollutants requiring
261
-------
Table XI I -1
Pretreatment Unit Operations
Pharmaceutical Industry
Suspended Biological System
Chemical Precipitation
(Metals) + Solvent
Separat on + Equalization
ization + Cyanide
fspill Protection
N)
CT>
NJ
Equalization + Neutralization
Fixed Biological System
Chemical Precipitation
(Metals) + Solvent
Separation + Equalization
+ Neutralization + Cyanide
Oxidation + Spill Protection
Equalization + Neutralization
Independent Physical
- Chemical System -
Chemical Precipitation
(Metals + Solvent
Separat, on ^Equalization
+ Neutral , zat ,on + Cyanide
Oxidation + Spill Protect, on
Equalization + Neutralization
ro
-------
pretreatment. Accordingly, the previously determined five
wfS^^J .8"bcatc9°ri«« f°r the pharmaceutical industry
were divided into two pretreatment sub-groups as follows:
Sub-group 1 Sub-group 2
Subcategory A Sufccategory B
Subcategory C Subcategory D
Subcategory E
The principal difference in the general characteristics of
the process wastewaters generated by the process techniques
in these two sub-groups is that the wastewaters of Sub-group
1 are more likely to include significant amounts of metals;
cyanide and spent solvents. The wastewaters generated by
the two process subcategories in Sub-group 1 are also
generally much higher strength wastes than those from the
Sub-group 2 process subcategories.
The types and amounts of metals and spent solvents in the
wastewater from a pharmaceutical manufacturing process
depend primarily on the manufacturing process and on the
amounts and types of catalysts and solvents lost from the
process. Most catalysts and solvents are expensive and
therefore are recovered for reuse. Only unrecoverable
catalysts (metals), generally in small concentrations and
spent solvents appear in the wastewater.
Point sources in the pharmaceutical industries generate
n«SJ2faterS °n an intermittent basis and equalization may be
needed as a pretreatment step. When solvents are used for
extraction, solvent removal can be accomplished by using
™^y/eparati°n an? skilranin
-------
spill protection for chemical storage areas. For Sub-group
2 the general requirements are equalization and
neutralization. In both subgroups, if the oxygen demands or
holding conditions are such as to cause oxygen depletion,
aeration may be necessary to control odors and hydrogen
sulfide.
In the near future, it is anticipated that a survey of the
pharmaceutical manufacturing point sources will be conducted
to determine whether or not the priority pollutants listed
in Table XII-2 are present in measurable quantities in the
effluents from these plants. In addition, it is
contemplated that various levels of treatment and the
related cost for treatment will be investigated.
Table XII-2
Recommended List of Priority Pollutants
Compound Name
1. *acenaphthene
2. *acrolein
3. *acrylonitrile
4. *benzene
5. *benzidine
6. *carbon tetrachloride (tetrachloromethane)
*Chlorinated benzenes (other than
dichlorobenzenes)
7. chlorobenzene
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
9. hexachlorobenzene
^Chlorinated ethanes (including 1,2-
dichloroethane, 1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane and hexachloroethane)
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
*Chloroalkyl ethers (chloromethyl,
chloroethyl and mixed ethers)
264
-------
17. bis(chloromethyl) ether
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
*Chlorinated naphthalene
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
"•Chlorinated phenols (other than those
listed elsewhere; includes trichloro-
phenols and chlorinated cresols)
21- 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlorometa cresol
23. *chloroform (trichloromethane)
24. *2-chlorophenol
*Dichlorobenzenes
25. 1»2-dichlorobenzene
26. 1»3-dichlorobenzene
27. 1»4-dichlorobenzene
*Dichlorobenzidine
28• 3,3•-dichlorobenzidine
*Pichloroethvlenes (1,1-dichloroethylene
and 1,2-dichloroethylene)
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
31. *2,4-dichlorophenol
*Dichloropropane and dichloropropene
32. 1r2-dichloropropane
33. 1,3-dichloropropylene (1,3-dichloropropene)
34. *2r4-dimethylphenol
*Dinitrotoluene
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
37. *1r2-diphenylhydrazine
38. *ethylbenzene
39. *fluroanthene
*Haloethers (other than those listed
elsewhere)
265
-------
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
*Halomethanes (other than those listed
elsewhere)
44. methylene chloride (dichlorcmethane)
45. methyl chloride (chloromethane)
46. methyl bromide (bromomethane)
47. bromoform (tribromomethane)
48. dichlorobromomethane
49. trichlorofluoromethane
50. dichlorodifluoromethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. *hexachlorobutadiene
53. *hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. *i sophorone
55. *naphthalene
56. *nitrobenzene
*Nitrophenols (including 2,4-dinitrophenol
and dinitrocresol)
57. 2-nitrophenol
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. *2,4-dinitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
*Nitrosamines
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
64. *penta chloropheno1
65. *phenol
*Phthalate esters
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. diethyl phthalate
70. dimethyl phthalate
*Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
71. 1,2-benzanthracene
72. benzo (a)pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
266
-------
73. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
74. 11»12-benzofluoranthene
75. chrysene
76. acenaphthylene
77. anthracene
78. 1»12-benzoperylene
79. fluroene
80. phenanthrene
81• 1»2:5,6-dibenzanthracene
82. indeno(1,2,3-C,D)pyrene
83. pyrene
ft?" *2r3,7r8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
85. *tetrachloroethylene
86. *toluene
87. *trichloroethylene
88. *vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
Pesticides and Metabolites
89. *aldrin
90. *dieldrin
91. *chlordane (technical mixture and metabolites)
*DDT and metabolites
92. 4,4»-DDT
93. a,4»-DDE (p,p«-DDX)
94. 4,4«-DDD (prp«-TDE)
*endosulfan and metabolites
95. alpha-endosulfan
96. beta-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
*endrin and metabolites
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
*heptachlor and metabolites
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
*hexachlorocvcloheyang (ali insomers)
102. alpha-BHC
103. teta-BHC
104. gamma-BBC (lindane)
267
-------
105. delta-BHC
*oolvchlorinated biphenyls (PCE« s)
106. PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
107. PCB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)
108. *Toxaphene
109. *Antimony (Total)
110. *Arsenic (Total)
111. *Asbestos (Fibrow)
112. *Beryllium (Total)
113. *Cadmium (Total)
114. *Chromium (Total)
115. *Copper (Total)
116. *Cyanide (Total)
117. *Lead (Total)
118. *Mercury (Total)
119. *Nickel (Total)
120. *selenium (Total)
121. *Silver (Total)
122. *Thallium (Total)
123. *Zinc (Total)
268
-------
SECTION XIII
PERFORMANCE FACTORS FOR TREATMENT
PLANT OPERATIONS
General
In the past, some effluent requirements have been issued by
regulatory agencies without stated concern for uniform
expression. Some agencies have issued regulations without
definition of time interval or without stipulation of the
type of the sample (grab or composite). This has caused
difficulties in determining whether a particular plant was
in violation. To overcome that situation, daily historical
data have been reviewed, when available, from several bio-
logical treatment plants.
Items such as spills, startup, shutdown, climatic
conditions, storm runoff, flow variation and treatment plant
inhibition may affect the operation of treatment plant
performances.
Some factors that bring about variations in treatment plant
performance can be minimized through proper dosing and
operation. Some of the controllable causes of variability
and techniques that can be used to minimize their effect are
explained below.
Spills of certain materials in the plant can cause a heavy
loading on the treatment system for a short period of time.
A spill may not only cause higher effluent levels as it goes
through the system, but may inhibit a biological treatment
system and therefore have longer term effects. Equalization
helps to lessen the effects of spills. However, long term
reliable control can only be attained by an aggressive spill
prevention and maintenance program including training of
operating personnel. Industrial associations such as the
Manufacturing Chemists Association (MCA) have developed
guidelines for prevention, control and reporting of spills.
These note how to assess the potential of spill occurrence
and how to prevent spills. Each pharmaceutical plant should
be aware of the MCA report and institute a program of spill
prevention using the principles described in the report If
every plant were to use such guidelines as part of plant
waste management control programs, its raw waste load and
effluent variations would be decreased.
269
-------
Startup and shutdown periods should be reduced to a minimum
and their effect dampened through the use of equalization
facilities and by proper scheduling of manufacturing cycles.
The design and choice of type of a treatment system should
be based on the climate at the plant location so that this
effect can be minimized. Where there are severe seasonal
climatic conditions, the treatment system should be designed
and sufficient operational flexibility should be available
so that the system can function effectively. This may
include air-supported flexible covers over aeration basins
in cold climates to maintain relatively uniform temperature
conditions for best performance.
Chemicals likely to inhibit the treatment processes should
be identified and prudent measures taken to see that they do
not enter the wastewater in concentrations that may result
in treatment process inhibitions. Such measures include the
diking of a chemical use area to contain spills and
contaminated wash water, using dry instead of wet clean-up
of equipment and changing to non-inhibiting chemicals.
The impact of process upsets and raw waste variations can be
reduced by properly sized equalization units. Equalization
is a retention of the wastes in a suitably designed and
operated holding system to average out the influent before
allowing it to enter the treatment system.
Storm water holding or diversion facilities should be
designed on the basis of rainfall history and area being
drained. The collected storm runoff can be drawn off at a
constant rate to the treatment system. The volume of this
contaminated storm runoff should be minimized through
segregation and the prevention of contamination. Storm
runoff from outside the plant area, as well as
uncontaminated runoff, should be diverted around the plant
or contaminated area.
Variations in the performance of wastewater treatment plants
are attributable to one or more of the following:
1. Variations in sampling techniques.
2. Variations in analytical methods.
3. Variations in one or more operational parameters,
e.g., the organic removal rate by the biological
mass, settling rate changes of biological sludge
270
-------
due to filamentous growths or non-settling pinpoint
floe.
4. Changes in the treatability characteristics of the
process wastewaters even after adequate
equalization.
The wastewater treatment plant performance variations/ which
are due in part to changes in raw waste load and waste
composition, will still occur although in lesser degree,
even if provision is made for equalization of the influent.
To cope with occasional instances in which the final
effluent exceeds a reasonably acceptable quality, it is
proposed that unacceptable effluent be diverted to empty
holding basins for re-treatment, instead of overdesigning
the total system to accommodate unpredictable upsets.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
It is proposed that performance be judged by sampling the
final effluent for a period of thirty consecutive days,
averaging the BOD, COD and TSS results and expressing the
results as percent reductions from average BODji, COD and TSS
values found in treatment plant influent for the twelve
months prior to the thirty consecutive days of effluent
sampling.
TSS in unfiltered effluents may be expected to vary widely,
due in part to hydraulic surges but primarily to
uncertainties in the settling characteristics of the
biological floe. Changes in waste composition, toxic
substances, nutrient levels and dissolved oxygen content can
affect bacterial metabolism, which is often evidenced by
poor floe formation and separation. The upset condition may
last for hours or days, until the bacteria adjust to the
changed conditions. In filtered effluents, the TSS
variations are reduced by trapping most of the solids in the
filter media.
In order to establish variability factors for this point
source category, historical data from plants number 8, 11,
14, 19, 22, 23 and 24 have been subjected to statistical
analyses. The results of this effort are reported in Table
XIII-3 for daily and monthly variability factors based on a
99 percent probability of occurrence.
Note that the compilation done in the initial study of
exemplary plants using the median values instead of mean
values is included for background purposes only and is shown
271
-------
in Table XIII-1. The summary values of the ratio of
probability for 99/50 values for BOD5, COD and TSS is
presented in TAble XIII-2. The monthly BPT variability
factors of 3.0 for BODj>, 2.2 for COD and 3.0 for TSS which
are utilized in the regulation published in the Federal
Register are derived from Table XIII-2 and are modified
based on a re-examination of data developed in Table XIII-3.
272
-------
Table XIII -1
12/6/76
Exemplary Biological
"50
Probability
P50-51 mg/L
P99
P90
P5Q-1.4 mg/L
P99
P95
P90
P50-8 mg/L
P99
P95
P90
P50-100 mg/L
P99
P95
P90
P5Q-310 mg/L
P99
P95
P90
P50=3.5 mg/L
P99
P95
P90
Day'
mg/L
402
194
162
19.4
3.7
3.0
29"
20"
1115
630
431
1667
812
711
104
24
13
BODq
Month
Ave.
mg/L
144"
1 24*
110'"
4.2
3.6
3.2
24'
20"
18*
222"'
190'"
1 75*
830
698
625
9"
8"
7*
P5Q Day
7.9
3.8
3.2
13.9
2.6
2.1
3.6
2.9
2.5
11.1
6.3
4.3
5.4
2.6
2.3
29.7
6.9
3.7
Max Month
P50 °ay
2.8
2.4
2 2
3.0
2.6
1.5
3.0
2 5
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.8
2.7
2 2
2.0
2.6
2.3
2.0
Max
Probabi 1 i ty Day
mg/L
P50-382 mg/L
P99 89*
P95 690
P90 iW
P50-16 8 mg/L
P99 52 6
P95 32'8
P90 28.0
P50=30 mg/L
P99 162
P95 126~"
"90 '°r
P50-32.6 mg/L
P99 202
Pgj 124
P90 68
COD Toc
Max. Max Day Max Month «ax «ax nau
M°nth P Da Max- Montn
m9/L mg/L mg/L
670 2.5 1.8
588 1.8 1.5
545 1.5 1.4
23.0" 3.1 1.4
21.5* 2.0 1.3
20.5' 1.7 1.2
120" 5.4 4.0
98* 4.2 3.3
88- 3.6 2.9
P50-292 mg/L
Pgg 1573 518* 5.3
P95 862 465* 3.0
P90 580 435* 2.0
88 6.2 2.7
75 3.7 2.3
68 2.1 2.1
TSS
Max Mont-i Max.
P Day . Maxi Month
mg/L mg/L
P -53 mg/L
P9g 320 132
P., 188 114
95
Pgo 143 104
P50-3.8 »g/L
Pjg 37.9 11.9"
Pqc 20.0 10.0*
Pj0 12.0 9.0*
P5(f" mg/L
Pjg 42* 39
P95 36" 32
Pgn 29* 28
PSO-W mg/L
1 .8 P 2620 620*
1.6 Pg5 1557 520""
1 .5 Pgo 802 460*
Pso-21.5 mg/L
Pg9 56.0 39
P95 « 34
Pg0 -to 31.5
Max Day Max Month
Pf-f. Day P Day
6.0 2.5
3.5 2.2
2.7 2.0
10.0 3.1
5.3 2.6
3.2 2.4
3.8 3.5
3.3 2.9
2.6 2.5
17.8 4.2
10.6 3.5
5.4 3.1
2.6 1.8
2.1 1.6
1.9 1.5
Normalized Data
-------
12/6/76
Table XII I -2
Pharmaceutical Industry
Average Ratios of Probabilities of Occurrence
Ratio Of
Probability Daily Monthly
BODg
99/50 10.9 3.0
95/50 4.1 2.3
90/50 3.1 2-0
COD
99/50 4.3 2.5
95/50 2.9 2.1
90/50 2.2 1.9
TOC
99/50 5.3 1-8
95/50 3-0 1-6
90/50 2.0 1.5
TSS
99/50 8.0 3-0
95/50 5.0 2.6
90/50 3-2 2.3
274
-------
TABLE XIII-3
12/6/76
Comparison of Daily and Monthly
Cgg/Ave. Factors for Pharmaceutical
Plants
PLANT
MONTH
8
11
14
19
22
23
24
8
11
14
19(TOC)
22
23
24
8
11
14
19
22
23
24
BOD
COD
TSS
3.8
3.5
1.4
3.0
1.8
2.1
2.1
3.0
1.9
1.9
3.2
1.7
1.6
2.0
2.9
3.2
1.5
5.8
1.8
2.3
1.9
AVE. MO.
2.4
2.0
2.8
DIST.
L
L
L
L
N
L-3
L-3
L
L
L
L
N
N
L
L-3
L
N
L
N
L
L
AVE.
3.
2.
3.
BOD
DAILY
4.4
4.3
3.6
5.4
2.7
3.0
3.1
COD
3.4
2.1
2.4
4.5
1.8
2.8
2.2
TSS
3.6
4.3
4.0
5.8
2.9
3.5
2.8
DAILY
8
4
8
DIST.
L
L
L
L
L-3
L-3
L-3
L
L
L-3
L
N
L-3
L-3
L
L
L-3
L
L-3
L
L-3
AVE. RATIO
1.7
1.2
1.5
DAILY/MO. RATIO
1.2
1.2
2.6
2.3
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.7
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.6
1.0
1.6
1.5
1.5
RATIO AVE.
1.6
1.2
1.4
LEGEND:
N
L
L-3
Normal Distribution
Log Normal Distribution
Three Parameter Log Normal Distribution
275
-------
SECTION XIV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has been prepared ty the Environmental
Protection Agency on the basis of a comprehensive study of
this industry performed by Roy F. Weston, Inc., under
contract No. 68-01-2932. The original study was conducted
and prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency under
the direction of Project Director James H. Dougherty, P.E.
and Technical Project Manager Jitendra R. Ghia, P.E. The
following individual members of the staff of Roy F. Weston,
Inc., made significant contributions tc the overall effort:
D.R. Junkins F.T. Russo
D.W. Grogan D.A. Baker
T.E. Taylor Y.H. Lin
P.J. Marks D.S. Smallwood
K.K. Wahl R.R. Wright
J.L. Simons M. Ramanathan
A.M. Tocci
The update of the original Weston effort was performed by
Jacobs Engineering under L.O.E. contract with the following
Jacobs Engineering personnel involved:
Henry Cruse - Project Manager
Dr. Richard Pomeroy - Process
Carl Johnston - Treatment Costs
Frank Baumann - Chemical Analysis
Bonnie Parrott - Statistican
The original RFW study, the Jacobs Engineering update and
this EPA revision were conducted under the supervision and
guidance of Mr. Joseph S. Vitalis, Project Officer, assisted
by Mr. George Jett, Assistant Project Officer.
Overall guidance and excellent assistance was provided the
Project officer by his associates in the Effluent Guidelines
Division, particularly Robert B. Schaffer, Director, Carl J.
Schafer, Branch Chief, Walter J. Hunt, Branch Chief and Dr.
W. Lamar Miller, Senior Project Officer Special
acknowledgement is also made of others in the Effluent
Guidelines Division: Messrs. William Telliard, Martin
Halper, Eric Yunker, Dr. Chester Rhines. Dr. Raymond Loehr
(Cornell University) and Allen Cywin (Science Advisor to Dr.
Breidenbach), for their helpful suggestions and timely
comments. EGDB project personnel also wishes to acknowledge
the assistance of the personnel at the Environmental
277
-------
Protection Agency's regional centers, who helped identify
those plants achieving effective waste treatment, and whose
efforts provided much of the research necessary for the
treatment technology review.
Appreciation is extended to Mr. James Rodgers of the EPA
Office of General Counsel for his invaluable input.
In addition Effluent Guidelines Development Branch would
like to extend its gratitude to the following individuals
for the significant input into the development of this
document while serving as members of the EPA working
group/steering committee which provided detailed review,
advice and assistance:
W. Hunt, Chairman, Effluent Guidelines Division
L. Miller, Section Chief, Effluent Guidelines Division
J. Vitalis, Project Officer, Effluent Guidelines Div.
G. Jett, Asst. Project Officer, Effluent Guidelines Div.
J. Ciancia, National Environmental Research Center
H. Skovrenek, National Enviropmental Research Center
M. Strier, Office of Enforcement
D. Davis, Office of Planning and Evaluation
C. Little, Office of General Counsel
P. Desrosiers, Office of Research and Development
R. Swank, Southeast Environmental Research Laboratory
N. Casselano, Region II
E. Krabbe, Region II
L. Reading, Region VII
C. Cook, Economic Analysis Section
S. Ng, Economic Analysis Section
D. Becker, Chief, Industrial Environmental Research Lab.
L. Weitzman, Industrial Environmental Research Lab.
E. Struzeski, Jr., National Enforcement Investigations Center
EGDB would also like to thank the Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers Association and personnel of selected plants
in the pharmaceutical industry who provided valuable
assistance in the collection of data relating to process RWL
and treatment plant performance.
The cooperation of the individual pharmaceutical companies
who offered their facilties for survey and contributed
pertinent data is gratefully appreciated. Facilities
visited were the property of the following:
Lederle Laboratories
Wyeth Laboratories
Charles Pfizer
American Cyanamid
278
-------
Abbott Laboratories
Merck, Sharpe & Dohme
Merrell - National Laboratories
Eli Lilly and Company
Dow Chemical Company
Merck and Company, Inc.
Hoffmann LaRoche
McNeil Laboratories
Warner - Lambert Company
Furthermore, the Effluent Guidelines Development Branch
wishes to express appreciation to the following
organizations and individuals for the valuable assistance
which they provided throughout the study:
Donald Bloodgood, ESWQIAC
Dorothy Bowers, Merck 6 Company, inc.
John L. Federman, Eli Lilly 6 Company
Harold Jensen, Warner Lambert Company
Dr. John Ruggerio, Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Assoc.
A. James Sederis, Hoffmann LaPoche
Acknowledgement and appreciation is also given to Ms. Kay
Starr for invaluable support in coordinating the preparation
and reproduction of this report, to Mr. Thomas Tape (federal
intern) for proofreading early drafts, to Mrs. Alice
Thompson, Mrs. Ernestine Christian, Ms. Nancy Zrubek and
Mrs. Carol Swann, of the Effluent Guidelines Division
secretarial staff for their efforts in the typing of drafts.
necessary revision and final preparation of the revised
Effluent Guidelines Division development document.
279
-------
SECTION XV
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. Pharmaceutical Industry
A-1. Anderson, D.R. et al, "Study of Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing Wastewater Characteristics and
Aerated Treatment System," Proceedings 25th Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference, May 1970, 26.
A-2. "Antibiotics" Industrial Wastes - Their Disposal
and Treatment, Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New
York, 1953.
A-3. Breaz, E., "Drug Firm Cuts sludge Handling Costs,"
Water and Wastes Engineering, January 1972,
Appendix 22-23.
A-4. Brown, W.E., "Antibiotics," Encyclopedia of
Chemical Technology, Kirk-Othmer, Vol. 2, 533-540.
A-5. "Cooling Tower," Power, Special Report, March 1973,
51-523.
A-6. "Economic Priorities Report," In Whose Hands, Vol.
4, council on Economic Priorities, New York.
A-7. Herion, R.W., Jr., "Two Treatment installations for
Pharmaceutical Wastes," Proceedings 18th Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference, 1963.
A-8. Holmberg, J.D. and Kinney, D.I., Drift Technology
of Cooling Towers, Marley Company, Mission, Kansas,
1973.
A-9. Lederman, P.B., Skovronek, H. and desRosiers, P.E.,
"Pollution Abatement in the Pharmaceutical
Industry," Pharmaceutical Symposium of the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers' National Meeting,
Washington, D.C., 1974.
A-10. Nemerow, N.L. Liquid Waste of Industry - Theories,
Practices and Treatment, Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Reading, Massachusetts, 1971.
A-11. Mayes, J.H., "Characterization of Wastewaters from
the Ethical Pharmaceutical Industry," EPA 67012-74-
281
-------
057, National Environmental Research Center,
Cincinnati, Ohio, July 1971.
A-12. Mohanrao, G.J., et al.r "Waste Treatment at a
Synthetic Drug Factory in India," JWPCF, Vol. 42,
No. 8, Part 1, August 1970, 1530-1543.
A-13. Shor, L.A. and Magee, R.J., "Veterinary Drugs,"
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Kirk-Othmer,
Vol. 21, 241-254.
A-14. Shreve, R.N., Chemical Process Industries, Third
Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1967.
A-15. Strong, L.E., "Blood Fractionation," Encyclopedia
of Chemical Technology, Kirk-Othmer, Vol. 3r 576-
602.
A-16. Taber, C.W., Tabers1 CycloEedic Medical Dictionary,
Tenth Edition, F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia,
Pa., 1965.
A-17. Windheuser, J.J., Perrin-John, "Pharmaceuticals,"
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Kirk-othmer,
Vol. 15, 112-132.
A-18. Patterson, J.W. and Minear, R.A., "Wastewater
Treatment Technology" 2nd Edition, Jan. 1973, for
State of Illinois, Institute for Environmental
Quality.
A-19. "Pollution Abatement Practices in the AAP", by I.
Forster, Environmental Science & Technology, Summer
of 1973.
A-20. "A Primer on Waste Water Treatment", Environmental
Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1971, 0-419-407.
A-21. "Industrial Process Design for Pollution Control",
Volume 4, Proceedings of Workshop organized and
held under the auspices of the AIChE Environmental
Division, October 27-29, 1971, Charleston, West
Virginia.
A-22. "Making Hard-to-Treat Chemical Wastes Evaporate",
Chemical Week, May 9, 1973.
282
-------
A-23. Cost of Clean Water, Industrial Waste Profile No.
3, GWQA, U.S. Department of the Interior (November
1967) .
A-24. "Development of Operator Training Materials",
Prepared by Environmental Science Services Corp.,
Stanford, Conn., under the direction of W.W.
Eckenfelder. Jr., for FWQA (August 1968).
A-25. Quirk, T.P., "Application of Computerized Analysis
to Comparative Costs of Sludge Dewatering by Vacuum
Filtration and Centrifuge," Proc., 23rd Ind. Waste
Conf., Purdue University 1968, pp. 691-709.
A-26. "Compilation Industrial and Municipal Injection
Wells in U.S.A.", EPA-520-9-74-020, Vol. 1 and Vol.
2, Industrial Waste, January-February 1975.
A-27. Davis, K.E., Funk, R.J., "Eeep Well Disposal of
Industrial Waste", Industrial Waste, January-
February 1975.
A-28. Ajit Sadana, "Multi-Effect Evaporation and
Pyrolyzation of Industrial Wastewater Residues and
Energy Recovery", Enviroengineering, Inc.,
Somerville, New Jersey, Paper Presented at National
Conference on Management and Disposal of Residues
from the Treatment of Industrial Wastewaters,
Washington, D.C., February 3-5, 1975.
A-29. Engineering-News Record. Published Weekly by
McGraw Hill, Inc., Highstown, New Jersey.
A-30. Barnard, J.L., "Treatment Cost Relationships for
Industrial Waste Treatment", Ph.D. Dissertation,
Vanderbilt University, Tennessee (1971).
A-31. Swanson, C.L., "Unit Process Operating and
Maintenance Costs for Conventional Waste Treatment
Plants," FWQA, Cincinnati, Ohio (June 1968) .
A-32. "Estimating Staff and Cost Factors for Small
Wastewater Treatment Plants Less than 1 MGD". Part
I and Part II. "Staffing Guidelines for
Conventional Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants
Less than 1 MGD". By Department of Industrial
Engineering and Engineering Research Institute,
Iowa State University. EPA Grant No. 5P2-WP-195-
0452, June 1973.
283
-------
A-33. EPA 625/1-74-006 "Process Design Manual for Sludge
Treatment and Disposal", U.S. EPA - Technology
Transfer, October 1974.
A-34. "Process Design Manual for Carbon Adsorption", U.S.
EPA Technology Transfer, October 1973.
A-35. EPA, "Development Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards of Performance - Organic
Chemicals Industry", June 1973.
A-36. EPA, "Draft Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
Steam Supply and Noncontact Cooling Water
Industries", October 1974.
A-37. "Water Quality Criteria, 1972", National Academy of
Sciences and National Academy of Engineering for
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
1972 (U.S. Government Printing Office, Stock No.
5501-00520).
A-38. "Process Design Manual for Upgrading Existing
Wastewater Treatment Plants", EPA, 1974.
A-39. "Waste Treatment and Disposal Methods for the
Pharmaceutical Industry", E.J. Struzeski Jr.,
February 1975, National Field Investigation Center,
Denver, Col., EPA 330/1-76-001.
A-40. Microbial Control of Insects and Mites, H.D. Burges
and N.W. Hussey, editors. Academic Press: New
York, 1971.
A-41. Pharmaceutical Industry Hazardous Waste Generation
and Disposal, contractor Report SW-508, U.S. EPA,
1976.
A-42. A Guide for Subsurface Injection of Waste Fluids
from Chemical Manufacturing Plants, Technical Guide
WR-1, Manufacturing Chemists Association,
Washington, D.C., 1976.
A-43. Kunin, R., "Ion-Exchange Technology in Medicine and
the Pharmaceutical Industry", Amber-hi-lites, Rohm
and Haas Co., Philadelphia, PA, 1975.
A-44. ion Exchange and Polymeric Adsorption Technology in
Medicine, Nutrition and the Pharmaceutical
Industry, Rohm and Haas Co., Philadelphia, PA.
284
-------
A-45. Struzeski, E.J., Jr., "Waste Treatment in the
Pharmaceuticals Industry - Part I", Industrial
Waste, July - August 1976.
A-46. Struzeskir E.J., Jr.r "Waste Treatment in the
Pharmaceuticals Industry - Part 2", Industrial
Waste, September - October 1976.
A-47. Diem, K.r Documenta Geigy Scientific Tables, Sixth
Edition, Geigy Pharmaceuticals, Division of Geigy
Chemical Corporation, Ardsley, N.Y., 1962.
U.S. Patent No. Date Patented Title of Patent
2,699,451 1-11-55 Process for the Production
of Organic Amino Diol
Derivatives
2,694,089 11-9-54 Process for the Recovery
of d1-Threo-1-p-Nitrophenyl-
2-Amino-1,3-Propanediol
2,692,897 10-26-54 Process for the Production
of Acylamido Diol Compounds
2,692,896 10-26-54 Process for the Production
of N-Acylamido Diols
2,687,434 8-24-54 Production of 1-{Nitro-
phenyl)-z Acylanddopropane-
1-3-Diols
2,686,802 8-17-54 Dichloracetimino Thioethers
and Acid Addition Salts
Thereof
2,681,364 6-15-54 Process for the Production
of 1-p-Nitrophenyl-Z-
Acylamidopropane-1,3-Diols
2,662,906 12-15-53 Chloramphenicol Esters and
Method for Obtaining Same
2,568,571 9-18-51 Haloacetylamidophenyl-Halo-
Acetamido propandiol
2,562,107 6-24-51 Derivatives of Organic
Amino Alcohols and Methods
for Obtaining the Same
285
-------
2,546,762 3-27-51 Acylamino Acetophenones and
Preparation Thereof
2,538,792 1-23-51 Preparation of Phenylserinol
2,538,766 1-23-51 Triacyl-Phenylpropane-
aminodiols
2,538,765 1-23-51 Diacyl Phenylpropane-
aminodiols
2,538,761 1-23-51 Acylamido-Phenylpropanediols
2,515,241 7-18-50 Nitrcphenyl Acylamino Acy-
loxy Ketones
2,515,239 7-18-50 a-Acylamido-p Hydroxy Nitro
Substituted Propiophenones
2,514,376 7-11-50 Triacyl Nitrophenylpropane-
aminodiols and Preparation
Thereof
2,513,346 7-4-50 Process for Obtaining
Organic Amino Diols
2,483,885 10-4-49 Nitrophenyl Acyl Amido
Alkane Diols
2,483,884 10-4-49 Method for Making Nitrophe-
nyl Acylamido Alkane Diols
References
GR-1 AICHE Environmental Division; "Industrial Process
Design for Pollution Control," Volume 4; October,
1971.
GR-2 Allen, E.E.; "How to combat Control Valve Noise,"
Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 71, No. 8;
August, 1975; pp. 43-55.
GR-3 American Public Health Association; Standard
Methods for •Examination of Water and Waste Water,
13th Edition; APHA, Washington, D.C. 20036; 1971.
GR-4 Barnard, J.L.; "Treatment Cost Relationships for
Industrial Waste Treatment," Ph.D. Dissertation,
Vanderbilt University; 1971.
286
-------
GR-5 Bennett, H., editor; Concise Chemical and Technical
Dictionary; F.A.I.C. Chemical Publishing Company,
Inc., New York, New York; 1962.
GR-6 Blecker, H.G. and Cadman, T.W.; Capital and
Operating Costs of Pollution Control Equipment
Modules. Volume I - User Guide; EPA-R5-73-023a; EPA
Office of Research and Development, Washington,
D.C. 20460; July 1973.
GR-7 Blecker, H.G. and Nichols, T.M.; Capital and
Operating Costs of Pollution Control Equipment
Modules. Volume II - Data Manual; EPA-R5-73-023b;
EPA Office of Research and Development, Washington,
D.C. 20460; July, 1973.
GR-8 Bruce, R.D. and Werchan, R.E.; "Noise Control in
the Petroleum and Chemical Industries," Chemical
Engineering Progress, Vol. 71, No. 8; August, 1975-
pp. 56-59.
GR-9 Chaffin, C.M.; "Wastewater Stabilization Ponds at
Texas Eastman Company."
GR~10 Chemical Coagulation/Mixed Media Filtration of
Aerated Lagoon Effluent. EPA-660/2-75-0257
Environmental Protection Technology Series,
National Environmental Research Center, Office of
Research and Development, D.S. EPA, Corvallis,
Oregon 97330.
GR~11 Chemical Engineering. August 6, 1973; "Pollution
Control at the Source."
GR~12 Chemical Engineering. 68 (2), 1961; "Activated-
Sludge Process Solvents Waste Problem."
GR-13 Chemical Week. May 9, 1973; "Making Hard-to-treat
Chemical Wastes Evaporate."
GR-14 Cheremisinoff, p.N. and Feller, S.M.; "Wastewater
Solids Separation," Pollution Engineering.
GR-15 Control of Hazardous Material Spills. Proceedings
of the 1972 National Conference on Control of
Hazardous Material Spills, Sponsored by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency at the University
of Texas, March 1972.
287
-------
GR-16 Cook, C.; "Variability in EOD Concentration from
Biological Treatment Plants," EPA internal
memorandum; March, 1974.
GR-17 Davis, K.E. and Funk, R.J.; "Eeep Well Disposal of
Industrial Waste," Industrial Waste; January-
February, 1975.
GR-18 Dean, J.A., editor; Lang e* s Handbook of Chemistry,
11th Edition; McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York,
New York; 1973.
GR-19 Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr.; Water Quality Engineering
for Practicing Engineers; Barnes and Noble, Inc.,
New York, New York; 1970.
GR-20 Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr.; "Development of Operator
Training Materials," Environmental Science services
Corp., Stamford, Conn.; August, 1968.
GR-21 Environments1 Science and Technology, Vol. 8, NO.
10, October, 1974; "Currents-Technology."
GR-22 Fassell, W.M.; sludge Disposal at a Profit?, a
report presented at the National Conference on
Municipal Sludge Management, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania; June, 1974.
GR-23 Guidelines for chemical Plants in the Prevention
Control and Reporting of Spills; Manufacturing
Chemists Association, Inc., Washington, D.C. 1972.
GR-24 Hauser, E.A., colloidal Phenomena, 1st Edition,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York; 1939.
GR-25 Iowa State University Department of Industrial
Engineering and Engineering Research Institute,
"Estimating Staff and Cost Factors for Small
Wastewater Treatment Plants Less Than 1 MGD," Parts
I and II; EPA Grant No. 5P2-WP-195-0452; June,
1973.
GR-26 Iowa State University Department of Industrial
Engineering and Engineering Research Institute,
"Staffing Guidelines for Conventional Wastewater
Treatment Plants Less Than 1 MGD," EPA Grant No.
5P2-WP-195-0452; June, 1973.
288
-------
GR-27 Judd, S.H.; "Noise Abatement in Existing
Refineries," Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol.
71, No. 8; August, 1975; pp. 31-42.
GR-28 Kent, J.A., editor; Reigel*s Industrial Chemistry,
7th Edition; Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New
York; 1974.
GR-29 Kirk-Othmer; Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology,
2nd Edition; interscience Publishers Division, John
Wiley and Sons, Inc.
GR-30 Kozlorowski, B. and Kucharski, J.; Industrial Waste
Disposal; Pergamon Press, New York; 1972.
GR-31 Lindner, G. and K. Nyberg; Environmental
Engineering, A Chemical Engineering Discipline; D.
Reidel Publishing Company, Boston, Massachusetts
02116, 1973.
GR-32 Liptak, E.G., editor; Environmental Engineers*
Handbook, Volume I, Water Pollution; Chilton Book
Company, Radnor, Pa.; 1974.
GR-33 Marshall, G.R. and E.J. Middlebrook; Intermittent
Sand Filtration to Upgrade Existing Wastewater
Treatment Facilities, PR JEW 115-2; Utah Water
Research Laboratory, College of Engineering, Utah
State University, Logan, Utah 84322; February,
1974.
GR-34 Martin, J.D., Dutcher, V.D., Frieze, T.R., Tapp,
M., and Davis, E.M.; "Waste Stabilization
Experiences at Union Carbide, Seadrift, Texas
Plant."
GR-35 McDermott, G.N.; Industrial Spill Control and
Pollution Incident Prevention, J. Water Pollution
Control Federation, 43 (8) 1629 (1971).
GR-36 Minear, R.A. and Patterson, J.W.; Wastewater
Treatment Technology, 2nd Edition; State of
Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality;
January, 1973.
GR-37 National Environmental Research Center; "Evaluation
of Hazardous Waste Emplacement in Mined Openings;"
NERC Contract No. 68-03-0470; September, 1974.
289
-------
GR-38 Nemerow, N.L.; Liquid Waste of Industry - Theories,
Practices and Treatment; Addision-Wesley Pulbishing
Company, Reading, Massachusetts; 1971.
GR-39 Novak, S.M.; "Biological Waste Stabilization Ponds
at Exxon Company, U.S.A. Baytown Refinery and Exxon
Chemical Company, U.S.A. Chemical Plant (Divisions
of Exxon Corporation) Baytcvm, Texas."
GR-40 Oswald, W.J. and Ramani, R.; "The Fate of Algae in
Receiving Waters," a paper submitted to the
Conference on Ponds as a Wastewater Treatment
Alternative, University of Texas, Austin; July,
1975.
GR-41 Otakie, G.F.; A Guide to the Selection of Cost-
effective Wastewater Treatment Systems; EPA-430/9-
75-002, Technical Report, U.S. EPA, Office of Water
Program Operations, Washington, D.C. 20460.
GR-42 Parker, C.L.; Estimating the Cost of Wastewater
Treatment Ponds; Pollution Engineering, November,
1975.
GR-43 Parker, W.P.; Wastewater Systems Engineering,
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
1975.
GR-44 Parker, D.S.; "Performance of Alternative Algae
Removal Systems," a report submitted to the
Conference on Ponds as a Wastewater Treatment
Alternative, University of Texas, Austin; July,
1975.
GR-45 Perry, J.H., et. al.; Chemical Engineers' Handbook,
5th Edition; McGraw-Hill Ecok Company, New York,
New York; 1973.
GR-46 Public Law 92-500, 92nd Congress, S.2770; October
18, 1972.
GR-47 Quirk, T.P.; "Application of Computerized Analysis
to Comparative Costs of Sludge Dewatering by Vacuum
Filtration and Centrifugation," Proc., 23rd
Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University;
1968; pp. 69-709.
GR-48 Riley, B.T., Jr.; The Relationship Between
Temperature and the Design and Operation of
290
-------
Biological Waste Treatment Plants, submitted to the
Effluent Guidelines Division, EPA; April, 1975.
GR-49 Rose, A. and Rose, E. ; The Condensed Chemical
Dictionary, 6th Edition; Reinhold Publishing
Corporation, New York; 1961.
GR-50 Rudolfs, W. ; Industrial Wastes^ Their Disposal and
Treatment: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New
York; 1953.
GR-51 Sax, N.I.; Dangerous Properties of Industrial
Material, 4th Edition; Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, New York; 1975.
GR-52 Seabrook, B.L. ; Cost of Wastewater Treatment by
Lar*d Application: EPA-430/9-75-0037 Technical
Rejgort; U.S. EPA, Office of Water ' Program
Operations, Washington, E.G. 20460.
GR-53 Shreve, R.N. ; Chemical Process Industries. Third
Edition; McGraw-Hill, New York; 19eT.
GR-54 Spill Prevention Techniques for Hazardous Polluting
Substances, OHM 7102001; U~. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 20460; February
GR-55 Stecher, P.G., editor; The Merck index. An
Encyclopedia of Chemicals and Drugs, 8th Edition^
Merck and Company, Inc., Rahway, New Jersey; 1968.
GR-56 Stevens, J.I., "The Roles of Spillage, Leakage and
Venting in Industrial Pollution Control", Presented
at Second Annual Environmental Engineering and
Conference' University of Louisville, April
GR-57 Supplement A 6 B - Detailed Record of Data Base for
"Draft Development Document for Interim Final
Effluent Limitations, Guidelines and Standards of
Performance for the Miscellaneous Chemicals
Manufacturing Point Source Category", u S EPA
Washington, D.C. 20460, February 1975. " '
GR-58 swanson, c.L. ; "Unit Process Operating and
Maintenance Costs for Conventional Waste Treatment
Plants;" FWQA, Cincinnati, Ohio; June, 1968.
291
-------
GR-59 U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare;
"Interaction of Heavy Metals and Biological sewage
Treatment Processes," Environmental Health Series;
HEW Office of Water Supply and Pollution Control,
Washington, B.C.; May, 1965.
GR-60 U.S. Department of the Interior; "Cost of Clean
Water," Industrial Waste Profile No. 3_; Dept. of
Int. GWQA, Washington, D.C.; Kovember, 1967.
GR-61 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Upgrading
Existing Waste Water Treatment Plants. U.S. EPA
Technology Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460;
October, 1974.
GR-62 U.S. EPA; Monitoring Industrial Waste Water, U.S.
x EPA Technology Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C.
20460; August, 1973.
GR-63 U.S. EPA; Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes, U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA
625/6-74-003; Washington, D.C. 20460; 1974.
GR-64 U.S. EPA; Handbook for Analytical Quality Control
in Water and Waste Water laboratories, U.S. EPA
Technology Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460;
June, 1972.
GR-65 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Phosphorus
Removal, U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; October, 1971.
GR-66 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Suspended
Solids Removal, U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA
625/1-75-003a, Washington, D.C. 20460; January,
1975.
GR-67 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Sulfide Control
in Sanitary Sewerage Systems, U.S. EPA Technology
Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460; October,
1974.
GR-68 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Carbon
Adsorption, U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; October, 1973.
GR-69 U.S. EPA; Process Design Manual for Sludge
Treatment and Disposal, U.S. EPA Technology
Transfer; EPA 625/1-74-006, Washington, D.C.
20460; October, 1974.
292
-------
GR-70 U.S. EPA; Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards of Performance, Metal Finishing Industry,
Draft Development Document; EPA 440/1-75/040 and
EPA 440/1-75/040a; EPA Office of Air and Water
Programs, Effluent Guidelines Division, Washington,
D.C. 20460; April, 1975.
GR-71 U.S. EPA; Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
~ Organic Chemicals Industry; EPA 440/1-74/009a;
EPA Office of Air and Water Programs, Effluent
Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C. 20460;
April, 1974.
GR-72 U.S. EPA; Draft Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
Steam Supply and Noncontact Cooling Water
Industries; EPA Office of Air and Water Programs,
Effluent Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C.
20460; October, 1974.
GR-73 U.S. EPA; Draft Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
- Organic Chemicals Industry, Phase II Prepared by
Roy F. Weston, Inc. under EPA Contract No. 68-01-
1509; EPA Office of Air and Water Programs,
Effluent Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C.
20460; February, 1974.
GR-74 U.S. EPA; Evaluation of Land Application Systems,
Technical Bulletin; EPA 430/9-75-001; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; March, 1975.
GR-75 U.S. EPA; "Projects in the Industrial Pollution
Control Division," Environmental Protection
Technology Series; EPA 600/2-75-001; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; December, 1974.
GR-76 U.S. EPA; Wastewater Sampling Methodologies and
Flow Measurement Techniques; EPA 907/9-74-005; EPA
Surveillance and Analysis, Region VII, Technical
Support Branch; June, 1974.
GR-77 U.S. EPA; A Primer on Waste Water Treatment; EPA
Water Quality Office; 1971.
GR-78 U.S. EPA; Compilation of Municipal and Industrial
In-jection Wells in the United States; EPA 520/9-74-
020; Vol. I and II; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460;
1974.
293
-------
GR-79 U.S. EPA; "Upgrading Lagcons," U.S. EPA Technology
Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460; August,
1973.
GR-80 U.S. EPA; "Nitrification and Denitrification
Facilities," U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; August,
1973.
GR-81 U.S. EPA; "Physical-Chemical Nitrogen Removal,"
U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C.
20460; July, 1974.
GR-82 U.S. EPA; "Physical-Chemical Wastewater Treatment
Plant Design," U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; August, 1973.
GR-83 U.S. EPA; "Oxygen Activated Sludge Wastewater
Treatment Systems, Design Criteria and Operating
Experience," U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; August, 1973.
GR-84 U.S. EPA; Wastewater Filtration Design
Considerations; U.S. EPA Technology Transfer; EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; July, 1974.
GR-85 U.S. EPA; "Flow Equalization," U.S. EPA Technology
Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460; May, 1974.
GR-86 U.S. EPA; "Procedural Manual for Evaluating the
Performance of Wastewater Treatment Plants," U.S.
EPA Technology Transfer; EPA, Washington, D.C.
20460.
GR-87 U.S. EPA; Supplement to Development Document for
Effluent Limitations, Guidelines and New Source
Performance Standards for the Corn Milling
Subcategory, Grain Processing, EPA, Office of Air
and Water Programs, Effluent Guidelines Division,
Washington, D.C. 20460, August 1975.
GR-88 U.S. EPA; Pretreatment of Pollutants Introduced
Into Publicly Owned Treatment Works; EPA Office of
Water Program Operations, Washington, D.C. 20460;
October, 1973.
GR-89 U.S. Government Printing Office; Standard
Industrial Classification Manual; Government
Printing Office, Washington, E.G. 20492; 1972.
294
-------
GR-90 U.S. EPA; Tertiary Treatment of Combined Domestic
and Industrial Wastes, EPA-R2-73-236, EPA,
Washington, D.C. 20460; May, 1973.
GR-91 Wang, Lawrence K.; Environmental Engineering
Glossary (Draft) Calspan Corporation, Environmental
Systems Division, Buffalo, New York 14221, 1974.
GR-92 Water Quality Criteria 1972, EPA-R-73-033, National
Academy of Sciences and National Academy of
Engineering; U.S. Government Printing Office, No.
5501-00520, March, 1973.
GR-93 Weast, R., editor; CRC Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics. 54th Edition; CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio
44128; 1973-1974.
GR-94 Weber, C.I., editor; Eiological Field and
Laboratory Methods for Measuring the Quality of
Surface Waters and Effluents," Environmental
Monitoring Series; EPA 670/4-73-001; EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; July, 1973.
GR-95 APHA, ASCE, AWWA and WPCF, Glossary of water and
Wastewater Control Engineering, American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York, 1969.
GR-96 Quality Criteria For Water, EPA-440/9-76-023, EPA
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials,
Washington, D.C., 20460; July 1976.
295
-------
SECTION XVI
GLOSSARY
A. Pharmaceutical Industry
Active Ingredient. The chemical constituent in a medicinal
which is responsible for its activity.
Alkaloids. Basic (alkaline) nitrogenous botanical products
which produce a marked physiological action when
administered to animals (or humans).
Alkylation. The addition of an aliphatic group to another
molecule. The media in which this reaction is accomplished
can be vapor or liquid phase, as well as aqueous or non-
aqueous .
Ampules. A small glass container that can be sealed and its
contents sterilized. Ampules are used to hold hypodermic
solutions. ^
Antibiotic. A substance produced by a living organism which
has the power to inhibit multiplication of, or to destroy,
other organisms, especially bacteria.
Biological Products. in the pharmaceutical industry,
medicinal products derived from animals or humans, such as
vaccines, tosoids, antisera and human tlood fractions.
Blood Fractionation. The separation of human blood into its
various protein fractions.
Botanicals. Drugs made from a part of a plant, such as
roots, bark, or leaves.
Capsules. A gelatinous shell used to contain medicinal
chemicals and as a dosage form for administering medicine.
Disinfectant. A chemical agent which kills bacteria.
Ethical Products, Pharmaceuticals promoted by advertising to
the medical, dental and veterinary professions.
Fermentor Broth. A slurry of microorganisms in water
containing nutrients (carbohydrates, nitrogen) necessary for
the microorganism's growth.
Fines- Crushed solids sufficiently fine to pass through a
screen, etc.
297
-------
Halogenated Solvent. An organic liquid chemcial containing
an attached halogen (chlorine, fluorine, etc.) used for
dissolving other substances.
Hormone. Any of a number of substances formed in the body
which activate specifically receptive organs when
transported to them by the body fluids. A material secreted
by ductless glands (endocrine glands). Most hormones as
well as synthetic analogues have in common the
cyclopentanophenanthrene nucleus.
Iniectables. Medicinals prepared in a sterile (buffered)
form suitable for administration by injection.
Iso-Electric Precipitation. Adjustment of the pH (hydrogen
ion concentration) of a solution to cause precipitation of a
substance from the solution.
Medicament. Medicine or remedy.
Parenteral. Injection of substances into the body through
any route other than via the digestive tract.
Plasma. The liquid part of the lymph and of the blood.
PMA. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Association. The PMA
represents 110 pharmaceutical manufacturing firms, who
account for approximately 95 percent of the prescription
products sold in the United States.
Proprietary Products. Pharmaceuticals promoted by
advertising directly the the consumer.
Saprophytic Organism. One that lives on dead or decaying
organic matter.
Serum. A fluid which is extracted from an animal rendered
immune against a pathogenic organism and injected into a
patient with the disease resulting from the same organism.
Steriod. Term applied to any one of a large group of
substances chemically related to various alcohols found in
plants and animals.
Toxoid. Toxin treated so as to destroy its toxicity, but
still capable of inducing formation of antibodies.
Trypsinized. Hydrolyzed by trypsin, an enzyme in pancreatic
juice.
298
-------
Vaccine. A killed or modified live virus or bacteria
prepared in suspension for inoculation to prevent or treat
certain infectious diseases.
General Definitions
Abatement. The measures taken to reduce or eliminate
pollution.
Absorption. A process in which one material (the absorbent)
takes up and retains another (the absorbate) with the
formation of a homogeneous mixture having the attributes of
a solution. Chemical reaction may accompany or follow
absorption.
Acclimation. The ability of an organism to adapt to changes
in its immediate environment.
Acid. A substance which dissolves in water with the
formation of hydrogen ions.
Acid Solution. A solution with a pH of less than 7.00 in
which the activity of the hydrogen ion is greater than the
activity of the hydroxyl ion.
Acidity. The capacity of a wastewater for neutralizing a
base. It is normally associated with the presence of carbon
dioxide, mineral and organic acids and salts of strong acids
or weak bases. it is reported as equivalent of CaC03
because many times it is not known just what acids are
present.
Acidulate. To make somewhat acidic.
h£t. The Federal water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972, Public Law 92-500.
Activated carbon. Carbon which is treated by high-
temperature heating with steam or carbon dioxide producing
an internal porous particle structure.
Activated Sludge Process. A process which removes the
organic matter from sewage by saturating it with air and
biologically active sludge. The recycle "activated"
microoganisms are able to remove both the soluble and
colloidal organic material from the wastewater.
Adsorption. An advanced method of treating wastes in which
a material removes organic matter not necessarily responsive
299
-------
to clarification or biological treatment by adherence on the
surface of solid bodies.
Adsorption isotherm. A plot used in evaluating the
effectiveness of activated carbon treatment ty showing the
amount of impurity adsorbed versus the amount remaining.
They are determined at a constant temperature by varying the
amount of carbon used or the concentration of the impurity
in contact with the carbon.
Advance Waste Treatment. Any treatment method or process
employed following biological treatment to increase the
removal of pollution load, to remove substances that may be
deleterious to receiving waters or the environment or to
produce a high-quality effluent suitable for reuse in any
specific manner or for discharge under critical conditions.
The term tertiary treatment is commonly used to denote
advanced waste treatment methods.
Aeration. (1) The bringing about of intimate contact
between air and a liquid by one of the following methods:
spraying the liquid in the air, bubbling air through the
liquid, or agitation of the liquid to promote surface
absorption of air. (2) The process or state of being
supplied or impregnated with air; in waste treatment, a
process in which liquid from the primary clarifier is mixed
with compressed air and with biologically active sludge.
Aeration Period. (1) The theoretical time, usually
expressed in hours, that the mixed liquor is subjected to
aeration in an aeration tank undergoing activated-sludge
treatment. It is equal to the volume of the tank divided by
the volumetric rate of flow of wastes and return sludge.
(2) The theoretical time that liquids are subjected to
aeration.
Aeration Tank. A vessel for injecting air into the water.
Aerobic. Ability to live, grow, or take place only where
free oxygen is present.
Aerobic Biological Oxidation. Any waste treatment or
process utilizing aerobic organisms, in the presence of air
or oxygen, as agents for reducing the pollution load or
oxygen demand of organic substances in waste.
Aerobic Digestion. A process in which microorganisms obtain
energy by endogenous or auto-oxidation of their cellular
protoplasm. The biologically degradable constituents of
cellular material are slowly oxidized to carbon dioxide,
300
-------
water and ammonia, with the ammonia being further converted
into nitrates during the process.
Algae. One-celled or many-celled plants which grow in
sunlit waters and which are capable of photosynthesis. They
are a food for fish and small aquatic animals and, like all
plants, put oxygen in the water.
Algicide. Chemical agent used to destroy or control algae.
Alkali. A water-soluble metallic hydroxide that ionizes
strongly.
Alkalinity. The presence of salts of alkali metals. The
hydroxides, carbonates and bicarbonates of calcium, sodium
and magnesium are common impurities that cause alkalinity.
A quantitative measure of the capacity of liquids or
suspensions to neutralize strong acids or to resist the
establishment of acidic conditions. Alkalinity results from
the presence of bicarbonates, carbonates, hydroxides,
alkaline, salts and occasionally berates and is usually
expressed in terms of the amount of calcium carbonate that
would have an equivalent capacity to neutralize strong
acids.
Alum. A hydrated aluminum sulfate or potassium aluminum
sulfate or ammonium aluminum sulfate which is used as a
settling agent. A coagulant.
Ammonia Nitrogen. A gas released by the microbiological
decay of plant and animal proteins. When ammonia nitrogen
is found in waters, it is indicative of incomplete
treatment.
Ammonia Stripping. A modification of the aeration process
for removing gases in water. Ammonium ions in wastewater
exist in equilibrium with ammonia and hydrogen ions. As pH
increases, the equilibrium shifts to the right and above pH
9 ammonia may be liberated as a gas by agitating the
wastewater in the presence of air. This is usually done in
a packed tower with an air blower.
Ammonification. The process in which ammonium is liberated
from organic compounds by microoganisms.
Anaerobic. Ability to live, grow, or take place where there
is no air or free oxygen present.
Anaerobic Biological Treatment. Any treatment method or
process utilizing anaerobic or facultative organisms, in the
301
-------
absence of air, for the purpose of reducing the organic
matter in wastes or organic solids settled out from wastes.
Anaerobic Digestion. Biodegradable materials in primary and
excess activated sludge are stabilized by being oxidized to
carbon dioxide, methane and other inert products. The
primary digester serves mainly to reduce VSS, while the
secondary digester is mainly for solids-liquid separation,
sludge thickening and storage.
Anion. Ion with a negative charge.
Antagonistic Effect. The simultaneous action of separate
agents mutually opposing each other.
Antibiotic. A substance produced ty a living organism which
has power to inhibit the multiplication of, or to destroy,
other organisms, especially bacteria.
Aqueous solution. One containing water or watery in nature.
Aquifer. A geologic formation or stratum that contains
water and transmits it from one point to another in
quantities sufficient to permit economic development
(capable of yielding an appreciable supply of water).
Aqueous solution. One containing water or watery in nature.
Arithmetic Mean. The arithmetic mean of a number of items
is obtained by adding all the items together and dividing
the total by the number of items. It is frequently called
the average. It is greatly affected by extreme values.
Autoclave. A heavy vessel with thick walls for conducting
chemical reactions under high pressure. Also an apparatus
using steam under pressure for sterilization.
Azeotrope. A liquid mixture that is characterized by a
constant minimum or maximum boiling point which is lower or
higher than that of any of the components and that distills
without change in composition.
Backwashinq. The process of cleaning a rapid sand or
mechanical filter by reversing the flow of water.
Bacteria. Unicellular, plant-like microorganisms, lacking
chlorophyll. Any water supply contaminated by sewage is
certain to contain a bacterial group called "coliform".
302
-------
?^^?f g011!0™ ££°^E* A group of bacteria, predominantly
inhabitants of the intestine of man but also found on
vegetationf including all aerobic and facultative anaerobic
gram-negative, non-sporeforming bacilli that ferment lactose
with gas formation. This group includes five tribes of
which the very great majority are Eschericheae. The
Eschencheae tribe comprises three genera and ten species
of which Escherichia Coli and Aerobacter Aerogenes are
dominant. The Escherichia Coli are normal inhabitants of
the intestine of man and all vertbrates whereas Aerobacter
Aerogenes normally are found on grain and plants and only to
a varying degree in the intestine of man and animals?
Formerly referred to as B. Coli, B. Coli group and Coli-
Aerogenes Group.
Bacterial Growth. All bacteria require food for their
continued life and growth and all are affected by the
conditions of their environment. Like human beings, they
consume food, they respire, they need moisture, they require
heat and they give off waste products. Their food
requirements are very definite and have been, in general,
already outlined. Without an adequate food supply of the
««Se ^ ?P?cific organism requires, bacteria will not grow
and multiply at their maximum rate and they will therefore,
not perform their full and complete functions.
BADCT (NSPS) Effluent Limitations. Limitations for new
?^?€KI Wl!iCh fre based On the Application of the Best
Available Demonstrated Control Technology.
IS§e. A substance that in aqueous solution turns red litmus
blue, furnishes hydroxyl ions and reacts with an acid to
form a salt and water only.
Batch Process. A process which has an intermitrent flow of
raw materials into the process and a resultant intermittent
flow of product from the process. ci«u.«enr
BAT (BATEA), Effluent Limitations. Limitations for point
sources, other than publicly owned treatment works, which
are based on the application of the Best Available
These
Benthic. Attached to the bottom of a body of water.
303
-------
Bioassay. An assessment which is made by using living
organisms as the sensors.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), A measure of the oxygen
required to oxidize the organic material in a sample of
wastewater by natural biological process under standard
conditions. This test is presently universally accepted as
the yardstick of pollution and is utilized as a means to
determine the degree of treatment in a waste treatment
process. Usually given in mg/1 (cr ppm units), meaning
milligrams of oxygen required per liter of wastewater, it
can also be expressed in pounds of total oxygen required per
wastewater or sludge batch. The standard BOD is five days
at 20 degrees C.
Biota. The flora and fauna (plant and animal life) of a
stream or other water body.
Biological Treatment System. A system that uses
microorganisms to remove organic pollutant material from a
wastewater.
Slowdown. Water intentionally discharged from a cooling or
heating system to maintain the dissolved solids
concentration of the circulating water below a specific
critical level. The removal of a portion of any process
flow to maintain the constituents of the flow within desired
levels. Process may be intermittent or continuous. 2) The
water discharged from a boiler or cooling tower to dispose
of accumulated salts.
BOD5. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (EOD) is the amount of
oxygen required by bacteria while stabilizing decomposable
organic matter under aerobic conditions. The BOD test has
been developed on the basis of a 5-day incubation period
(i.e. BOD5).
Boiler Slowdown. Wastewater resulting from purging of solid
and waste materials from the boiler system. A solids build
up in concentration as a result of water evaporation (steam
generation) in the boiler.
BPT (BPCTCA) Effluent Limitations. Limitations for point
sources, other than publicly owned treatment works, which
are based on the application of the Best Practicable Control
Technology Currently Available. These limitations must be
achieved by July 1, 1977.
Break Point. The point at which impurities first appear in
the effluent of a granular carbon adsorption bed.
304
-------
Break Point Chlorination. The addition of sufficient
chlorine to destroy or oxidize all substances that creates a
chlorine demand with an excess amount remaining in the free
residual state.
Brine. Water saturated with a salt.
Buffer. A solution containing either a weak acid and its
salt or a weak base and its salt which thereby resists
changes in acidity or basicity, resists changes in pH.
Carbohydrate. A compound of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen,
usually having hydrogen and oxygen in the proportion of two
to one.
Carbonaceous. Containing or composed of carbon.
Catalyst. A substance which changes the rate of a chemical
reaction but undergoes no permanent chemical change itself.
Cation. The ion in an electrolyte which carries the
positive charge and which migrates toward the cathode under
the influence of a potential difference.
Caustic Soda. In its hydrated form it is called sodium
hydroxide. Soda ash is sodium carbonate.
Cellulose,. The fibrous constituent of trees which is the
principal raw material of paper and paperboard. Commonly
thought of as a fibrous material of vegetable origin.
Centrate. The liquid fraction that is separated from the
solids fraction of a slurry through centrifugation.
Centrifugation. The process of separating heavier materials
from lighter ones through the employment of centrifuqal
force.
Centrifuge. An apparatus that rotates at high speed and by
centrifugal force separates substances of different
densities.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD). A measure of oxygen-consuming
capacity of organic and inorganic matter present in water or
wastewater. It is expressed as the amount of oxygen
consumed from a chemical oxidant in a specific test. it
does not differentiate between stable and unstable organic
matter and thus does not correlate with biochemical oxygen
demand.
305
-------
Chemical Synthesis. The processes of chemically combining
two or more constituent substances into a single substance.
Chlorination. The application of chlorine to water, sewage
or industrial wastes, generally for the purpose of
disinfection but frequently for accomplishing other
biological or chemical results.
Clarification. Process of removing turbidity and suspended
solids by settling. Chemicals can be added to improve and
speed up the settling process through coagulation.
Clarifier. A basin or tank in which a portion of the
material suspended in a wastewater is settled.
Clays. Aluminum silicates less than 0.002mm (2.0 urn) in
size. Therefore, most clay types can go into colloidal
suspension.
Coagulation. The clumping together of solids to make them
settle out of the sewage faster. Coagulation of solids is
brought about with the use of certain chemicals, such as
lime, alum or polyelectrolytes.
Coagulation and Flocculation. Processes which follow
sequentially.
Coagulation Chemicals. Hydrolyzable divalent and trivalent
metallic ions of aluminum, magnesium and iron salts. They
include alum (aluminum sulfate), quicklime (calcium oxide),
hydrated lime (calcium hydroxide), sulfuric acid, anhydrous
ferric chloride. Lime and acid affect only the solution pH
which in turn causes coagulant precipitation, such as that
of magnesium.
Coliform. Those bacteria which are most abundant in sewage
and in streams containing feces and other bodily waste
discharges. See bacteria, coliform group.
Coliform organisms. A group of bacteria recognized as
indicators of fecal pollution.
Colloid. A finely divided dispersion of one material (0.01-
10 micron-sized particles), called the "dispersed phase"
(solid), in another material, called the "dispersion medium"
(liquid) .
Color Bodies. Those complex molecules which impart color to
a solution.
306
-------
Color Units. A solution with the color of unity contains a
mg/1 of metallic platinum (added as potassium
chloroplatinate to distilled water). Color units are
defined against a platinum-cobalt standard and are based, as
are all the other water quality criteria, upon those
analytical methods described in Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 12 ed., Amer. Public
Health Assoc., N.Y., 1967.
Combined Sewer. One which carries both sewage and storm
water run-off.
Composite Sample. A combination of individual samples of
wastes taken at selected intervals, generally hourly for 24
hours, to minimize the effect of the variations in
individual samples. Individual samples making up the
composite may be of equal volume or be roughly apportioned
to the volume of flow of liquid at the time of sampling.
Composting. The biochemical stabilization of solid wastes
into a humus-like substance by producing and controlling an
optimum environment for the process.
Concentration. The total mass of the suspended or dissolved
particles contained in a unit volume at a given temperature
and pressure.
Conductivity. A reliable measurement of electrolyte
concentration in a water sample. The conductivity
measurement can be related to the concentration of dissolved
solids and is almost directly proportional to the ionic
concentration of the total electrolytes.
Contact Stabilization. Aerobic digestion.
Contact Process Wastewaters. These are process-generated
wastewaters which have come in direct or indirect contact
with the reactants used in the process. These include such
streams as contact cooling water, filtrates, centrates, wash
waters, etc.
Continuous Process. A process which has a constant flow of
raw materials into the process and resultant constant flow
of product from the process.
Contract—Disposal. Disposal of waste products through an
outside party for a fee.
Cooling Water - Uncontaminated. Water used for cooling
purposes only which has no direct contact with any raw
307
-------
material, intermediate, or final product and which does not
contain a level of contaminants detectably higher than that
of the intake water.
Cooling Water - Contaminated. Water used for cooling
purposes only which may become contaminated either through
the use of water treatment chemicals used for corrosion
inhibitors or biocides, or by direct contact with process
materials and/or wastewater.
Crustaceae. These are small animals ranging in size from
0.2 to 0.3 millimeters long which move very rapidly through
the water in search of food. They have recognizable head
and posterior sections. They form a principal source of
food for small fish and are found largely in relatively
fresh natural water.
Cryogenic. Having to do with extremely low temperatures.
Crystalli zation. The formation cf solid particles within a
homogeneous phase. Formation of crystals separates a solute
from a solution and generally leaves impurities behind in
the mother liquid.
Culture. A mass of microorganisms growing in a media.
Curie. 3.7 x 10*° disintegrations per second within a given
quantity of material.
Cyanide, Total. Total cyanide as determined by the test
procedure specified in 40 CFR Part 136 (Federal Register,
Vol. 38, no. 199, October 16, 1973).
Cyclone. A conical shaped vessel for separating either
entrained solids or liquid materials from the carrying air
or vapor. The vessel has a tangential entry nozzle at or
near the largest diameter, with an overhead exit for air or
vapor and a lower exit for the more dense materials.
Cyanide A.. Cyanides amendable to chlorination as described
in "1972 Annual Book of ASTM Standards" 1972: Standard D
2036-72, Method B, p. 553.
Degreasing. The process of removing greases and oils from
sewage, waste and sludge.
Demineralization. The total removal of all ions.
Denitrification. Bacterial mediated reduction of nitrate to
nitrite. Other bacteria may act en the nitrite reducing it
308
-------
to ammonia and finally N2 gas. This reduction of nitrate
occurs under anaerobic conditions. The nitrate replaces
oxygen as an electron acceptor during the metabolism of
carbon compounds under anaerobic conditions. A biological
process in which gaseous nitrogen is produced from nitrite
and nitrate. The heterotrophic microoganisms which
participate in this process include pseudomonades,
achromobacters and bacilli.
Derivative. A substance extracted from another body or
substance.
Desorption. The opposite of adsorption. A phenomenon where
an adsorbed molecule leaves the surface of the adsorbent.
Diluent. A diluting agent.
Disinfection. The process of killing the larger portion
(but not necessarily all) of the harmful and objectionable
microorganisms in or on a medium.
Dissolved Air Flotation. The term "flotation" indicates
something floated on or at the surface of a liquid
Dissolved air flotation thickening is a process that adds
energy in the form of air bubbles, which become attached to
suspended sludge particles, increasing the buoyancy of the
particles and producing more positive flotation.
Dissolved Oxygen (DO]. The oxygen dissolved in sewage,
water or other liquids, usually expressed either in
milligrams per liter or percent of saturation. it is the
test used in BOD determination.
Distillation. The separation, by vaporization, of a liquid
mixture of miscible and volatile substance into individual
components, or, in some cases, into a group of components.
The process of raising the temperature of a liquid to the
boiling point and condensing the resultant vapor to liquid
form by cooling, it is used to remove substances from a
liquid or to obtain a pure liquid from one which contains
impurities or which is a mixture of several liquids havinq
different boiling temperatures. Used in the treatment of
fermentation products, yeast, etc. and other wastes to
remove recoverable products.
Double-effect Evaporators. Double-effect evaporators are
two evaporators in series where the vapors from one are used
to boil liquid in the other.
309
-------
DO Units. The units of measurement used are milligrams per
liter (mg/1) and parts per million (ppm), where mg/1 is
defined as the actual weight of oxygen per liter of water
and ppm is defined as the parts actual weight of oxygen
dissolved in a million parts weight of water, i.e., a pound
of oxygen in a million pounds of water is 1 ppm. For
practical purposes in pollution ccntrol work, these two are
used interchangeably; the density of water is so close to 1
g/ccu m that the error is negligible. Similarly, the
changes in volume of oxygen with changes in temperature are
insignificant. This, however, is not true if sensors are
calibrated in percent saturation rather than in mg/1 or ppm.
In that case, both temperature and barometric pressure must
be taken into consideration.
Drift. Entrained water carried frcm a cooling device by the
exhaust air.
Dual Media. A deep-bed filtration system utilizing two
separate and discrete layers of dissimilar media (e.g.,
anthracite and sand) placed one on top of the other to
perform the filtration function.
Ecology. The science of the interrelations between living
organisms and their environment.
Effluent. A liquid which leaves a unit operation or
process. Sewage, water or other liquids, partially or
completely treated or in their natural states, flowing out
of a reservoir basin, treatment plant or any other unit
operation. An influent is the incoming stream.
Elution. (1) The process of washing out, or removing with
the use of a solvent. (2) In an ion exchange process it is
defined as the stripping of adsorbed ions from an ion
exchange resin by passing through the resin solutions
containing other ions in relatively high concentrations.
Elutriation. A process of sludge conditioning whereby the
sludge is washed, either with fresh water or plant effluent,
to reduce the sludge alkalinity and fine particles, thus
decreasing the amount of required coagulant in further
treatment steps, or in sludge dewatering.
Emulsion. Emulsion is a suspension of fine droplets of one
liquid in another.
Entrainment Separator. A device to remove liquid and/or
solids from a gas stream. Energy source is usually derived
from pressure drop to create centrifugal force.
310
-------
Environment. The sum of all external influences and
conditions affecting the life and the development of an
organism.
Equalization Basin. A holding basin in which variations in
flow and composition of a liquid are averaged. Such basins
are used to provide a flow of reasonably uniform volume and
composition to a treatment unit.
Esterification. This generally involves the combination of
an alcohol and an organic acid to produce an ester and water
The reaction is carried out in the liquid phase, with
aqueous sulfuric acid as the catalyst. The use of sulfuric
acid has in the past caused this type of reaction to be
called sulfation.
Eutrophication. The process in which the life-sustaining
quality of a body of water is lost or diminished (e.g.,
aging or filling in of lakes). A eutrophic condition is one
in which the water is rich in nutrients but has a seasonal
oxygen deficiency.
Evapotranspiration. The loss of water from the soil both by
evaporation and by transpiration from the plants growing
thereon.
Facultative. Having the power to live under different
conditons (either with or without oxygen).
Facultative Lagoon. A combination of the aerobic and
anaerobic lagoons. It is divided ty loading and thermal
stratifications into an aerobic surface and an anaerobic
bottom, therefore the principles of both the aerobic and
anaerobic processes apply.
Fatty Acids. An organic acid obtained by the hydrolysis
(saponification) of natural fats and oils, e.g., stearic and
palmitic acids. These acids are monobasic and may or may
not contain some double bonds. They usually contain sixteen
or more carbon atoms.
Fauna- The animal life adapted for living in a specified
environment.
Fermentation. Oxidative decomposition of complex substances
through the action of enzymes or ferments produced by
microorganisms.
Filter Cakes. Wet solids generated by the filtration of
solids from a liquid. This filter cake may be a pure
311
-------
material (product) or a waste material containing additional
fine solids (i.e., diatomaceous earth) that has been added
to aid in the filtration.
Filter, Trickling. A filter consisting of an artificial bed
of coarse material, such as broken stone, clinkers, slate,
slats or brush, over which sewage is distributed and applied
in drops, films for spray, from troughs, drippers, moving
distributors or fixed nozzles. The sewage trickles through
to the underdrains and has the opportunity to form zoogleal
slimes which clarify and oxidize the sewage.
Filter, Vacuum. A filter consisting of a cylindrical drum
mounted on a horizontal axis and covered with a filter
cloth. The filter revolves with a partial submergence in
the liquid, and a vacuum is maintained under the cloth for
the larger part of each revolution to extract moisture. The
cake is scraped off continuously.
Filtrate. The liquid fraction that is separated from the
solids fraction of a slurry through filtration.
Filtration, Biological. The process of passing a liquid
through a biological filter containing media on the surfaces
of which zoogleal films develop that absorb and adsorb fine
suspended, colloidal and dissolved solids and that release
various biochemical end products.
Flocculants. Those water-soluble organic polyelectrolytes
that are used alone or in conjunction with inorganic
coagulants such as lime, alum or ferric chloride or
coagulant aids to agglomerate solids suspended in aqueous
systems or both. The large dense floes resulting from this
process permit more rapid and more efficient solids-liquid
separations.
Flocculation. The formation of floes. The process step
following the coagulation-precipitation reactions which
consists of bringing together the colloidal particles, it
is the agglomeration by organic polyelectroytes of the
small, slowly settling floes formed during coagulation into
large floes which settle rapidly.
Flora. The plant life characteristic of a region.
Flotation. A method of raising suspended matter to the
surface of the liquid in a tank as scum-by aeration, vacuum,
evolution of gas, chemicals, electrolysis, heat or bacterial
decomposition and the subsequent removal of the scum by
skimming.
312
-------
Fractionation (or Fractional Distillation). The separation
of constituents, or group of constituents, of a liquid
mixture of miscible and volatile substances by vaporization
and recondensing at specific boiling point ranges.
Fungus. A vegetable cellular organism that subsists on
organic material, such as bacteria.
Gland. A device utilizing a soft wear-resistant material
used to minimize leakage between a rotating shaft and the
stationary portion of a vessel such as a pump.
Gland Water. Water used to lubricate a gland. Sometimes
called "packing water."
Grab Sample. (1) Instantaneous sampling, (2) A sample
taken at a random place in space and time.
Grease. In sewage, grease includes fats, waxes, free fatty
acids, calcium and magnesium soaps, mineral oils and other
nonfatty materials. The type of solvent to be used for its
extraction should be stated.
Grit Chamber. A small detentiop chamber or an enlargement
of a sewer designed to reduce the velocity of flow of the
liquid and permit the separation of mineral from organic
solids by differential sedimentation.
Groundwater. The body of water that is retained in the
saturated zone which tends to move by hydraulic gradient to
lower levels.
Hardness. A measure of the capacity of water for
precipitating soap. It is reported as the hardness that
would be produced if a certain amount of CaCO_3 were
dissolved in water. More than one ion contributes to water
hardness. The "Glossary of Water and Wastewater Control
Engineering" defines hardness as: A characteristic of water,
imparted by salts of calcium, magnesium and ion, such as
bicarbonates, carbonates, sulfates, chlorides and nitrates,
that causes curdling of soap, deposition of scale in
boilers, damage in some industrial processes, and sometimes
objectionable taste. Calcium and magnesium are the most
significant constituents.
Heavy Metals. A general name given for the ions of metallic
elements, such as copper, zinc, iron, chromium and aluminum.
They are normally removed from a wastewater by the formation
of an insoluble precipitate (usually a metallic hydroxide).
313
-------
Hydrocarbon. A compound containing only carbon and
hydrogen.
Hydrolysis. A chemical reaction in which water reacts with
another substance to form one or more new substances.
Incineration. The combustion (by burning) of organic matter
in wastewater sludge.
Incubate. To maintain cultures, tacteria, or other
microorganisms at the most favorable temperature for
development.
Influent. Any sewage, water or other liquid, either raw or
partly treated, flowing into a reservoir, basin, treatment
plant, or any part thereof. The influent is the stream
entering a unit operation; the effluent is the stream
leaving it.
In-Plant Measures. Technology applied within the
manufacturing process to reduce or eliminate pollutants in
the raw waste water. Sometimes called "internal measures"
or "internal controls".
Ion. An atom or group of atoms possessing an electrical
charge.
Ion Exchange. A reversible interchange of ions between a
liquid and a solid involving no radical change in the
structure of the solid. The solid can be a natural zeolite
or a synthetic resin, also called polyelectrolyte. Cation
exchange resins exchange their hydrogen ions for metal
cations in the liquid. Anion exchange resins exchange their
hydroxyl ions for anions such as nitrates in the liquid.
When the ion-retaining capacity of the resin is exhausted,
it must be regenerated. Cation resins are regenerated with
acids and anion resins with bases.
Lagoons. An oxidation pond that received sewage which is
not settled or biologically treated.
LC 50. A lethal concentration for 50% of test animals.
Numerically the same as TLm. A statistical estimate of the
toxicant, such as pesticide concentration, in water
necessary to kill 50% of the test organisms within a
specified time under standardized conditions (usually 24,48
or 96 hr).
Leach. To dissolve out by the action of a percolating
liquid, such as water, seeping through a sanitary landfill.
314
-------
Lime. Limestone is an accumulation of organic remains
consisting mostly of calcium carbonate. When burned, it
yields lime which is a solid. The hydrated form of a
chemical lime is calcium hydroxide.
Liquid-liquid-extraction. The process by which the
constituents of a solution are separated by causing their
unequal distribution between two insoluble liquids.
Maximum Day Limitation. The effluent limitation value equal
to the maximum for one day and is the value to be published
by the EPA in the Federal Register.
Maximum Thirty Day Limitation. The effluent limitation
value for which the average of daily values for thirty
consecutive days shall not exceed and is the value to be
published by the EPA in the Federal Register.
Mean. The arithmetic average of the individual sample
values.
Median. In a statistical array, the value having as many
cases larger in value as cases smaller in value.
Median Lethal Dose (LD50). The dose lethal to 50 percent of
a group of test organisms for a specified period. The dose
material may be ingested or injected.
Median Tolerance Limit (TLm). In toxicological studies, the
concentration of pollutants at which 50 percent of the test
animals can survive for a specified period of exposure.
Microbial. Of or pertaining to a pathogenic bacterium.
Molecular Weight. The relative weight of a molecule
compared to the weight of an atom of carbon taken as exactly
12.00; the sum of the atomic weights of the atoms in a
molecule.
Mvcelia. The mass of filaments which constitutes the
vegetative body of fungi.
Navigable Waters. Includes all navigable waters of the
United States; tributaries of navigable waters; interstate
waters; intrastate lakes, rivers and streams which are
utilized by interstate travellers for recreational or other
purposes; intrastate lakes, rivers and streams from which
fish or shellfish are taken and sold in interstate commerce;
and intrastate lakes, rivers and streams which are utilized
315
-------
for industrial purposes by industries in interstate
commerce.
Ne utrali zation. The restoration of the hydrogen or
hydroxyl ion balance in a solution so that the ionic
concentration of each are equal. Conventionally, the
notation "pH" (puissance d1hydrogen) is used to describe the
hydrogen ion concentration or activity present in a given
solution. For dilute solutions of strong acids, i.e., acids
which are considered to be completely dissociate (ionized in
solution), activity equals concentration.
New Source. Any facility from which there is or may be a
discharge of pollutants, the construction of which is
commenced after the publication of proposed regulations
prescribing a standard of performance under section 306 of
the Act.
Njtrate Nitrogen. The final decomposition product of the
organic nitrogen compounds. Determination of this parameter
indicates the degree of waste treatment.
Nitrification. Bacterial mediated oxidation of ammonia to
nitrite. Nitrite can be further oxidized to nitrate. These
reactions are brought about by only a few specialized
bacterial species. Nitrosomonias sp. and Nitrococcus sp.
oxidize ammonia to nitrite which is oxidized to nitrate by
Nitrobacter sp.
Nitrifiers. Bacteria which causes the oxidation of ammonia
to nitrites and nitrates.
Nitrite Nitrogen. An intermediate stage in the decompo-
sition of organic nitrogen to the nitrate form. Tests for
nitrite nitrogen can determine whether the applied treatment
is sufficient.
Nitrobacteria. Those bacteria (an autotrophic genus) that
oxidize nitrite nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen.
Nitrogen Cycle. Organic nitrogen in waste is oxidized by
bacteria into ammonia. If oxygen is present, ammonia is
bacterially oxidized first into nitrite and then into
nitrate. If oxygen is not present, nitrite and nitrate are
bacterially reduced to nitrogen gas. The second step is
called "denitrification."
Nitrogen Fixation. Biological nitrogen fixation is carried
on by a selected group of bacteria which take up atmospheric
316
-------
nitrogen and convert it to amine groups or for amino acid
synthesis.
Nitrosomonas. Bacteria which oxidize ammonia nitrogen into
nitrite nitrogen; an aerobic autotrophic life form.
Non-contact Cooling Water. Water used for cooling that does
not come into direct contact with any raw material,
intermediate product, waste product or finished product.
Non-contact Process Wastewaters. Wastewaters generated by a
manufacturing process which have net come in direct contact
with the reactants used in the process. These include such
streams as non-contact cooling water, cooling tower
blowdown, boiler blowdown, etc.
Nonputrescible. Incapable of organic decomposition or
decay.
Normal Solution. A solution that contains 1 gm molecular
weight of the dissolved substance divided by the hydrogen
equivalent of the substance (that is, one gram equivalent)
per liter of solution. Thus, a one normal solution of
sulfuric acid (H2SO*», mol. wt. 98) contains (98/2) 49gms of
H2SOJ* per liter.
NSPS. New Source Performance Standards. See BADCT.
NPDES. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System. A
federal program requiring industry to obtain permits to
discharge plant effluents to the nation's water courses.
Nutrient. Any substance assimilated by an organism which
promotes growth and replacement of cellular constituents.
•
Operations and Maintenance. Costs required to operate and
maintain pollution abatement equipment including labor,
material, insurance, taxes, solid waste disposal, etc.
Organic Loading. In the activated sludge process, the food
to micoorganisms (F/M) ratio defined as the amount of
biodegradable material available to a given amount of
microorganisms per unit of time.
Osmosis. The diffusion of a solvent through a semipermeable
membrane into a more concentrated solution.
Oxidation. A process in which an atom or group of atoms
loses electrons; the combination of a substance with oxygen,
accompanied with the release of energy. The oxidized atom
317
-------
usually becomes a positive ion while the oxidizing agent
becomes a negative ion in (chlorination for example) .
Oxidation Pond. A man-made lake or body of water in which
wastes are consumed by bacteria. It receives an influent
which has gone through primary treatment while a lagoon
receives raw untreated sewage.
Oxidation Reduction (OR) . A class of chemical reactions in
which one of the reacting species gives up electrons
(oxidation) while another species in the reaction accepts
electrons (reduction) . At one time, the term oxidation was
restricted to reactions involving hydrogen. Current
chemical technology has broadened the scope of these terms
to include all reactions where electrons are given up and
taken on by reacting species; in fact, the donating and
accepting of electrons must take place simultaneously.
Oxidation Reduction Potential ORP • A measurement that
indicates the activity ratio of the oxidizing and reducing
species present.
Oxygen, Available. The quantity of atmospheric oxygen
dissolved in the water of a stream; the quantity of
dissolved oxygen available for the oxidation of organic
matter in sewage.
Oxygen, Dissolved. The oxygen (usually designated as DO)
dissolved in sewage, water or another liquid and usually
expressed in parts per million or percent of saturation.
Ozonation. A water or wastewater treatment process
involving the use of ozone as an oxidation agent.
Ozone. That molecular oxygen with three t atoms of oxygen
forming each molecule. The third atcm of oxygen in each
molecule of ozone is loosely bound and easily released.
Ozone is used sometimes for the disinfection of water but
more frequently for the oxidation of taste- producing
substances, such as phenol, in water and for the
neutralization of odors in gases or air.
Parts Per Million (ppm) . Parts ty weight in sewage
analysis; ppm by weight is equal to milligrams per liter
divided by the specific gravity. It should be noted that in
water analysis ppm is always understood to imply a
weight/weight ratio, even though in practice a volume may be
measured instead of a weight.
Pathogenic. Disease producing.
318
-------
Percolation. The movement of water beneath the ground
surface both vertically and horizontally, but above the
groundwater table.
Permeability. The ability of a substance (soil) to allow
appreciable movement of water through it when saturated and
actuated by a hydrostatic pressure.
pH. The negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion
concentration or activity in a solution. The number 7
indicates neutrality, numbers less than 7 indicate
increasing acidity and numbers greater than 7 indicate
increasing alkalinity.
Phenol. Class of cyclic organic derivatives with the basic
chemical formula C6H5OH.
Phosphate. Phosphate ions exist as an ester or salt of
phosphoric acid, such as calcium phosphate rock. In
municipal wastewater, it is most frequently present as
orthophosphate.
Phosphorus Precipitation. The addition of the multivalent
metallic ions of calcium, iron and aluminum to wastewater to
form insoluble precipitates with phosphorus.
Photosynthesis. The mechanism by which chlorophyll-bearing
plant utilize light energy to produce carbohydrate and
oxygen from carbon dioxide and water (the reverse of
respiration).
Physical/Chemical Treatment System. A system that utilizes
physical (i.e., sedimentation, filtration, centrifugation,
activated carbon, reverse osmosis, etc.) and/or chemical
means (i.e., coagulation, oxidation, precipitation, etc.) to
treat wastewaters.
Point Source. Any discernible, confined and discrete
conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch,
channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container,
rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or
vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or
may be discharged.
Pollutional Load. A measure of the strength of a wastewater
in terms of its solids or oxygen-demanding characteristics
or other objectionable physical and chemical characteristics
or both or in terms of harm done to receiving waters. The
pollutional load imposed on sewage treatment works is
expressed as equivalent population.
319
-------
Polyelectrolytes. Synthetic chemicals (polymers) used to
speed up the removal of solids from sewage. These chemicals
cause solids to coagulate or clump together more rapidly
than do chemicals such as alum or lime. They can be anionic
(-charge), nonionic {+ and -charge) or cationic (^charge—
the most popular). They are linear or branched organic
polymers. They have high molecular weights and are water-
soluble. Compounds similar to the polyelectrolyte
flocculants include surface-active agents and ion exchange
resins. The former are low molecular weight, water soluble
compounds used to disperse solids in aqueous systems. The
latter are high molecular weight, water-insoluble compounds
used to selectively replace certain ions already present in
water with more desirable or less noxious ions.
Population Equivalent (PE) . An expression of the relative
strength of a waste (usually industrial) in terms of its
equivalent in domestic waste, expressed as the population
that would produce the equivalent domestic waste. A
population equivalent of 160 million persons means the
pollutional effect equivalent to raw sewage from 160 million
persons; 0.17 pounds BOD (the oxygen demand of untreated
wastes from one person) = 1 PE.
Potable Water. Drinking water sufficiently pure for human
use.
Potash. Potassium compounds used in agriculture and
industry. Potassium carbonate can be obtained from wood
ashes. The mineral potash is usually a muriate. Caustic
potash is its hydrated form.
Preaeration . A preparatory treatment of sewage consisting
of aeration to remove gases and add oxygen or to promote the
flotation of grease and aid coagulation.
Precipitation. The phenomenon which occurs when a substance
held in solution passes out of that solution into solid
form. The adjustment of pH can reduce solubility and cause
precipitation. Alum and lime are frequently used chemicals
in such operations as water softening or alkalinity
reduction.
Pretreatment. Any wastewater treatment process used to
partially reduce the pollution load before the wastewater is
introduced into a main sewer system or delivered to a
treatment plant for substantial reduction of the pollution
load.
320
-------
Primary Clarifier. The settling tank into which the
wastewater (sewage) first enters and from which the solids
are removed as raw sludge.
Primary Sludge. Sludge from primary clarifiers.
Primary Treatment. The removal of material that floats or
will settle in sewage by using screens to catch the floating
objects and tanks for the heavy matter to settle in. The
first major treatment and sometimes the only treatment in a
wastp-treatment works, usually sedimentation and/or
flocculation and digestion. The removal of a moderate
percentage of suspended matter but little or no colloidal or
dissolved matter. May effect the removal of 30 to 35
percent or more BOD.
Process Waste Water. Any water which, during manufacturing
or processing, comes into direct contact with or results
from the production or use of any raw material, intermediate
product, finished product, by-product, or waste product.
Process Water. Any water (solid, liquid or vapor) which,
during the manufacturing process, comes into direct contact
with any raw material, intermediate product, by-product,
waste product, or finished product.
Putrefaction. Biological decomposition of organic matter
accompanied by the production of foul-smelling products
associated with anaerobic conditions.
Pyrolysis. The high temperature decomposition of complex
molecules that occurs in the presence of an inert atmosphere
(no oxygen present to support combustion).
Quench. A liquid used for cooling purposes.
Raw Waste Load (RWL1. The quantity (kg) of pollutant being
discharged in a plant's wastewater. measured in terms of
some common denominator (i.e., kkg of production or m^ of
floor area).
Receiving Waters. Rivers, lakes, oceans or other courses
that receive treated or untreated wastewaters.
Recirculation. The refiltration of either all or a portion
of the effluent in a high-rate trickling filter for the
purpose of maintaining a uniform high rate through the
filter. (2) The return of effluent to the incoming flow to
reduce its strength.
321
-------
Reduction. A process in which an atom (or group of atoms)
gain electrons. Such a process always requires the input of
energy.
Refractory Organics. organic materials that are only
partially degraded or entirely nonbiodegradable in
biological waste treatment processes. Refractory organics
include detergents, pesticides, color- and odor-causing
agents, tannins, lignins, ethers, olefins, alcohols, amines,
aldehydes, ketones, etc.
Residual Chlorine. The amount of chlorine left in the
treated water that is available to oxidize contaminants if
they enter the stream. It is usually in the form of
hypochlorous acid of hypochlorite ion or of one of the
chloramines. Hypochlorite concentration alone is called
"free chlorine residual" while together with the chloramine
concentration their sum is called "combined chlorine
residual."
Respiration. Biological oxidation within a life form; the
most likely energy source for animals (the reverse of
photosynthesis) .
Retention Time. Volume of the vessel divided by the flow
rate through the vessel.
Retort. A vessel, commonly a glass bulb with a long neck
bent downward, used for distilling or decomposing substances
by heat.
Reverse Osmosis. The process in which a solution is
pressurized to a degree greater than the osmotic pressure of
the solvent, causing it to pass through a membrane.
Salt. A compound made up of the positive ion of a base and
the negative ion of an acid.
Sanitary Landfill. A sanitary landfill is a land disposal
site employing an engineered method of disposing of solid
wastes on land in a manner that minimizes environmental
hazards by spreading the wastes in thin layers, compacting
the solid wastes to the smallest practical volume, and
applying cover material at the end of each operating day.
There are two basic sanitary landfill methods; trench fill
and area or ramp fill. The method chosen is dependent on
many factors such as drainage and type of soil at the
proposed landfill site.
322
-------
Sanitary Sewers. In a separate system, pipes in a city that
carry only domestic wastewater. The storm water runoff is
handled by a separate system of pipes.
Screening. The removal of relatively coarse, floating and
suspended solids by straining through racks or screens.
Secondary Treatment. The second step in most waste
treatment systems in which bacteria consume the organic part
of the wastes. This is accomplished by bringing the sewage
and bacteria together either in trickling filters or in the
activated sludge process.
Sedimentation, Final. The settling of partly settled,
flocculated or oxidized sewage in a final tank. (The term
settling is preferred).
sedimentation. Plain. The sedimentation of suspended matter
in a liquid unaided by chemicals or other special means and
without any provision for the decomposition of the deposited
solids in contact with the sewage. (The term plain settling
is preferred) .
Seed. To introduce microorganisms into a culture medium.
Settleable Solids. Suspended solids which will settle out
of a liquid waste in a given period of time.
Settling Velocity. The terminal rate of fall of a particle
through a fluid as induced by gravity or other external
forces.
Sewage, Raw. Untreated sewage.
Sewage, Storm. The liquid flowing in sewers during or
following a period of heavy rainfall and resulting
therefrom.
Sewerage. A comprehensive term which includes facilities
for collecting, pumping, treating and disposing of sewage;
the sewerage system and the sewage treatment works.
SIC Codes. Standard Industrial Classification. Numbers
used by the U.S. Department of Commerce to denote segments
of industry.
Silt. Particles with a size distribution of 0.05mm-0.002mm
(2.0mm). Silt is high in quartz and feldspar.
Skimming. Removing floating solids (scum).
323
-------
Sludge, Activated. Sludge floe produced in raw or settled
sewage by the growth of zoogleal bacteria and other
organisms in the presence of dissolved oxygen and
accumulated in sufficient concentration by returning the
floe previously formed.
Sludge, Age. The ratio of the weight of volatile solids in
the digester to the weight of volatile solids added per day.
There is a maximum sludge age beyond which no significant
reduction in the concentration of volatile solids will
occur.
Sludge, Digested. Sludge digested under anaerobic
conditions until the volatile content has been reduced,
usually by approximately 50 percent or more.
Solution. A homogeneous mixture of two or more substances
of dissimilar molecular structure. In a solution, there is
a dissolving medium-solvent and a dissolved substance-
solute.
Solvent. A liquid which reacts with a material, bringing it
into solution.
Solvent Extraction. A mixture of two components is treated
by a solvent that preferentially dissolves one or more of
the components in the mixture. The solvent in the extract
leaving the extractor is usually recovered and reused.
Sparger. An air diffuser designed to give large bubbles,
used singly or in combination with mechanical aeration
devices.
Sparging. Heating a liquid by means of live steam entering
through a perforated or nozzled pipe (used, for example, to
coagulate blood solids in meat processing) .
Standard Deviation. The square root of the variance which
describes the variability within the sampling data on the
basis of the deviation of individual sample values from the
mean.
Standard Raw Waste Load (SRWL^. The raw waste load which
characterizes a specific subcategory. This is generally
computed by averaging the plant raw waste loads within a
subcategory.
Steam Distillation. Fractionation in which steam introduced
as one of the vapors or in which steam is injected to
provide the heat of the system.
324
-------
Sterilization. The complete destuction of all living
organisms in or on a medium; heat to 121°C at 5 psig for 15
minutes.
Bottom. The residue remaining after distillation of a
material. Varies from a watery slurry to a thick tar which
may turn hard when cool.
Stillwell. A pipe, chamber , or compartment with
comparatively small inlet or inlets communicating with a
main body of water. Its purpose is to dampen waves or
surges while permitting the water level within the well to
rise and fall with the major fluctuations of the main body
of water. it is used with water-measuring devices to
improve accuracy of measurement.
S toichi ometric . Characterized by being a proportion of
substances exactly right for a specific chemical reaction
with no excess of any reactant or product.
Stripper. A device in which relatively volatile components
are removed from a mixture by distillation or by passage of
steam through the mixture.
Substrate. (1) Reactant portion of any biochemical
reaction, material transformed into a product. (2) Any
substance used as a nutrient by a microorganism. (3) The
liquor in which activated sludge or other material is kept
in suspension.
Sulfate. The final decomposition product of organic sulfur
compounds.
Supernatant. Floating above or on the surface,
Surge tank. A tank for absorbing and dampening the wave like
motion of a volume of liquid; an in- process storage tank
that acts as a flow buffer between process tanks.
Suspended Solids. The wastes that will not sink or settle
in sewage. The quantity of material deposited on a filter
when a liquid is drawn through a Gooch crucible.
Synergistic. An effect which is more than the sum of the
individual contributors.
Svnercristic Effect. The simultaneous action of separate
agents which, together, have greater total effect than the
sum of their individual effects.
325
-------
Tablet. A small, disc-like mass of medicinal powder used as
a dosage form for administering medicine.
Tertiary Treatment. A process to remove practically all
solids and organic matter from wastewater. Granular
activated carbon filtration is a tertiary treatment process.
Phosphate removal by chemical coagulation is also regarded
as a step in tertiary treatment.
Thermal Oxidation. The wet combustion of organic materials
through the application of heat in the presence of oxygen.
TKN (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen). Includes ammonia and organic
nitrogen but does not include nitrite and nitrate nitrogen.
The sum of free nitrogen and organic nitrogen in a sample.
TLm. The concentration that kills 50% of the test organisms
within a specified time span, usually in 96 hours or less.
Most of the available toxicity data are reported as the
median tolerance limit (TLm). This system of reporting has
been misapplied by some who have erroneously inferred that a
TLm value is a safe value, whereas it is merely the level at
which half of the test organisms are killed. In many cases,
the differences are great between TLm concentrations and
concentrations that are low enough to permit reproduction
and growth. LC50 has the same numerical value as TLm.
Total Organic Carbon (TOG). A measure of the amount of
carbon in a sample originating from organic matter only.
The test is run by burning the sample and measuring the
carbon dioxide produced.
Total Solids. The total amount of solids in a wastewater
both in solution and suspension.
Total Volatile Solids JTVS). The quantity of residue lost
after the ignition of total solids.
Transport Water. Water used to carry insoluble solids.
Trickling Filter. A bed of rocks or stones. The sewage is
trickled over the bed so that bacteria can break down the
organic wastes. The bacteria collect on the stones through
repeated use of the filter.
Trypsinize. To treat with trypsin, a proteolytic enzyme of
the pancreatic juice, capable of converting proteins into
peptone.
326
-------
Turbidity. A measure of the amount of solids in suspension.
The units of measurement are parts per million (ppm) of
suspended solids or Jackson Candle Units. The Jackson
Candle Unit (JCU) is defined as the turbidity resulting from
1 ppm of fuller's earth (and inert mineral) suspended in
water. The relationship between ppm and JCU depends on
particle size, color, index of refraction; the correlation
between the two is generally not possible. Turbidity
instruments utilize a light beam projected into the sample
fluid to effect a measurement. The light beam is scattered
by solids in suspension and the degree of light attenuation
or the amount of scattered light can be related to
turbidity. The light scattered is called the Tyndall effect
and the scattered light the Tyndall light. An expression of
the optical property of a sample which causes light to be
scattered and absorbed rather than transmitted in straight
lines through the sample.
Viruses. (1) An obligate intracellular parasitic
microorganism smaller than bacteria. Kost can pass through
filters that retain bacteria. (2) The smallest (10-300 urn
in diameter) form capable of producing infection and
diseases in man or other large species. Occurring in a
variety of shapes, viruses consist of a nucleic acid core
surrounded by an outer shell (capsid) which consists of
numerous protein subunits (capsomeres). Some of the larger
viruses contain additional chemical substances. The true
viruses are insensitive to antibiotics. They multiply only
in living cells where they are assembled as complex
macromolecules utilizing the cells* biochemical systems.
They do not multiply by division as do intracellular
bacteria.
Volatile Suspended Solids (VSS1. The quantity of suspended
solids lost after the ignition of total suspended solids.
Waste Treatment Plant. A series of tanks, screens, filters,
pumps and other equipment by which pollutants are removed
from water.
Wasterwater. Process water contaminated to such an extent
it is not reusable in the process without repurification.
Water Quality Criteria. Those specific values of water
quality associated with an identified beneficial use of the
water under consideration.
Weir. A flow measuring device consisting of a barrier
across an open channel, causing the liquid to flow over its
327
-------
crest. The height of the liquid above the crest varies with
the volume of liquid flow.
Wet Air Pollution Control. The technique of air pollution
abatement utilizing water as an absorptive media.
Wet Oxidation. The direct oxidation of organic matter in
wastewater liquids in the presence of air under heat and
pressure; generally applied to organic matter oxidation in
sludge.
Zeolite. Various natural or synthesized silicates used in
water softening and as absorbents.
Zooplankton. (1) The animal portion of the plankton. (2)
Collective term for the nonphotosynthetic organisms present
in plankton; contrasts with phytoplankton.
328
-------
SECTION XVII
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMEOLS
A.C. activated carbon
ac.ft. acre foot
Ag. silver
atm. atmosphere
ave. average
B. Boron
Ba. Barium
bbl. barrel
BOD5 biochemical oxygen demand, five day
Btu British thermal unit
C centigrade degrees
C.A. carbon adsorption
cal. calorie
cc cubic centimeter
cfm cubic foot per minute
cfs cubic foot per second
Cl. chloride
cm centimeter
CN cyanide
COD chemical oxygen demand
c one. coneentration
cu m cubic meter
db decibels
deg degree
DO dissolved oxygen
E. Coli Escherichia coliform bacteria
Eq. equation
F Fahrenheit degrees
Fig. figure
F/M food to microorganism ratio (Ibs BOD/lbs MLSS)
fpm foot per minute
fps foot per second
ft foot
g gram
gal gallon
gpd gallon per day
gpm gallon per minute
Hg mercury
hp horsepower
hp-hr horsepower-hour
hr hour
in inch
kg kilogram
kw kilowatt
kwhr kilowatthour
329
-------
L (1)
L/kkg
Ib
m
M
me
mg
mgd
min
ml
MLSS
MSVSS
mm
MM
mole
mph
MPN
mu
NOJJ
NH^-N
O2
p.
pH
POTW
pp.
ppb
ppm
psf
psi
R.O.
rpm
R.W.L.
sec
Sec.
S.I.C.
sox
sq
sq.ft.
SS
stp
SRWL
TDS
TKN
TLm
TOC
TOD
TSS
u
ug
vol
wt
yd
liter
liters per 1000 kilograms
pound
meter
thousand
milliequivalent
milligram
million gallons daily
minute
milliliter
mixed-liquor suspended solids
mixed-liquor volatile suspended solids
millimeter
million
gram-molecular weight
mile per hour
most probable number
millimicron
nitrate
ammonia nitrogen
oxygen
phosphate
potential hydrogen or hydrogen-ion index (negative
logrithm of the hydrogen-ion concentration)
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
pages
parts per billion
parts per million
pound per square foot
pound per square inch
reverse osmosis
revolution per minute
raw waste load
second
Section
Standard Industrial Classification
sul fates
square
square foot
suspended solids
standard temperature and pressure
standard raw waste load
total dissolved solids
total Kjeldahl nitrogen
median tolerance limit
total organic carbon
total oxygen demand
total suspended solids
micron
microgram
volume
weight
yard
330
-------
TABLE XVIII
METRIC TABLE
CONVERSION TABLE
12/6/76
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
I CONVERSION P
0.405
1233.5
0.252
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
(0.06805 psig +1)*
0.0929
6.452
0.907
0.9144
f
iBBREVIATIOl
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg cal/kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
°C
m
1
I/sec
kw
cm
atm
kg
cu m/day
km
atm
sq m
sq cm
kkg
m
TO OBTAIN (METRIC UNITS)
METRIC UNIT
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram-calories
kilogram calories/kilogram
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
liters/second
killowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters/day
kilometer
atmospheres (absolute)
square meters
square centimeters
metric ton (1000 kilograms)
meter
*Actual conversion, not a multiplier
331
------- |