DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
FOR THE
MACHINERY & MECHANICAL
PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
VOLUME 4 SECTIONS VIM, IX, X. XI,
XII, XIII & XIV
£
I ^w s
\.
SB
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
JUNE 1975
-------
DRAFT
NOTICE
The attached document is a DRAFT CONTRACTOR'S REPORT. It includes tech-
nical information and recommendations submitted by the Contractor to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") regarding the sub-
ject industry. It is being distributed for review and coiswaent only. The
report is not an official EPA publication, and it has not been reviewed
by the Agency. '
The report, including the recommendations, will be undergoing extensive
review by EPA, Federal and State agencies, public interest organizations,,
and other interested groups and persons during the coining weeks. The
report—and, in particular, the contractor's recommended effluent limita-
tion guidelines and standards of performance—is subject to change in any
and all respects.
The regulations to be published by EPA under Section 3(K (b) and 306 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, will be based to a
large extent on the report and the comments received on it. However,
pursuant to Sections 304 (b) and 306 of the Act, EPA v/ill also consider
additional pertinent technical and economic information which is developed
in the course of review of this report by the public and within EPA. EPA
is currently performing an economic impact analysis regarding the subject
industry, which will be taken into account as part of the review of the
report. Upon completion of the review prcce?s, and prior to final pro-
mulgation of regulations, an EFA report will be issued setting forth EPA's
conclusions concerning the Machinery and Mechanical Products industry,
effluent limitation guidelines, and standard? of performance applicable
to such industry. Judgments necessary to promulgation of regulations
under Section 304 (b) and 306 of the Act, of course, remain the respon-
sibility of EPA. Subject to the?e limitations, EPA is making this draft
contractor's report available in order to encourage the widest possible
participation of interested perscrs in the decision making process at the
earliest possible time.
The report shall have standing in any EPA proceeding or court proceeding
only to the extent that it represents the views of the Contractor who
studied the subject industry and prepared the information and recommenda-
tions. It cannot be cited, referenced, or represented in any respect in
any such proceedings as a statement of EPA's views regarding the subject •
industry.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water and Hazardous Materials
Effluent Guidelines Division
Washington, D. C. 20460
-------
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
FOR THE
MACHINERY & MECHANICAL
PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING
POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
VOLUME 4 SECTIONS VIII, IX, X, XI,
XII, XIII & XIV
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-2914
JUNE 1975
-------
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS
Table of Contents Volume !_
Section Page
I CONCLUSIONS 1-1
II RECOMMENDATIONS 2-1
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY 2-1
AVAILABLE
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 2-1
-NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 2-1
III INTRODUCTION 3-1
" PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY 3-1
APPROACH TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS DERIVATION 3-2
Sources of Industry 3-3
Utilization of Industry Data 3-24
Effluent Limitations Derivation 3-27
INDUSTRY SUMMARY DESCRIPTION 3-31
PRODUCTION DATA 3-39
Raw Materials 3-44
Production Processes 3-45
Water Usage 3-47
Waste Characteristics 3-47
INDIVIDUAL INDUSTRY SEGMENT DESCRIPTIONS 3-47
Miscellaneous Plastics Products 3-54
Primary Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous 3-63
Metals, Not Elsewhere Classified
Secondary Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous 3-69
Metals
Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding of Copper 3-75
Aluminum Sheet, Plate, and Foil 3-81
Aluminum Extruded Products 3-86
Aluminum Rolling and Drawing, Not Elsewhere 3-91
Classified
Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding of Nonferrous 3-96
Metals, Except Copper and Aluminum
Drawing and Insulating of Nonferrous Wire 3-101
111
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 1, Section III (Continued)
Aluminum Foundries (Castings) 3-105
Brass, Bronze, Copper, Copper Base Alloy 3-110
Foundries
Nonferrous Foundries (Castings), Not Elsewhere 3-115
Classified
Metal Heat Treating 3-120
Primary Metal Products, Not Elsewhere 3-124
Classified
Metal Cans 3-129
Metal Shipping Barrels, Drums, Kegs, and Pails 3-134
Cutlery 3-139
Hand and Edge Tools, Except Machine Tools and 3-144
Hand Saws
Hand Saws and Saw Blades 3-151
Hardware, Not Elsewhere Classified 3-155
Enameled Iron and Metal Sanitary Ware 3-162
Plumbing Fixture Fittings and Trim 3-167
(Brass Goods)
Heating Equipment, Except Electric and Warm 3-172
Air Furnaces
Fabricated Structural Metal 3-177
Metal Doors, Sash, Frames, Molding, and Trim 3-182
Fabricated Plate Work (Boiler Shops) 3-187
Sheet Metal Work , 3-194
Architectural and Ornamental Metal Work 3-199
Prefabricated Metal Buildings and Components 3-204
Miscellaneous Metal Work 3-204
Screw Machine Products 3-210
Bolts, Nuts, Screws, Rivets, and Washers 3-214
(Fasteners)
Iron and Steel Forgings 3-219
Nonferrous Forgings 3-224
Automotive Stampings 3-228
Crowns and Closures 3-232
Metal Stampings, Not Elsewhere Classified 3-236
Small Arms Ammunition 3-241
Ammunition, Except for Small Arms, Not 3-246
Elsewhere Classified
Small Arms 3-252
Ordnance and Accessories, Not Elsewhere 3-257
Classified
Steel Springs, Except Wire 3-262
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 1, Section III (Continued)
Valves and Pipe
Brass Good:
Wire Springs
Miscellaneous Fabricated Wire Products
Metal Foil and Leaf
Fabricated Pipe
Fabricated Meta'.i Products, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Steam, Gas, and
Generator Set Units
Internal Combustion Engines, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Farm Machinery and Equipment
Garden Tractors
Construction Ma
Mining Machiner
and Lawn and Garden Equipment
:hinery and Equipment
Systems
Industrial True
Stackers
Machine Tools,
Machine Tools,
Machine Tool Ac
Power Driven Ha id Tools
Rolling Mill Ma
Fittings, Except Plumbers'
and Fabricated Pipe Fittings
Hydraulic Turbines and Turbine
and Equipment, Except Oil
Field Machinery and Equipment
Oil Field Machinery and Equipment
Elevators and Moving Stairways
Conveyors and Conveying Equipment
Hoists, Industrial Cranes, and Monorail
cs, Tractors, Trailers and
tetal Cutting Types
4etal Forming Types
Special Dies an|3 Tools, Die Sets, Jigs and
Fixtures aid Industrial Molds
^essories and Measuring Devices
^hinery and Equipment
Metalworking Machinery, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Food Products Machinery
Textile Machinery
Woodworking Machinery
Paper Industries Machinery
Printing Trades Machinery and Equipment
Special Industry Machinery, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Pumps and Pumping Equipment
Air and Gas Compressors
Ball and Roller Bearings
3-267
3-272
3-277
3-284
3-289
3-294
3-300
3-305
3-310
3-317
3-322
3-329
3-335
3-340
3-345
3-350
3-355
3-361
3-368
3-374
3-379
3-385
3-390
3-395
3-400
3-406
3-412
3-417
3-422
3-429
3-435
3-435
3-440
v
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 2_, Section III (Continued)
Blowers and Exhaust and Ventilation Fans 3-445
Industrial Patterns 3-450
Speed Changers, Industrial High Speed Drives, 3-454
and Gears
Mechanical Power Transmission Equipment, Mot 3-454
Elsewhere Classified
Industrial Process Furnaces and Ovens 3-459
General Industrial Machinery and Equipment, 3-464
Mot Elsewhere Classified
Typewriters 3-471
Office Machines, Not Elsewhere Classified 3-471
Electronic Computing Equipment 3-478
Calculating and Accounting Machines, Except 3-484
Electronic Computing Equipment
Scales and Balances, Except Laboratory 3-489
Automatic Merchandising Machines 3-494
Commercial Laundry, Dry Cleaning, and 3-498
Pressing Machines
Air Conditioning and Warm Air Heating 3-503
Equipment and Commercial and Industrial
Refrigeration Equipment
Measuring and Dispensing Pumps 3-508
Service Industry Machines, Not Elsewhere 3-512
Classified
Carburetors, Pistons, Piston Rings and Valves 3-517
Machinery, Except Electrical, Not Elsewhere 3-517
Classified
Power, Distribution, and Specialty Transformers 3-523
Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus 3-528
Motors and Generators 3-533
Industrial Controls 3-538
Welding Apparatus, Electric 3-543
Carbon and Graphite Products 3-548
Electrical Industrial Apparatus, Not Elsewhere 3-552
Classified
Household Cooking Equipment 3-557
Household Refrigerators and Home and Farm 3-562
Freezers
Household Laundry Equipment 3-567
Electric Housewares and Fans 3-572
Household Vacuum Cleaners 3-578
Household Appliances, Not Elsewhere Classified 3-582
Electric Lamps 3-587
VI
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 2, Section III (Continued)
Current-Carrying Wiring Devices
Noncurrent-Carrying Wiring Devices
Residential Electric Lighting Fixtures
Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional
Electric Lighting Fixtures
Vehicular Lighting Equipment
Lighting Equipment, Not Elsewhere Classified
Radio and Television Receiving Sets, Except
Communication Types
Phonograph Records and Pre-recorded Magnetic
Tape
Telephone and Telegraph Apparatus
Radio and Television Transmitting, Signaling,
and Detection Equipment and Apparatus
Radio and Television Receiving Type Electron
Tubes, Except Cathode Ray
Cathode Ray Television Picture Tubes
Transmitting, Industrial, and Special Purpose
Electron Tubes
Semiconductors and Related Devices
Electronic Capacitors
Resistors for Electronic Applications
Electronic Coils, Transformers and Other
Inductors
Connectors for Electronic Applications
Electronic Components, Not Elsewhere Classified
Storage Batteries
Primary Batteries, Dry and Wet
Radiographic X-ray, Fluoroscopic X-ray,
Therapeutic X-ray, and Other X-ray
Apparatus and Tubes; Electromedical
and Electrotherapeutic Apparatus
Electrical Equipment for Internal Combustion
Engines
Electrical Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies,
Not Elsewhere Classified
Motor Vehicles and Passenger Car Bodies
Truck and Bus Bodies
Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories
Truck Trailers
Aircraft
Aircraft Engines and Engine Parts
vn
-------
DRAFT
COLTLNTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 2, Section III (Continued)
Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment, Not 3-739
Elsewhere Classified
Ship Building and Repairing 3-746
Boat Building and Repairing 3-751
Railroad Equipment 3-756
Motorcycles, Bicycles, and Parts 3-762
Guided Missiles and Space Vehicles 3-767
Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion 3-771
Units and Propulsion Unit Parts
Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and 3-776
Auxiliary Equipment, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Travel Trailers and Campers 3-782
Tanks and Tank Components 3-787
Transportation Equipment, Not Elsewhere 3-792
Classified
Engineering, Laboratory, Scientific, and 3-797
Research Instruments and Associated
Equipment
Automatic Controls for Regulating Residential 3-804
and Commercial Environments and Appliances
Industrial Instruments for Measurement, Display, 3-810
and Control of Process Variables; and
Related Products
Totalizing Fluid Meters and Counting Devices 3-817
Instruments for Measuring and Testing of 3-822
Electricity and Electrical Signals
Measuring and Controlling Devices, Not 3-829
Elsewhere Classified
Optical Instruments and Lenses 3-835
Surgical and Medical Instruments and Apparatus 3-841
Orthopedic, Prosthetic, and Surgical Appliances 3-848
and Supplies
Dental Equipment and Supplies 3-855
Ophthalmic Goods 3-860
Photographic Equipment and Supplies 3-865
Watches, Clocks, Clockwork Operated Devices, 3-872
and Parts
Jewelry, Precious Metal 3-877
Silverware, Plated Ware, and Stainless Steel 3-882
Ware
Jewelers' Findings and Materials, and Lapidary 3-887
Work
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table p_f Contents Volume 2_, Section III (Continued)
Section Page
Musical Instruments
Dolls
Games, Toys, and Children's Vehicles; Except
Dolls and Bicycles
Sporting and Athletic Goods, Not Elsewhere
Classified
Pens/ Mechanical Pencils, and Parts
Costume Jewelry and Costume Novelties, Except
Precious Metal
Brooms and Brushes
Signs and Advertising Displays
Burial Caskets
Table of_ Contents Volume 3_
IV INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION 4-1
INTRODUCTION 4-1
SUBCATEGORY SELECTION 4-1
OTHER FACTORS 4-9
SUBCATEGORY DESCRIPTIONS 4-24
Subcategory 1 - Casting and Molding - Metals 4-24
Subcategory 2 - Mechanical Material Removal 4-27
Subcategory 3 - Material Forming - All 4-27
Materials Except Plastics
Subcategory 4 - Physical Property Modification 4-28
Subcategory 5 - Assembly Operations 4-29
Subcategory 6 - Chemical-Electrochemical 4-29
Operations
Subcategory 7 - Material Coating 4-30
Subcategory 8 - Smelting and Refining of 4-30
Nonferrous Metals
Subcategory 9 - Molding and Forming - Plastics 4-32
Subcategory 10 - Film Sensitizing 4-32
Subcategory 11 - Dockside Shipbuilding and 4-33
Repair
Subcategory 12 - Lead Acid Batteries 4-33
IX
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3^ Section IV (Continued)
Section Page
EFFLUENT LIMITATION BASIS 4-34
Production Related Parameters 4-35
Selection of Production-Oriented Parameter 4-39
SUMMARY 4-60
V WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 5-1
INTRODUCTION 5-1
SUBCATEGORY 1 - CASTING AND MOLDING METALS 5-1
Process Schematic 5-1
Wazer Usage 5-4
Waste Constituents 5-4
SUBCATEGORY 2 - MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL 5-6
Process Schematic 5-6
Water Usage 5-6
Waste Constituents 5-8
SUBCATEGORY 3 - MATERIAL FORMING - ALL MATERIALS 5-8
EXCEPT PLASTICS
Process Schematic 5-8
Wazer Usage 5-11
Waste Constituents 5-11
SUBCA1ZGORY 4 - PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION 5-13
Process Schematic 5-13
Water Usage 5-13
Waste Characteristics 5-13
SUBCATEGORY 5 - ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS 5-16
Process Schematic 5-16
Water Usage 5-16
Waste Constituents 5-18
SUBCATI30RY 6 - CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL OPERATIONS 5-18
Process Schematic 5-18
Water Usage 5-18
Waste Constituents 5-18
x
-------
OKA FT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table o_f_ Contents Volume 3_, Section V_ (Continued)
Section
SUBCATEGORY 7 - MATERIAL COATING
Process Schematic
Water Usage
Waste Constituents
SUBCATEGORY 8 - SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS 5-24
METALS
Process Schematic 5-24
Water Usage 5-27
Waste Constituents 5-27
SUBCATEGORY 9 - MOLDING AND FORMING - PLASTICS 5-29
Process Schematic 5-29
Water Usage 5-29
Waste Constituents 5-31
SUBCATEGORY 10 - FILM SENSITIZING 5-31
Process Schematic 5-31
Water Usage 5-31
Waste Constituents 5-34
SUECATEGORY 11 - DOCKSIDE SHIPBUILDING ACTIVITIES 5-34
Process Description 5-34
Water Usage 5-36
Waste Characteristics 5-36
SUBCATEGORY 12 - LEAD ACID BATTERY MANUFACTURE 5-37
Process Schematic 5-37
Water Usage 5-37
Waste Constituents 5-39
VI SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS 6-1
INTRODUCTION 6-1
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS 6-5
pH 6-5
Total Suspended Solids 6-6
Cadmium (Cd) 6-7
Chromium (Cr) 6-8
Copper (Cu) 6-9
Cyanide (CN) 6-10
Fluoride 6-11
XI
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VI (Continued)
Iron (Fe) 6-12
Lead (Pb) 6-13
Mercury (Hg) 6-14
Nickel (Ni) 6-14
Oil and Grease 6-15
Chemical Oxygen Demand 6-16
Phosphates 6-17
Silver (Ag) 6-18
Zinc (Zn) 6-19
RATIONALE FOR NOT SELECTING CERTAIN POLLUTANTS AS 6-20
PARAMETERS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Color 6-20
Turbidity 6-21
Odor 6-21
Acidity 6-21
Alkalinity 6-22
Ammonia (NH3J 6-23
Dissolved Oxygen 6-23
Conductance 6-23
Chlorine (Cl) 6-24
Sulfides 6-24
Hardness 6-25
Total Solids 6-25
Settleable Solids 6-26
Algicides 6-26
Aluminum (Al) 6-26
Antimony (Sb) 6-27
Arsenic (As) 6-27
Barium (Ba) 6-28
Beryllium (Be) 6-29
Boron (B) 6-30
Calcium (Ca) 6-30
Chlorides 6-31
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons 6-31
Dissolved Iron 6-32
Magnesium (Mg) 6-33
Manganese (Mn) 6-33
Molybdenum (Mo) 6-34
Nitrates 6-34
Nitrites 6-35
Kjeldahl Nitrogen 6-35
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 6-36
PCB's 6-36
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table o_f Contents Volume 3_, Section VI (Continued)
Section Page
Phenols 6-38
Potassium (K) 6-39
Selenium (Se) 6-40
Silica/Silicates/Silicon 6-40
Sodium (Na) 6-41
Strontium (Sr) 6-41
Sulfates 6-42
Sulfites 6-43
Titanium (Ti) 6-43
Volatile Solids 6-44
Surfactants 6-44
Plasticizers 6-44
Bromide (Br) 6-44
Cobalt (Co) 6-45
Thallium (Tl) 6-45
Tin (Sn) 6-46
Aldehydes 6-46
Hydroquinone/Sodium Thiosulfate/Thiocyanates 6-47
VII CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 7-1
INTRODUCTION 7-1
IN-PLANT TECHNOLOGY 7-4
INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES 7-5
NEUTRALIZATION ' 7-6
Definition of the Process 7-6
Description of the Process 7-6
Advantages and Limitations 7-8
Specific Performance 7-8
Operational Factors 7-8
Demonstration Status 7-9
CHEMICAL REDUCTION 7-9
Definition of the Process 7-9
Description of the Process 7-9
Advantages and Limitations 7-11
Specific Performance 7-13
Operational Factors 7-13
Demonstration Status 7-13
Kill
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued!
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VII (Continued)
SKIMMING 7-13
Definition of the Process 7-13
Description of the Process 7-15
Advantages and Limitations 7-15
Specific Performance 7-15
Operational Factors 7-15
Demonstration Status 7-16
CLARIFICATION 7-16
Definition of the Process 7-16
Description of the Process 7-16
Advantages and Limitations 7-18
Specific Performance 7-18
Operational Factors 7-19
Demonstration Status 7-19
FLOTATION 7-19
Definition of the Process 7-19
Description of the Process 7-20
Advantages and Limitations 7-22
Specific Performance 7-22
Operational Factors 7-22
Demonstration Status 7-24
OXIDATION BY CHLORINE 7-24
Definition of the Process 7-24
Description of the Process 7-26
Advantages and Limitations 7-29
Specific Performance 7-29
Operational Factors 7-29
Demonstration Status 7-30
OXIDATION BY OXYGEN 7-30
Description of the Process 7-30
Advantages and Limitations 7-33
Specific Performance 7-33
Operational Factors 7-34
Demonstration Status 7-34
CHEMICAL PRECIPITATION 7-35
Definition of the Process 7-35
Description of the Process 7-35
xiv
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VII (Continued)
Advantages and Limitations 7-37
Specific Performance 7-38
Operational Factors 7-38
Demonstration Status 7-38
COAGULATION/FLOCCULATION 7-41
Definition of the Process 7-41
Description of the Process 7-41
Advantages and Limitations 7-41
Specific Performance 7-43
Operational Factors 7-43
Demonstration Status 7-43
SEDIMENTATION 7-44
Definition of the Process 7-44
Description of the Process 7-44
Advantages and Limitations 7-47
Specific Performance 7-47
Operational Factors 7-49
Demonstration Status 7-50
MICROSTRAINING 7-50
Definition of the Process 7-50
Description of the Process 7-50
Advantages and Limitations 7-50
Specific Performance 7-50
Operational Factors 7-53
Demonstration Status 7-53
DEEP BED FILTRATION 7-53
Definition of the Process 7-53
Description of the Process 7-53
Advantages and Limitations 7-56
Specific Performance 7-57
Operational Factors 7-57
Demonstration Status 7-57
SCREENING 7-57
Definition of the Process 7-57
Description of the Process 7-60
Advantages and Limitations 7-61
Specific Performance 7-61
xv
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VII (Continued)
Operational Factors 7-61
Demonstration Status 7-62
ION EXCHANGE 7-62
Definition of the Process 7-62
Description of the Process 7-62
Advantages and Limitations 7-64
Specific Performance 7-66
Operational Factors 7-66
Demonstration Status 7-67
ADSORPTION 7-67
Definition of the Process 7-67
Description of the Process 7-67
Advantages and Limitations 7-69
Specific Performance 7-69
Operational Factors 7-70
Demonstration Status 7-71
DISTILLATION 7-71
Definition of the Process 7-71
Description of the Process 7-71
Advantages and Limitations 7-73
Specific Performance 7-74
Operational Factors 7-74
Demonstration Status 7-74
REVERSE OSMOSIS 7-75
Definition of the Process 7-75
Description of the Process 7-75
Advantages and Limitations 7-76
Specific Performance 7-77
Operational Factors 7-78
Demonstration Status 7-78
ULTRAFILTRATION 7-79
Definition of the Process 7-79
Description of the Process 7-80
Advantages and Limitations 7-80
Specific Performance 7-82
Operational Factors 7-83
Demonstration Status 7-84
xvi
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VII (Continued)
ELECTRO-DIALYSIS 7-85
Definition of the Process 7-85
Description of the Process 7-85
Advantages and Limitations 7-88
Specific Performance 7-88
Operational Factors 7-88
Demonstration Status 7-90
LIQUID/LIQUID EXTRACTION 7-90
Definition of the Process 7-90
Description of the Process 7-90
Advantages and Limitations 7-92
Specific Performance 7-92
Operational Factors 7-94
Demonstration Status 7-94
GAS PHASE SEPARATION 7-95
Definition of the Process 7-95
Description of the Process 7-95
Advantages and Limitations 7-95
Specific Performance 7-97
Operational Factors 7-97
Demonstration Status 7-97
FREEZING/CRYSTALIZATION 7-98
Definition of the Process 7-98
Description of the Process 7-98
Advantages and Limitations 7-100
Specific Performance 7-100
Operational Factors 7-100
Demonstration Status 7-100
CHEMICAL DISINFECTION 7-101
Definition of the Process 7-101
Description of the Process 7-101
Advantages and Limitations 7-102
Specific Performance 7-102
Operational Factors 7-104
Demonstration Status 7-104
xvi i
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3, Section VII (Continued)
ANAEROBIC DIGESTION 7-104
Definition of the Process 7-104
Description of the Process 7-104
Advantages and Limitations 7-106
Specific Performance 7-108
Operational Factors 7-108
Demonstration Status 7-109
AEROBIC DIGESTION 7-109
Definition of the Process 7-109
Description of the Process 7-109
Advantages and Limitations 7-111
Specific Performance 7-111
Operational Factors 7-115
Demonstration Status ' 7-115
THICKENING 7-115
Definition of the Process 7-115
Description of the Process 7-115
Advantages and Limitations 7-116
Specific Performance 7-116
Operational Factors 7-119
Demonstration Status 7-119
PRESSURE FILTRATION 7-119
Definition of the Process 7-119
Description of the Process 7-119
Advantages and Limitations 7-121
Specific Performance 7-121
Operational Factors 7-124
Demonstration Status 7-124
HEAT TREATMENT 7-125
Definition of the Process 7-125
Description of the Process 7-125
Advantages and Limitations 7-125
Specific Performance 7-126
Operational Factors 7-126
Demonstration Status 7-126
xvi 11
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3^ Section VII (Continued)
HEAT DRYING 7-126
Definition of the Process 7-126
Description of the Process 7-127
Advantages and Limitations 7-128
Specific Performance 7-128
Operational Factors 7-128
Demonstration Status 7-128
SAND BED DRYING 7-129
Definition of the Process 7-129
Description of the Process 7-129
Advantages and Limitations 7-129
Specific Performance 7-131
Operational Factors 7-131
Demonstration Status 7-131
VACUUM FILTRATION 7-132
Definition of the Process 7-132
Description of the Process 7-132
Advantages and Limitations 7-132
Specific Performance 7-134
Operational Factors 7-134
Demonstration Status 7-134
CENTRIFUGATION 7-136
Definition of the Process 7-136
Description of the Process 7-136
Advantages and Limitations 7-138
Specific Performance 7-138
Operational Factors 7-138
Demonstration Status 7-139
SLUDGE DISPOSAL 7-139
General 7-139
Landfill 7-139
Incineration 7-140
Lagoons 7-142
Land Spreading 7-144
Wet Air Oxidation 7-146
Ocean Disposal 7-146
Pyrolysis for Sludge Disposal 7-146
Other Methods 7-148
xix
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of_ Contents Volume 3_, Section VII (Continued)
Page
EMULSION BREAKING 7-148
Definition of the Process 7-148
Description of the Process 7-148
Advantages and Limitations 7-149
Specific Performance 7-149
Operational Factors 7-149
Demonstration Status 7-150
SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY - BPT AND BAT 7-151
BEST PRACTICAL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE (BPT) 7-151
BASELINE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION (BPT) 7-154
ALTERNATE APPROACHES 7-158
SUBCATEGORY 1, CASTING AND MOLDING - METALS - BPT 7-159
SUBCATEGORY 2, MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL - BPT 7-162
SUBCATEGORY 3, MATERIAL FORMING - ALL MATERIALS 7-162
EXCEPT PLASTICS - BPT
SUBCATEGORY 4, PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION - BPT 7-167
SUBCATEGORY 5, ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS - BPT 7-167
SUBCATEGORY 6, CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL 7-173
OPERATIONS - BPT
SUBCATEGORY 7, MATERIAL COATING - BPT 7-173
SUBCATEGORY 8, SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS 7-180
METALS - BPT
SUBCATEGORY 9, MOLDING AND FORMING OF PLASTICS - BPT 7-180
SUBCATEGORY 10, FILM SENSITIZING - BPT 7-180
SUBCATEGORY 11, DOCKSIDE SHIPBUILDING ACTIVITIES - 7-1&4
BPT
SUBCATEGORY 12, LEAD ACID BATTERY MANUFACTURE - BPT 7-184
xx
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 3_, Section VII (Continued)
Section Page
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 7-186
(BAT)
In-Plant Techniques 7-189
End-Of-Pipe Treatment 7-189
SUBCATEGORY 1, CASTING AND MOLDING - METALS - BAT 7-193
SUBCATEGORY 2, MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL - BAT 7-193
SUBCATEGORY 3, MATERIAL FORMING - ALL MATERIALS 7-196
EXCEPT PLASTICS - BAT
SUBCATEGORY 4, PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION - BAT 7-196
SUBCATEGORY 5, ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS - BAT 7-199
SUBCATEGORY 6, CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL 7-199
OPERATIONS - BAT
SUBCATEGORY 7, MATERIAL COATING - BAT 7-199
SUBCATEGORY 8, SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS 7-203
METALS - BAT
SUBCATEGORY 9, MOLDING AND FORMING OF PLASTICS - BAT 7-203
SUBCATEGORY 10, FILM SENSITIZING - BAT 7-203
SUBCATEGORY 11, DOCKSIDE SHIPBUILDING ACTIVITIES - 7-206
BAT
SUBCATEGORY 12, LEAD ACID BATTERY MANUFACTURE - BAT 7-206
j Table of_Contents Volume 4 |
VIII COST, ENERGY, AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS 8-1
INTRODUCTION 8-1
COST ESTIMATES 8-1
Technology Cost Estimates 8-1
Technology Costs and Assumptions 8-3
System Cost Estimates 8-25
Cost Breakdown Factors 8-53
xxi
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of Contents Volume 4_, Section VIII (Continued)
Section Page
ENERGY AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS 8-55
Energy Aspects 8-55
Nonwater Quality Aspects S-55
IX BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY 9-1
AVAILABLE - EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
INTRODUCTION 9-1
APPLICABILITY 9-1
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 9-2
IDENTIFICATION OF BPT 9-6
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF BPT 9-6
Age and Size of Facilities 9-6
Processes Employed 9-7
Nonwater Quality Environmental Impact 9-7
Engineering Impact on Treatment Facilities 9-8
Process Changes 9-8
Cost of Meeting the Effluent Limitations 9-8
PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT 9-10
LIMITATIONS
Screening Rationale 9-10
Determination of 30-Day Average Effluent 9-12
Limitations
Single-Day Maximum Effluent Limitations 9-15
APPLYING THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 9-15
General Principles of Application 9-15
Examples 9-16
X BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVEABLE 10-1
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
INTRODUCTION 10-1
APPLICABILITY 10-1
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 10-1
XXll
-------
f» fj «*, T~ "f
iws <.»*% i I
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of_ Contents Volume 4_, Section X (Continued)
Section
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF BAT 10-1
APPLICATION OF BAT 10-2
Introduction 10-2
Pollutant Reduction or Elimination 10-15
Water Use Reduction or Elimination 10-17
Pollutant Control Measures 10-17
In-Plant Water Reuse 10-17
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse 10-18
Contract Removal 10-23
APPLYING THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 10-24
ECONOMIC IMPACT 10-24
XI NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND PRETREATMENT 11-1
STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION 11-1
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 11-1
Applicability 11-1
New Source Performance Standards 11-1
Rationale for New Source Performance Standards 11-2
Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology 11-2
Economic Impact 11-3
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS 11-3
Applicability 11-3
Pretreatment Standards 11-4
Pretreatment Standards Rationale 11-4
Technology 11-9
XII ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 12-1
XIII REFERENCES 13-1
INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION 13-1
IN-PLANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY/RECYCLING 13-4
xxill
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of_ Contents Volume 4_, Section XIII (Continued)
Page
SCREENING 13-7
EMULSION BREAKING 13-7
SKIMMING/OIL REMOVAL 13-8
FLOTATION 13-9
SEDIMENTATION 13-9
ULTRAFILTRATION 13-10
REVERSE OSMOSIS (HYPERFILTRATION) 13-10
OTHER FILTRATION 13-12
LIQUID-LIQUID EXTRACTION 13-12
ADSORPTION 13-13
ION EXCHANGE 13-14
GAS PHASE SEPARATION 13-15
ELECTRODIALYSIS, ETC. 13-15
DISTILLATION/EVAPORATION 13-16
MISCELLANEOUS REMOVAL TECHNIQUES 13-16
CHEMICAL OXIDATION OF CYANIDES, ETC. 13-17
CHEMICAL REDUCTION OF CHROMIUM, ETC. 13-18
NEUTRALIZATION WITH ACIDS 13-19
NEUTRALIZATION WITH BASES 13-20
FLOCCULATION (COAGULATION) 13-20
CLARIFICATION 13-21
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS (Continued)
Table of_ Contents Volume £, Section XIII (Continued)
Section
MISCELLANEOUS CHEMICAL TECHNIQUES
BIOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES
THICKENING
CENTRIFUGATION
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
MISCELLANEOUS DISPOSAL
INCINERATION
PYROLYSIS
CONTRACTOR REMOVAL
MONITORING AND CONTROL
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
INTEGRATED TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
ECONOMICS DATA
COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS
XIV GLOSSARY
XXV
-------
SECTION VIII
COST, ENERGY, AND NONWATER QUALITY ASPECTS
INTRODUCTION
This section presents the cost of implementing the control and treat-
ment technology described in Section VII for a range of typical plants.
These technology costs as well as the costs of entire systems represen-
ting BPT (Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available) and
BAT (Best Available Technology Economically Achievable) were determined
by developing system costing logic and utilizing an IBM 370 computer
system for cost computations. In addition, the description of each
control and treatment technology presented in Section VII is extended
to define nonwater characteristics. These nonwater characteristics
include energy requirements and an indication of the degree to which the
technology impacts air pollution, noise pollution, solid waste, and
radiation.
COST ESTIMATES
Cost correlations and estimates are presented for individual waste
treatment technologies and for BPT and BAT wastewater treatment sys-
tems. Cost breakdown factors used in preparing these estimates are
discussed, assumptions are listed, system cost computations are review-
ed, and the computer techniques used are summarized.
The basic cost data came from a number of primary sources. Some of
the data were obtained during the on-site surveys. Other data were
obtained through discussions with waste treatment equipment manufac-
turers. Another block of data was derived from previous EPA projects
which utilized data from engineering firms experienced in the installa-
tion of waste treatment systems.
Technology Cost Estimates
Cost correlations listed in Table 8-1 for individual wastewater treat-
ment technologies used in the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufac-
turing industries are presented in Figures 8-1 through 8-26. Specific
reference to each of these figures is made under the subheading "Tech-
nology Costs and Assumptions". Each technology is represented by a
pair of graphs, which plots cost vs wastewater flow rate. Two graphs
are presented for each technology because the various cost elements
were usually of different orders of magnitude.
8-1
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-1
INDEX TO TECHNOLOGY COST GRAPHS
FIGURE WASTE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
8-1 Emulsion Breaking
8-2 API Oil Skimmer
8-3 Holding Tanks
8-4 Equalization - Earthen Pond
8-5 Equalization - Concrete Tank
8-6 Clarification - Settling Tank
8-7 Clarification - Metal Removal Tube Settler
8-8 Clarification - Oil Removal Tube Settler
8-9 Neutralization - Acidic Influent
8-10 Neutralization - Alkaline Influent
8-11 Gravity Thickening
8-12 Sludge Drying Beds
8-13 Contractor Removal - Total Flow
8-14 Chemical Reduction of Chromium
8-15 Chemical Oxidation of Cyanide
8-16 Filtration - without alum precoat filter
8-17 Filtration - with alum precoat filter
8-18 Reverse Osmosis
8-19 Ultrafiltration
8-20 Ion Exchange
8-21 Distillation - Simple
8-22 Distillation - Wiped Film
8-23 Flotation/Separation - Acidic Influent
8-24 Flotation/Separation - Alkaline Influent
8-25 Sludge Pumping
8-26 Copper Cementation
-------
DRAFT
I
1
In general, the graphs show costs for investment, total annual cost,
depreciation, cost of capital, operation and maintenance (less energy
and power), and energy. Investment cost is always shown on the first
(left-hand) of the pair of graphs. Total annual cost, depreciation,
operation and maintenance (less energy and power) cost, energy cost,
and cost of capital are shown on whichever graph they can be read
more accurately. These costs are defined under the subheadings to
follow. Not all of these costs pertain to all technologies. Energy
is often negligible, and some techniques such as contract removal
require no investment.
Investment - Investment is the capital expenditure required to bring
the technology into operation. If the installation is a package
contract, the investment is the purchase price for the installed equip-
ment. Otherwise, it includes the equipment cost, engineering costs,
cost of freight, insurance, and taxes, installation costs, and overhead
costs.
Total Annual Cost - Total annual cost is the sum of annual costs for
depreciation, cost of capital, operation and maintenance (less energy
and power), and energy as a separate function.
Depreciation - Depreciation is an allowance, based on tax regulations,
for the recovery of fixed capital from an investment to be considered
as a non-cash annual expense. It may be regarded as the decline
in value of a capital asset due to wearout and obsolescence.
Cost of Capital - The annual cost of capital is the cost to the plant
of obtaining capital, expressed as an interest rate. It is equal to
the capital recovery cost (see the following section on cost factors)
less depreciation.
Operation and Maintenance - Operation and maintenance cost is the
annual cost of running the wastewater treatment equipment. It includes
labor and materials such as waste treatment chemicals. As presented
on the graphs, operation and maintenance cost does not include energy
(power or fuel) costs because these costs are shown separately.
Energy Cost - The annual cost of power and fuel is shown separately,
although it is commonly included as part of operation and maintenance
cost. Energy cost is shown separately because of the importance of
energy to the nation's economy.
Technology Costs and Assumptions
Specific cost data were generalized to obtain the cost correlations
by means of certain assumptions. Correlations were then verified by
checking them against independent sets of cost data. The specific
assumptions for each wastewater treatment process applicable to
BPT and BAT are listed under the suheadings to follow.
1-3
-------
DRAFT
Emulsion Breaking - Emulsion breaking costs are shown in Figure 8-1.
Costing assumptions were:
a) Costs were based on two neoprene lined conical steel tanks
with a 6 hour retention time.
b) Capital costs include* mixer, acid feed system, and pH control.
c) The chemical requirement was set to 20 liters of 25* aqueous
sulfuric acid for every 10,009 liters •t wastewater.
d) The fuel requirement was based on 52 degrees C wastewater
temperature rise. The heating value of fuel was taken as
10,140 calories/gram (lower heatinf value at API 30). A
boiler heat recovery value of 85% was assumed.
Oil Skimmer - Oil skimming costs are shown in Figure 8-2. Costing as-
sumptions were:
a) The unit was sized per the API design procedure, with a
maximum flow velocity set to the smaller of 1.52 centimeters/
second or 4.72 times the oil rise rate. All units sized were
analyzed for minimum surface area.
b) Costs assumed concrete construction an* include excavation.
c) Power costs were ignored as they were negligible in comparison
to all other operation and maintenance costs.
Holding Tank - Holding tank costs are shown in Figure 8-3. Costs were
based on a single concrete tank with 7 day retention.
Equalization-Earthen Pond - Earthen pond equalization costs are shown
in Figure 8-4. Costing assumptions were:
a) The cost was based on an earthen pond with an impervious
lining and mechanical aerators on stationary platforms.
b) An effluent pump head of 3.05 meters was used, in conjunction
with an excess capacity factor of 1.25.
»-
EqualRation-Concrete Tank - Concrete tank equalization costs are shown
in Figure 8-5. Costing assumptions were:
*
a) The unit was of concrete construction with diffused air
aeration.
b) Costs included aerated tank, air supply, sludge pumping system,
and flow measuring devices.
c) An effluent pump head of 3.05 meters was used, in conjunction
with an excess capacity factor of 1.25.
d) A tank length to width ratio of 1.0 was assumed.
8-4
-------
DRAFT
1 MGD
0 31,54? 63,084
31,542 63,084 94,626 126,168 157,710 (LIT/KRI
FIGURE 8-1 EMULSION BREAKING
1 •? .3 .4 .5 MGD
l-'7 1 31,542 47,313 63,084 78,855 (LIT/HR)
.2 .3 .4 .5 HGD
'1,542 47,313 63,084 78,855 (L1T/HR)
FLOW
FIGURE 8-2 API OIL SKIMMER
8-5
-------
DRAFT
0 31,5
MGD
LIT/HR)
.2 .4 .6 .8 1 MGD
31,542 53,084 94,626 126,168 157,710 (LIT/HR)
FLOW
FIGURE 8-3 HOLDING TANKS
2 4 6 8 10 MGD
3i:,416 fi3G,8J2 946,248 1,261,664 1, 577,080 (L.1T/HR)
FIGURE 8-4 EQUALIZATION - EARTHEN POND
8-6
-------
DRAFT
Clarification-Settling Tanks - Settling tank clarification costs are
shown in Figure 8-6. Costing assumptions were:
a) Costs included concrete flocculator and its excavation,
concrete settling tank with skimmer and its excavation, and
sludge pumps.
b) The flocculator size was based on 45 minutes retention time,
a length/width ratio of 5, a depth of 2.44 meters and a
thickness of 0.305 meter, and an excess capacity factor of
1.2 was employed. A mixer was included in the flocculator.
c) The settling tank was sized by a design hydraulic loading
of 32,590 liters per day per square meter, and a two hour
retention time. An excess capacity factor of 1.2 was employed.
d) Sludge pump operation was assumed as 14 hours/week. An
excess capacity factor of 1.2 was employed.
e) Power requirements were based on data from a major manufac-
turer.
Clarification-Metal and Oil Removal Tube Settlers - Tube settler clarifi-
cation costs are shown in Figure 8-7 and 8-8. Costing assumptions were:
a) Cost included a concrete flocculator and its excavation, a
concrete settling tank with skimmer and its excavation, sludge
pumps and settling tube modules.
b) The flocculator size was based on 45 minutes retention time,
a length to width ratio of 5, and depth of 2.44 meters, a
thickness of 0.305 meters, and an excess capacity factor of
1.2 was employed. A mixer was included in the flocculator.
c) The settling tube area was sized by a design hydraulic loading
. of 146,000 liters per day per square meter, a settling tube
depth of 1.22 meters, a settling tank area of 1.5 times the
settling tube area and a settling tank depth of 2.44 meters.
d) Sludge pump operation was assumed as 14 hours per week and
an excess capacity factor of 1.2 was employed.
e) Power requirements were based on data from a major manufac-
turer.
8-7
-------
DRAFT
1 6 8 10 MGD
630,832 946,24B 1,261,664 1, 577,080(LIT/HB
2 4 6 8 10 MGD
315,415 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,cec'LIT/MR!
FIGURE 8-5 EQUALIZATION - CONCRETE TANK
I I
I 3°
1 * B 10 MGD
30,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
FLOW
315,4i6 630,832 946,248 l,261,a€4
FLOW
FIGURE 8-6 CLARIFICATION - SETTLING TANK
-------
DRAFT
ENERGY (5/YR)
2 4 6 8 10 MGD
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
FLOW
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,C33 a
FLOW
FIGURE 8-7 CLARIFICATION - METAL REMOVAL TUBE SETTLER
24 € & 10 MGD
J»5,416 030,832 946,249 1,261,664 1,577.080 (LIT/HR)
FIGURE 8-8 CLARIFICATION - OIL REMOVAL TUBE SETTLER
t
8-9
-------
DRAFT
Neutralization-Acidic and Alkaline Influents - Neutralization costs are
shown in Figures 8-9 and 8-10. Costing assumptions were:
a) Costs were based on 3 baffled above ground concrete com-
partments, each with 5 minute retention time.
b) The overall tank volume is based on a length/width ratio
of 6, a depth of 2.44 meters, and a thickness of 0.305
meters. An excess capacity factor of 1.2 was employed.
c) Power requirements were based on a representative instal-
lation with one turnover/minute.
Gravity Thickening - Gravity thickening costs are shown in Figure 8-11.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The thickener size was based on a design overflow rate of
28,520 liters per day per square meter and a design solids
loading rate of 39 kg/day/sq m.
b) The thickener was of concrete construction and includes
excavation. An excess capacity factor of 1.5 was employed.
8-10
-------
DRAFT
2 16 I 10 MCD
315,416 630,832 946,218 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
0 2 4 6 8 10 HGD
0 315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
FIGURE 8-9 NEUTRALIZATION - ACIDIC INFLUENT
2 4 6 I 10 HGD
315,416 (30,832 946,248 1.261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
2
315,416
10 HGD
577.08C (LIT NKI
FIGURE 8-10 NEUTRALIZATION - ALKALINE INFLUENT
8-11
-------
DRAFT
Sludge Drying Beds - Sludge drying bed costs are shown in Figure 8-12.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The uncovered open sand beds were sized based on a sludge
bed loading of 7.6 liters per day per square meter and 35%
solids in the sludge stream. An excess capacity factor of
1.5 was employed.
b) Costs included excavation, sludge and drain piping.
Contract Removal - Contract removal costs are shown in Figure 8-13.
Costing assumptions were:
a) Dry sludge was hauled 16.1 kilometers by a 30 cubic meter
truck at a speed of 40 kilometers per hour to a landfill
sludge disposal.
b) The landfill site was 1.8 meters deep with a 20 year planning
period. Landfill costs were based on $l,000/acre with oper-
ating costs of $3/ton.
Chromium Reduction - Chromium reduction costs are shown in Figure 8-14.
Costing assumptions were: ~~^-.
a) The unit was assumed to be an above ground cylindrical
concrete tank with 45 minutes retention time.
b) Costs were based on a 0.305 meter thickness and include
excavation, sulfonator, acid feed system, pH control, ORP
(oxidation-reduction potential) control, and mixer.
c) A constant power requirement of 2 HP was assumed to mix
small flows and rapid mix chemicals for large flows. Large
flows were assumed to blend without power.
Cyanide Oxidation - Cyanide oxidation costs are shown in Figure 8-15.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was assumed to be a cylindrical above-ground con-
crete tank with 8 hours retention time. Treatment was of
the batch type.
b) Costs included 2 tanks of 0.305 meter thickness and 2.44
meter depth, feed system, chlorine feed system, pH control,
ORP control, and mixer.
c) The mixer power was based on 2 HP for each 11,360 liters,
operational 25% of the time.
8-12
-------
DRAFT
24 6 fl 10 HGO
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080(LIT/HRl
2463
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,614
10 MGD
..?77,08Q (LJT/Hfl)
FIGURE 8-11 GRAVITY THICKENING
• 02 .04 .06 .08 .1 MGD
3,154 6,308 9,462 12,616 15,771(I.ZT/HR)
PLOW
.02 .04 .06 .03
3,154 6,308 9,462 12,6U
1 MGD
.5,771 (LIT/HR)
FIGURE 8-12 SLUDGE DRYING BEDS
8-13
-------
DRAFT
_1_
0 2 4 6 8 10 MGD
0 315,416 630,83^ 946,243 1,261,664 1,577,060 (LlT/HR)
FLOW
FIGURE 8-13 CONTRACTOR REMOVAL - TOTAL FLOW
24 6 8 10 MGr
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (UT/m>>
FLOW
ENERGY 1S/.R)
246 8 1C
•15,416 630,832 946,2«8 1,261,664 1,577,CSC
FLOW
FIGURE 8-14 CHEMICAL REDUCTION OF CHROMIUM
-------
DRAFT
Filtration-With and Without Alum Precoat - Filtration costs are shown
in Figures 8-16 and 8-17. Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on a hydraulic loading of 235,000
liters per day per square meter and an excess capacity facto]
of 1.2.
b) Operational costs included alum and sodium carbonate if an
alum precoat filter was utilized.
c) The maximum allowable influent oil was set to 100 mg/1 to
prevent clogging of the filter.
Reverse Osmosis - Reverse osmosis costs are shown in Figure 8-18.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on an initial total pressure of
21 atm and a membrane water permeation coefficient of 0.010
mg/sq cm-sec-atm.
b) Permeate recovery range of 80-95% was employed.
c) Installation cost was minimal and was ignored.
Ultrafiltration - Ultrafiltration costs are shown in Figure 8-19.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on a hydraulic loading of 1430
liters per day per square meter and an excess capacity
factor of 1.2.
b) Power was based on, 30.48 meters from the equation HP = meters
x 1. x (lit/min recirc)/ (3532 x 0.7)
Where lit/min recirc = 35
and HP is the requirement for every 18,925 liters/day.
Ion Exchange - Ion exchange costs are shown in Figure 8-20. Costing
assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on 3 columns to allow both cation
and anion exchangers of sodium and chloride, rather than
hydrogen. An average resin life of 7 years was assumed.
b) Maximum inlet concentrations of 5 mg/1 were allowed as the
ion exchanger was to perform a water polishing function.
Regeneration costs were ignored as life under these condition
is 400-1,000 days.
c) Heavy metal removal was complete.
8-15
-------
DRAFT
•146,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HR)
0 2 4 6 6 10 HGD
0 315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,060 (LIT/HH)
FLOW
FIGURE 8-15 CHEMICAL OXIDATION OF CYANIDE
MGD
LIT/HR)
0 2 4 6 B 10 HGD
0 J15,416 6 1C,832 94t,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (L1T/HR)
FIGURE 8^16 FILTRATION - WITHOUT ALUM PRECOAT FILTER
-------
DRAFT
10 MGD
577,080(LIT/HR)
315,416 630,832 946,24
FLOW
8 10 MGD
1,261,664 1,577,080(LIT/HR)
FIGURE 8-17 FILTRATION - WITH ALUM PRECOAT FILTER
3 10
.4 .6
1 MGD
31,542 63,084 94,626 126,168 157,710 (LIT/HR)
FLOW
31,542 63,084 94,626 126,168 157,710 (LJT/H
FIGURE 8-18 REVERSE OSMOSIS
8-17
-------
DRAFT
I »
8 20°
8 20
.02 .04 .06 .08 .1 MfiD
3,154 6,308 9,462 12,616 15,771 aiT/HK)
FLOW
.02 .0* •»«
3,154 6,301 9,462
FLOW
FIGURE 8-19 ULTRAFILTRATION
10 MGD
m,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (UT/HR)
FLOW
FIGURE 8-20 ION EXCHANGE
8-18
-------
DRAFT
Simple Distillation - Simple distillation costs are shown in
Figure 8-21. Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on an overall heat transfer co-
efficient of 830 kg-cal/hr-sq m-deg C and a temperature
differential of 4.4 degrees C. The evaporative heat required
was calculated based on 583 cal/gram of wastewater. The
heating value of fuel was taken as 10,140 cal/gram (LHV,
API of 30). A boiler heat recovery value of 85% was assumed.
b) The sludge stream was set to 50% solids.
c) Unit cost was based on a standard vertical tube heat ex-
changer with a cast iron body and copper tubes. An excess
capacity factor of 1 was employed.
Wiped Film Distillation - Wiped film distillation costs are shown
in Figure 8-22. Costing assumptions were:
a) The unit was sized based on a Plant ID 526 installation for
56.8 liters per minute. Evaporative heat of 583 cal/gram
of wastewater required. The heating value of fuel was
taken as 10,140 cal/gram (LHV, API of 30) with a boiler
heat recovery of 85%. An excess capacity factor of 2
was employed.
b) The sludge stream was set to 95% solids.
c) The electrical requirement was based on a Plant ID 526
installation.
8-19
-------
DRAFT
1 MOD
',710 (LIT/HR)
FIGURE 8-21 DISTILLATION - SIMPLE
1 MGLJ
157,710 (Lir/HH)
FIGURE 8-22 DISTILLATION - WIPED FILM
-------
DRAFT
Flotation/Separation-Acidic and Alkaline Influents - Flotation/
Separation costs are shown in Figures 8-23 and 8-24. Costing as-
sumptions were:
a) The unit area was sized by a design hydraulic loading of
58,500 liters per day per square meter and a minimum surface
area of 1.4 square meters. An excess capacity factor of
1.2 was used.
b) The capital and power cost were based on data from major
„ manufacturers.
Sludge Pumping - Costs for sludge pumping are shown in Figure 8-25.
Costing assumptions were:
a) The capital and operating costs were based on a previous
study for the EPA by another contractor.
b) All operation and maintenance costs other than labor were as-
sumed to be energy costs only.
Copper Cementation - Costs for copper cementation are shown in Figure
8-26. Costing assumptions were:
a) Cost included 2 concrete tanks each with a retention time of
50 minutes, a length to width ratio of 3, and a wall thick-
ness of 0.305 meters and an excess capacity factor of 1.2
was employed.
b) Sixty percent of the influent copper concentration was
assumed recovered as a saleable product.
-------
DRAFT
0 2 4 6 8 10 MOD
0 315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261.664 1,577,080 (LIT/HP)
FLOW
0 315,416 630,932 946,24B 1,261,664 1,577,080 C.IT/J.P
FLOW
FIGURE 8-^23 FLOTATION/SEPARATION - ACIDIC INFLUENT
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HP)
FLOW
_J I
FIGURE 8—24 FLOTATION/SEPARATION -ALKALINE INFLUENT
8-22
-------
DRAFT
FIGURE 8-25 SLUDGE PUMPING
2 4 6 8 10 MGD
315,416 630,832 946,248 1,261,664 1,577,080 (LIT/HP1
FIGURE 8-26 COPPER CEMENTATION
-------
DRAFT
For copper cementation, the operation and maintenance cost curve is
unusual because at higher flow rates the curve has a negative slope
and costs are negative. These characteristics represent a credit due
to increasingly efficient recovery of copper for reuse as plant size
increases.
-------
DRAFT
System Cost Estimates
Cost estimates for BPT and BAT systems for the Machinery and Mechanical
Products Manufacturing industries subcategories are based on the spe-
cific treatment systems discussed in Section VII of this document.
For each series (BPT and BAT) of systems, the subcategory costs are
presented in a series of tables, and each series is preceded by the
the appropriate baseline schematic that served as the basis for the
tabulated costs.
On each table, costs are listed for treatment of four representative
wastewater processing rates, which cover a broad range of flow rates.
The range of flow rates for BAT is lower than the range for BPT because
in-plant ^control measures, discussed in Section VII, are expected to
reduce water use substantially. However, the flow rates for BPT and
BAT were selected so that three of the four rates are identical, per-
mitting a direct comparison between BPT costs and BAT costs for any
subcategory. The basic cost elements used in preparing these costs
are the same as those presented for the individual technologies: invest
ment, annual capital cost, annual depreciation, annual operation and
maintenance cost (less energy and power costs), energy and power cost,
and total annual cost. These elements were discussed in detail earlier
in this section.
Performance is indicated in terms of typical or representative raw waste
water pollutant concentrations and typical effluent (treated wastewater)
pollutant concentrations. BAT raw wastewater concentrations were de-
fined as twice the value of BPT raw wastewater concentrations. This
factor of two indicates that higher concentrations of contaminants in
treated wastewater are expected due to reduced water use. However, the
BAT treatment enables water effluent quality to be completely adequate
for reuse.
The costs from the cost tables may be applied directly to plants using
water in more than one subcategory. To estimate the cost for a mul-
tiple subcategory plant, the subcategory with the most complex system
is selected, and the cost is then determined from the corresponding
cost table, using the total plant process wastewater treatment rate.
Flow rates on the sytem cost tables are shown in metric units. The
following conversion chart is presented for convenience in using the
tables:
Liters/hr 3,943 7,885 15,771 39,427 157,708
Gal/day 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 1,000,000
8-25
-------
DRAFT
BPT System Costs - Figure 8-27 shows the baseline BPT system. The
system shown applies directly to Subcategories 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, and 12.
Subcategory 4 and 10 require cyanide oxidation in addition to the base-
line technologies. Subcategories 6 and 7 require chromium reduction in
addition to the baseline technologies. There is no system for Subcate-
gory 9, because when process water is used it is normally recycled for
reuse, and there is no end-of-pipe treatment. There is no system for
Subcategory 11 because end-of-pipe treatment is not applicable. It
must be emphasized that these systems are representative techniques
for achieving BPT. There are alternative methods which are equally
effective. The costs assume no prior waste treatment facility.
The cost tables based on these BPT systems are as follows:
Subcategory 1 - Casting and Molding-Metals
Subcategory 2 - Mechanical Material Removal
Subcategory 3 - Material Forming-All Materials
Except Plastics
Subcategory 4 - Physical Property Modification
Subcategory 5 - Assembly Operations
Subcategory 6 - Chemical-Electrochemical
Operations
Subcategory 7 - Material Coating
Subcategory 8 - Smelting and Refining of
Nonferrous Metals
Subcategory 10 - Film Sensitizing
Table 8-2
Table 8-3
Table 8-4
Table 8-5
Table 8-6
Table 8-7
Table 8-8
Table 8-9
Table 8-10
Subcategory 12 - Lead Acid Battery Manufacture Table 8-11
The actual costs of installing and operating a BPT system at a partic-
ular plant may be substantially below the tabulated values. Reduc-
tions in investment and operating cost are possible in several potential
areas. Design and installation costs may be reduced by using plant
engineering and maintenance personnel instead of contracting the work.
Equipment costs may be reduced by using or modifying existing equip-
ment instead of purchasing all new equipment. Application of an excess
capacity factor, which increased the size of most equipment to compen-
sate for shutdowns, may be unnecessary. Excavation and foundation costs
could be reduced if an existing concrete pad or floor can be utilized.
8-26
-------
DRAFT
I I
r
K
i
i H
1 a
1 -a
•H
M 1 S-
w co
3 - «
•n
•* 1
a 1
V
f(.
I
iJ Jj
10 C
CO 0
* O
U
H
EH
U
cn
S
w
H
CO
>H
en
a
EH
<
W
&
EH
W
EH
w
EH
co
£
W
3
H
^
w
CO
EH
CU
CQ
CN
I
oo
I
O
v^SSsS^ssSSssS^
8-27
-------
DRAFT
7,885 15,771 39,427 157,708
$349,959 $407,602 $545,984 $1,132,728
TABLE 8-2
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 1: CASTING AND MOLDING - METALS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
17,158
34,996
34,645
19,984
40,760
34,284
26,769
54,598
52,011
55,537
113,273
113,052
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Silver
Zinc
10,064 20,138 50,382 201,527
$ 96,863 $120,166 $183,761 $ 483,389
Typical
Waste Load
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
8.2
1490 mg/1
0.04 mg/1
9 . 7 mg/1
13.8 mg/1
0 . 6 mg/1
4 . 6 mg/1
1050 mg/1
2430 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
10.8 mg/1
8.5
17.9 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
0 . 1 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
8 . 1 mg/1
72.9 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
8-28
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-3
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 2: MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Zinc
7,885
$344,936
16,912
34,494
34,207
10,064
$ 95,676
Typical
Waste Load
9.2
1220 mg/1
2.4 mg/1
18.9 mg/1
4 . 5 mg/1
8.5 mg/1
9.0 mg/1
2.0 mg/1
3 . 4 mg/1
668 mg/1
3087 mg/1
10.0 mg/1
7 . 1 mg/1
15,771 39,427
$398,924 $527,008 $1
19,559 25,839
39,892 52,701
38,451 49,965
20,139 50,383
$118,041 $178,887 $
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
8.5
15.0 mg/1
0.12 mg/1
0.4 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
2 . 0 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
5.8 mg/1
92.6 mg/1
2 . 6 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
157,71
,063,1'
52,1
106,3
103,6
201,5
463,6
8-29
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-4
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 3: MATERIAL FORMING - ALL MATERIALS EXCEPT PLASTICS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
7,885
15,771
39,427
157,708
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
$340,738 $391,880 $512,176 $1,011,174
16,706
34,074
33,912
19,214
39,188
37,897
25,112
51,218
48,624
49,577
101,117
97,653
10,064
$ 94,755
Typical
Waste Load
20,139
$116,437
50,384
$175,337
201,535
$ 449,882
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
8.8
1030
8.5
29.3
2.8
5.8
600
2830
6.5
0.01
10.8
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
8.5
15.0
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.2
5.4
84.9
1.7
0.01
0.5
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
n\g/l
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-5
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 4: PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr) 7,885 15,771 39,427 157,708
Investment $362,404 $410,126 $520,973 $971,811
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs 17,768 20,108 25,543 47,647
Depreciation 36,240 41,013 52,097 97,181
Operation & Maintenance 44,162 47,369 57,486 102,628
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs 8,099 16,208 40,558 162,233
Total Annual Cost $106,270 $124,699 $175,685 $409,689
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant Typical Typical Effluent
Parameter Waste Load Discharge Level
pH 9.0 8.5
Total Suspended Solids 716 mg/1 15.0 mg/1
Cyanide 67.2 mg/1 0.05 mg/1
Iron 14.5 mg/1 0.5 mg/1
Lead 2.8 mg/1 0.1 mg/1
Nickel 1.3 mg/1 0.2 mg/1
Oil & Grease 681 mg/1 5.5 mg/1
Chemical Oxygen Demand 2360 mg/1 70.8 rcg/1
8-31
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-6
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 5: ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
7,885 15,771 39,427 157,708
$341,325 $392,894 $514,384 $1,019,225
16,735
34,132
19,263
37,289
25,220
51,438
49,972
101,923
Operation & Maintenance 33,808 37,683 48,080 95,572
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs 10,064 20,139 50,383 201,534
Total Annual Cost
$ 94,739 $116,374 $175,122 $ 449,000
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
Typical
Waste Load
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
8.7
1060 mg/1
1.3 mg/1
3.6 mg/1
14.8 mg/1
9.6 mg/1
3 . 3 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
2 . 3 mg/1
720 mg/1
2440 mg/1
8.0 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
2.9 mg/1
8.5
15.0 mg/1
0.07 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
3.0 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
0 . 1 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
6.1 mg/1
73.2 mg/1
2.1 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
8-32
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-7
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 6: CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL PROCESSING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr) 7,885 15,771 39,427 157,708
Investment $355,713 $403,486 $515,197 $974,699
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
17,440
35,571
41,552
8,298
19,783
40,349
52,370
16,384
25,260
51,520
84,760
40,664
47,789
97,470
241,277
161,990
$102,862 $128,886 $202,203 $548,525
Typical
Waste Load
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
3.7
837
11.5
3.8
22.9
1.6
30.4
97.0
419
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
8.5
15.0 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
1.6 mg/1
0 . 6 mg/1
2 . 0 mg/1
12.6 mg/1
8-33
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-8
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 7: MATERIAL COATING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr) 7,885 15,771
Investment $357,495 $406,472
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
17,528
35,750
34,301
8,298
19,929
40,647
38,070
16,384
39,427
$521,439
25,566
52,144
48,978
40,663
157,708
$996,384
48,852
99,638
98,638
161,988
$ 95,876 $115,030 $167,352 $408,810
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
Typical
Waste Load
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
8.9
918 mg/1
2 . 0 mg/1
20.0 mg/1
1.5 mg/1
21.1 mg/1
6.9 mg/1
21.6 mg/1
1.7 mg/1
.01 mg/1
545 mg/1
1840 mg/1
9.6 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
4 . 7 mg/1
8.5
15.0 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0 . 4 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0 . 4 mg/1
2.0 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
4.7 mg/1
55.2 mg/1
2.5 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0 . 5 mg/1
8-34
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-9
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 8: SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
7,885 15,771
$361,062 $427,152
39,427 157,708
$588,566 $1,290,007
17,703
36,106
20,943
42,689
28,857
58,857
63,249
129,001
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Silver
Zinc
39,544 49,006
(-2,100) (-4,000)
(-2,100) (-4,000)
10,063 20,137
$103,416 $132,762
(-2,400) (-4,000)
(-2,400) (-4,000)
Typical
Waste Load
2.7
2090 mg/1
0.8 mg/1
7 . 1 mg/1
96.4 mg/1
4 . 6 mg/1
0.03 mg/1
16.5 mg/1
166 mg/1
1650 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
23.5 mg/1
76,345 214
(-10,000 (-42,
(-10,000) (-42,
50,380 201
$214,438 $ 607
(-10,500) (-42,
(-10,500) (-42,
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
8.5
25.0 mg/1
0.04 mg/1
0 . 2 mg/1
1.9 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
2 . 8 mg/1
49.5 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
.71 mg/1
,028
000)
000)
,519
,796
000)
000)
8-35
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-10
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUECATEGORY 10: FILM SENSITIZING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr) 7,885 15,771
Investment $347,981 $386,029
39,427
$472,992
157,708
$ 818,790
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
17,061
18,927
23,190
40,145
Depreciation
34,798
38,603
47,299
81,879
Operation & Maintenance 43,264 45,206 50,076 71,903
Costs (Excluding''Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs 8,099 16,210 40,560 162,242
Total Annual Cost
$103,223 $118,945 $161,126 $356,169
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Cyanide
Iron
Mercury
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
Typical
Waste Load
5.8
183 mg/1
1.5 mg/1
1.2 mg/1
2.9 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
386 mg/1
1230 mg/1
3.4 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
1.4 mg/1
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
8.5
15.0 mg/1
.07 mg/1
.01 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
3.8
36.9
1.0 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-11
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BPT
SUBCATEGORY 12: LEAD ACID BATTERY MANUFACTURE
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr) 7,885 15,771 39,427
Investment $314,587 $347,832 $422,101
157,708
$718,409
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
15,424
17,054
20,695
35,223
Depreciation
31,459
34,783
42,210
71,841
Operation & Maintenance 40,155 48,958 74,392 196,241
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs 10,065 20,140 50,388 201,551
Total Annual Cost
$ 97,102 $120,936 $187,685 $504,855
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Zinc
Typical
Waste Load
2.0
22.8 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
32.3 mg/1
2.2 mg/1
0.09 mg/1
15.4 mg/1
92.5 mg/1
1.3 mg/1
0.6 mg/1
Typical Effluent
Discharge Level
15.0 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.6 mg/1
0.1 mg/1
0.09 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
2.8 mg/1
1.0 mg/1
0.5 mg/1
-------
DRAFT
Equipment size requirements may be reduced by the ease of treatment (for
example, shorter retention time) of particular waste streams. Substan-
tial reductions in both investment and operating cost would pertain if
a plant reduced its water use rate by various in-plant techniques.
Then, to estimate its costs from the tables, the plant would use the
projected flow rate rather than the current flow rate. If a plant has
lower raw waste concentrations than those indicated on the tables, in-
vestment and, in particular, operating costs will be lower. The tab-
ulated costs are based on around-the-clock operation 365 days per year.
Thus, if a plant operates one or two shifts per day, five or six days
per week, or has an annual shutdown period, operating costs would be
significantly lower. In some parts of the country, operating costs
would be lower because of wage rates lower than the value used in the
computations. Reductions in labor cost by using operating and main-
tenance personnel on a shared (part time) basis may be practical. Sub-
stantial reductions in energy cost may be practical at a particular
plant. For example, increased residence time for emulsion breaking can
obviate the need for heating the emulsion, without reducing effective-
ness.
BAT System Costs - Figure 8-28 shows the baseline BAT system. The sys-
tem shown applies to all subcategories except 9 and 11. There is no
system for Subcategory 9, because when process water is used it is
normally recycled for reuse, and there is no end-of-pipe treatment.
There is no system for Subcategory 11 because end-of-pipe treatment is
not applicable. It must be emphasized that the system is a representa-
tive method for achieving BAT pollutant control. A plant can use either
the method shown or an alternative technique. In particular, the cen-
tralized system shown can be simplified by substitution of localized
in-plant techniques for centralized treatment functions.
The cost tables based on this BAT system are as follows:
Subcategory 1 - Casting and Molding-Metals Table 8-12
Subcategory 2 - Mechanical Material Removal Table 8-13
Subcategory 3 - Material Forming-All Materials
Except Plastics Table 8-14
Subcategory 4 - Physical Property Modification Table 8-15
Subcategory 5 - Assembly Operations Table 8-16
Subcategory 6 - Chemical-Electrochemical
Operations Table 8-17
8-38
-------
DRAFT
Subcategory 7 - Material Coating Table 8-18
Subcategory 8 - Smelting and Refining of
Nonferrous Metals Table 8-19
Subcategory 10 - Film Sensitizing Table 8-20
Subcategory 12 - Lead Acid Battery Manufacture Table 8-21
The actual costs of installing and operating a BAT system at a partic-
ular plant may be substantially below the tabulated values, for the sami
reasons discussed under BPT System Costs. In particular, existing
plants should already have a BPT system at the time a BAT stystem is
required. For those plants, therefore, the BPT system could be up-
graded to BAT in an add-on fashion. Moreover, use of localized in-plan
treatment would simplify the centralized treatment system, reducing its
cost. The actual cost reduction would be dependent on the particular
plant BPT system, the reduction in flow accomplished (if any), and the
raw waste concentrations.
System Cost Computation - A computer program was developed to calculate
the system costs listed in the BPT and BAT cost tables. A mathematical
model or set of correlations was developed for each individual waste-
water treatment technology. In general, these correlations related
equipment size to influent flow rate and pollutant concentrations and,
in turn, related cost to equipment size. The computer was programmed
to combine specified individual treatment technologies in a specified
arrangement, forming a system. Using this arrangement, the computer
then determined flow rates and concentrations at all points in the spec
fied system, determined equipment sizes, determined equipment costs,
and added these costs to arrive at a total system cost.
The correlations used for computing equipment size and cost were de-
rived from cost data obtained from several sources listed under the
"Cost Estimates" heading. These data for wastewater flow rate, cor-
responding equipment size, and corresponding cost, were related to form
the correlations by means of a separate computer program. This pro-
grain was developed to correlate the data by regression analysis, util-
izing first order arithmetic equations, first order logarithmic equa-
tions, and multiple order equations, as appropriate.
8-39
-------
00
CM
I
00
w
O
8-40
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-12
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 1: CASTING AND MOLDING - METALS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
3,943
$326,345
16,001
32,635
40,257
7,655
$96,547
Representative
Waste Load
7,885
$389,768
19,110
38,977
47,170
15,160
$120,417
15,771
$489,550 $
24,002
48,955
54,307
24,723
$161,987 $
39,427
733,270
35,952
73,327
92,118
69,780
271,177
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Silver
Zinc
8.2
2980 mg/1
0.08 mg/1
19.5 mg/1
27.6 mg/1
1.2 mg/1
9.1 mg/1
2100 mg/1
4860 mg/1
0.04 mg/1
21.9 mg/1
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.01 mg/1
0.023 mg/1
0.032 mg/1
0.006 mg/1
0.016 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
56.5 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.038 mg/1
8-41
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-13
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 2: MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
3,943
$322,139
15,794
32,214
40,019
7,646
$ 95,673
Representative
Waste Load
7,885
$382,498
18,754
38,250
46,722
15,139
$118,865
15,771
$476,467
23,361
47,647
58,418
29,668
$159,093
39,427
$703,059
34,471
70,306
89,650
69,539
$263,966
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Zinc
9.2
2440 mg/1
4.9 mg/1
37.8 mg/1
8.9 mg/1
17.0 mg/1
18.0 mg/1
4.1 mg/1
6.7 mg/1
1340 mg/1
6180 mg/1
20.4 mg/1
14.2 mg/1
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.014 mg/1
0.044 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.20 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
0.010 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
72.0 mg/1
0.31 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
8-42
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-14
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 3: MATERIAL FORMING - ALL MATERIALS EXCEPT PLASTICS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
3,943
$317,878
15,585
31,788
39,629
7,817
$ 94,819
Representative
Waste Load
8.8
2060 mg/1
17.0 mg/1
58.6 mg/1
5 . 5 mg/1
11.6 mg/1
1200 mg/1
5660 mg/1
12.9 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
20.8 mg/1
7,885 15,771 39
$375,164 $463,349 $673
18,394 22,718 33
37,516 46,335 67
45,962 56,909 85
15,477 30,329 71
$117,349 $156,291 $257
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.020 mg/1
0.068 mg/1
0.013 mg/1
0.020 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
65.8 mg/1
0.20 mg/1
0.003 mg/1
0.036 mg/1
,427
,060
,000
,306
,746
,097
,148
8-43
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-15
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 4: PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
3,943
$312,595
15,326
31,259
39,839
7,676
$ 94,100
7,885
$366,551
17,972
36,655
45,334
15,191
$115,152
15,771
$448,757
22,002
44,876
55,703
24,738
$152,319
39,427
$641,668
31,461
64,167
82,630
69,474
$247,731
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cyanide*
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Representative
Waste Load
9.0
1432
0.1
29.0
5.5
2.5
1362
4720
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.006 mg/1
0.034 mg/1
0.013 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
55.0 mg/1
*Prior Oxidation of Cyanide is Assumed
8-44
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-16
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 5: ASSEMBLY OPERATIONS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
3,943
$318,383
15,610
31,838
39,506
7,812
$ 94,766
Representative
Waste Load
8.7
2120 mg/1
2 . 7 mg/1
7 . 1 mg/1
29.6 mg/1
19.2 mg/1
6 . 7 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
4 . 6 mg/1
1440 mg/1
4880 mg/1
16.0 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
5 . 8 mg/1
7,885 15,771 39
$376,040 $464,929 $676
18,437 22,795 33
37,604 46,493 67
45,711 56,403 84
15,467 30,312 71
$117,220 $156,003 $256
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
8.4
0 . 0 mg/1
0.008 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.34 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
0.015 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
56.8 mg/1
0.24 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
,42
,70
,17
,67
,49
,06
,40
8-45
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-17
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 6: CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL PROCESSING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
3,943 7,
$316,131 $372,
15,500 18,
31,613 37,
47,136 60,
7,531 14,
$101,780 $130,
Representative
Waste Load
3.7
1674 mg/1
23.0 mg/1
7 . 6 mg/1
45.8 mg/1
3 . 1 mg/1
60.8 mg/1
194 mg/1
838 mg/1
885
419
259
242
247
903
652
15,771 39
$458,864 S£-c3
22,498 32
45,886 66
85,512 157
29,174 68
$183,071 IS24
,427
,763
,544
,376
,192
,149
,261
Typical Effluenr
Available for Re ase
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.027 mg/1
0.006 mg/1
0.053 mg/1
0.12 mg/1
0.071 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
9.8 mg/1
8-46
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-18
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 7: MATERIAL COATING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
3,943 7,
$316,387 $372,
15,512 18,
31,639 37,
39,842 45,
7,788 15,
$ 94,781 $116,
Representative
Waste Load
8.9
1836 mg/1
4 . 1 mg/1
40.0 mg/1
3 . 0 mg/1
42.2 mg/1
13.8 mg/1
43.2 mg/1
3 . 4 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
1090 mg/1
3680 mg/1
19.1 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
9 . 3 mg/1
885 15,771 39
532 $458,550 $661
265 22,482 32
253 45,855 66
866 57,737 85
419 30,211 70
803 $155,285 $254
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.047 mg/1
0.002 mg/1
0.049 mg/1
0.16 mg/1
0.05 mg/1
0.008 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
42.8 mg/1
0.29 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
,42
,83
,44
,18
,27
,77
,68
8-47
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-19
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 8: SMELTING AND REFINING OF NONFERROUS METALS
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
3,943
$342,505
16,793
34,250
47,043
6,153
$104,240
Representative
Waste Load
7,885
$419,420
20,564
41,942
60,712
12,165
$135,383
15,771
$545,782
26,759
54,578
86,446
23,768
$191,551
39,427
$869,807
42,646
86,981
160,796
55,152
$345,574
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Silver
Zinc
2.7
4180 mg/1
1.6 mg/1
14.2 mg/1
193 mg/1
9.2 mg/1
0.06 mg/1
33.0 mg/1
332 mg/1
3300 mg/1
0.10 mg/1
47.0 mg/1
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.005 mg/1
0.017 mg/1
0.23 mg/1
0.022 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.058 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
38.9 mg/1
0.003 mg/1
0.083 mg/1
8-48
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-20
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 10: FILM SENSITIZING
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Cyanide*
Iron
Mercury
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Silver
Zinc
3,943
$298,280
14,625
29,828
42,625
7,987
$ 95,064
Representative
Waste Load
7,885
$342,604
16,798
34,260
50,472
15,804
$117,334
15,771
$408,149
20,011
40,815
64,575
30,933
$156,335
39,427
$555,457
27,234
55,546
103,782
72,219
$258,781
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
5.9
366 mg/1
2.9 mg/1
0.004 mg/1
5.8 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
772 mg/1
2460 mg/1
6.8 mg/1
0.10 mg/1
2.9 mg/1
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.009 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
28.7 mg/1
0.10 mg/1
0.003 mg/1
0.029 mg/1
*Prior Oxidation of Cyanide is Assumed
8-49
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-21
WATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT COSTS-BAT
SUBCATEGORY 12: LEAD ACID BATTERY MANUFACTURE
COST
Flow Rate (Liters/Hr)
Investment
Annual Costs :
Capital Costs
Depreciation
Operation & Maintenance
Costs (Excluding Energy
& Power Costs)
Energy & Power Costs
Total Annual Cost
PERFORMANCE
Effluent Pollutant
Parameters
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Chromium, Hexavalent
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil £ Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphates
Zinc
3,943
$299,776
14,698
29,978
48,547
6,466
$ 99,889
Representative
Waste Load
2.0
45.6 mg/1
0.04 mg/1
0 . 4 mg/1
0.02 mg/1
64.6 mg/1
4.4 mg/1
0.2 mg/1
30.8 mg/1
185 mg/1
2.6 mg/1
1.1 mg/1
7,885 15,771 39
$348,276 $422,286 $596
17,076 20,705 29
34,828 42,229 54
62,305 88,228 161
12,762 24,839 56
$126,970 $176,001 $307
Typical Effluent
Available for Reuse
8.4
0.0 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.012 mg/1
0.001 mg/1
0.076 mg/1
0.010 mg/1
0.011 mg/1
0.0 mg/1
2.19 mg/1
0.061 mg/1
0.030 mg/1
,427
,286
,236
,629
,986
,924
,774
8-50
-------
DRAFT
Each computer run involved several items of input and output. Specifi-
cally, to compute system costs, the computer required as input (1)
identification of system components (oil skimmer, clarifier, etc.), (2
definition of how these components were schematically arranged, (3) raw
wastewater flow rate, and (4) raw waste pollutant concentrations. The
computer output consisted of a cost breakdown and an effluent charac-
teristics summary. Capital cost was listed, and total annual cost was
broken down to yield operation and maintenance cost, energy cost, dep-
leciation, and cost of capital. The effluent concentrations and other
characteristics pertained to whatever characteristics were included in
the input.
The program was developed to accept any of the components (up to 25
in a particular system) listed in Table 8-1. In addition, "mixers" and
"splitters" were added to represent merging or separation of streams.
The schematic arrangements of these components that could be input to
the computer were entirely flexible, permitting simulation and costing
of many variations. The computer handled a wide range of wastewater
flow rates. Care was taken to assure reasonable results for extremely
large as well, as extremely small plants. The program was designed to
handle the wastewater parameters listed in Table 8-22. The program
used standard values for certain cost factors such as depreciation rate
but different values could be input if desired.
Computer Techniques - The cost estimating computer program consists
of a main routine which accepts the system input cards and accesses all
other routines, a series of subroutines which compute the performance
and cost of each of the unit processes, a cost routine, and a routine
for printing the results. The main routine performs a system iteratior
until a mass balance has been established. The mass balance is estab-
lished when the pollutant parameter concentrations in all the process
streams differ from the values in the process streams in the previous
iteration by less than one part in one hundred thousand or by 0.1 mg/1,
whichever is larger.
The program was based on earlier work done by the EPA to compute costs
of municipal treatment plants. This earlier program was analyzed, re-
vised, and expanded to obtain the present program. Many of the earl-
ier subroutines were not applicable because they modelled biological 33
temr,; those that were useful were expanded to accommodate the longer
list of industrial pollutants and modified to be compatible with the
8-51
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8-22
COST PROGRAM POLLUTANT PARAMETER
Parameter, Units
Flow, MGD
pH, pH units
Turbidity, Jackson units
Temperature, °C
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/1
Residual Chlorine, mg/1
Acidity, mg/1 CaC03
Alkalinity, mg/1 CaC03
Ammonia, mg/1
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, mg/1
Color, Chloroplatinate units
Sulfide, mg/1
Cyanides, mg/1
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/1
Phenols, mg/1
Conductance, micromhos/cm
Total Solids, mg/1
Total Suspended Solids, mg/1
Settleable Solids, mg/1
Aluminum, mg/1
Barium, mg/1
Cadmium, mg/1
Calcium, mg/1
Chloride, mg/1
Chromium, Hexavalent, mg/1
Chromium, Total, mg/1
Copper, mg/1
Fluoride, mg/1
Iron, Total, mg/1
Lead, mg/1
Magnesium, mg/1
Molybdenum, mg/1
Parameter, Units
Oil, Grease, mg/1
Hardness, mg/1
Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg/1
Algicides, mg/1
Total Phosphates, mg/1
Polychlorobiphenyls, mg/1
Potassium, mg/1
Silica, mg/1
Sodium, mg/1
Sulfate, mg/1
Sulfite, mg/1
Titanium, mg/1
Zinc, mg/1
Arsenic, mg/1
Boron, mg/1
Iron, Dissolved, mg/1
Mercury, mg/1
Nickel, mg/1
Nitrate, mg/1
Selenium, mg/1
Silver, mg/1
Strontium, mg/1
Beryllium, mg/1
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, mg/1
Total Volatile Solids, mg/1
Surfactants, mg/1
Plasticizers, mg/1
Antimony, mg/1
Bromide, mg/1
Cobalt, mg/1
Thallium, mg/1
Tin, mg/1
8-52
-------
DRAFT
rest of the industrial program. Many new treatment process subroutines
were added to the modified subroutines from the earlier work. The in-
dustrial wastewater treatment cost estimating program was written in
FORTRAN IV for an IBM-370-158 computer system.
Cost Breakdown Factors
The factors used to compute the values of the cost elements for the
individual technologies and entire systems are defined and discussed
under the following subheadings. They are Dollar Base, Investment Cost
Adjustment, Supply Cost Adjustment, Cost of Labor, Cost of Energy and
Power, Capital Recovery Costs, Debt-Equity Ratio, and Subsidiary Costs.
Dollar Bjas^ - A dollar base of August 1972 was used for all costs.
Inve_stmen_t Cojjt Adjustment - Investment costs were adjusted to the afore-
mentioned dollar base by use of the Sewage Treatment Plant Construction
Cost Index. This cost index is published monthly by the EPA Division of
Facilities Construction and Operation. The national average of the
Construction Cost Index for August 1972 was 173.11. Within each process,
the investment cost was usually defined as some function of the unit
size or capacity. Where applicable, an excess capacity factor was
used when obtaining the cost-determining size or capacity. This ex-
cess capacity factor is a multiplier on the size of the process to
account, for shutdown for cleaning and maintenance.
Supj. 1y_ Cost Adjustment - Supply costs such as chemicals were related
to the dollar base by the Wholesale Price Index. This figure was ob-
tained fron the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
i;Montnly Labor Review". For August 1972 the "Industrial Commodities"
Wholesale Price Index was 118.5. Process supply and replacement costs
were included in the estimate of the total process operating and main-
tenance cost.
Cost of_ Labor - To relate the operating and maintenance labor costs,
the hourly wage rate for production of non-supervisory workers in
water, steam, and sanitary systems was used from the U. S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly publication, Employment
and Earnings". For August 1972, this wage rate was $3.97 per hour.
This wage rate was then applied to estimates of operational and main-
tenance man-hours within each process to obtain process direct labor
charges. To account for indirect labor charges, 15 percent of the
direct labor of the direct labor costs was added to the direct labor
charge to yield estimated total labor costs. The 15 percent value was
listed in three references as the correct value for estimation of in-
direct labor charges. Such items as Social Security, employer contri-
8-53
-------
DRAFT
butions to pension or retirement funds, and employer-paid premiums to
various forms of insurance programs were considered indirect labor
costs.
Cost of Energy and Power - Energy and power requirements were calculated
directly within each process. Estimated costs were then determined
by applying either typical fuel costs or, in the case of electrical re-
quirements, a rate of approximately 1.6 cents per kilowatt hour. This
charge was based on 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour for January 1971 which
was then adjusted by the Wholesale Price Index for the correct dollar
base.
The electrical charge for August 1972, based on the above procedure..
was corroborated through consultation by the Energy Consulting Services
Department of the Connecticut Light and Power Company. This electrical
charge was determined by assuming that any electrical needs of a waste
treatment facility would be satisfied by an existing electrical dis-
tribution system; i.e., no new meter would be required. This elimin-
ated the formation of any new demand load base for the electrical
charge, thus minimizing the electrical rates applied. Base charges
and an August 1972 fuel adjustment rate were used. Typical long-hours
use industrial customers were studied and the actual rates charged
were consistent with the assumption.
Capital Recovery Costs - Capital recovery costs were divided into
straight line ten-year depreciation and cost of capital at an eight
percent annual interest rate for a period of ten years. The ten year
depreciation period was consistent with the faster write-off (financial
life) allowed for these facilities even though the equipment life is
in the range of 20 to 25 years.
The capital recovery factor (CFR) is normally used in industry to
help allocate the initial investment and the interest to the total
operating cost of the facility. The CFR is equal to the interest rate
plus the interest rate divided by A-l, where A is equal to the quan-
tity 1 plus the interest rate raised to the Nth Power, where N is the
number of years the interest is applied. The annual capital recovery
(ANR) was obtained by multiplying the initial investment by the CFR.
The annual depreciation (D) of the capital investment was calculated
by dividing the initial investment by the depreciation period N, which
had been assumed to be ten years. The annual cost of capital was then
equal to the annual capital recovery (ANR) minus the depreciation (D).
Debt-Equity Ratio - Limitations on new borrowings assume that debt
may not exceed a set percentage of the shareholders equity. This de-
fines the breakdown of the capital investment between debt and equity
charges. However, due to the large number of plants in this study
and a lack of information about their financial status, it was not
8-54
-------
OH Ah I
feasible to estimate typical shareholders equity to obtain debt finan-
cing limitations. For these reasons, no attempt was made to break dowr
the capital cost into debt and equity charges. Rather, the annual
cost of capital is calculated via the procedure outlined in the Capita]
Recovery Costs section, above.
Subsidiary Coj3t.s_ - The costs presented in Tables 8-2 through 8-21 for
BPT and BAT~wa~sTe water control and treatment systems include all sub-
sidiary costs associated with system construction and operation. These
subsidiary costs include estimates of garage and shop facilities; ad-
ministrative and laboratory facilities; yardwork; laboratory operation;
administration and general costs; yardwork operation; cost of land re-
quired for plant construction (based on $1000 per acre for August 1972)
legal, fiscal, and administrative services during plant construction;
engineering costs during plant construction; and the cost of interest
during plant construction,
ASPECTJ3
Energy and nonwater quality aspects of the wastewater treatment tech-
nologies described in Section VII are summarized in Tables 8-23 and
8-24. Energy requirements are listed, the impact on environmental air
and noise pollution is noted, and solid waste generation characteristic
are summarized. The treatment processes are divided into two groups,
wastewater treatment processes on Table 8-23 and sludge and solids hand
ling processes on Table 8-24.
Aspects
Energy aspects of the wastewater treatment processes are important
because of the impact of energy use on our natural resources and on the
economy. Electrical power and fuel requirements (coal, oil, or gas)
are listed in units of kilowatt hours per ton of dry solids for sludge
and solids handling. Specific energy uses are noted in the "Remarks"
column.
Energy requirements are generally low, although distillation and heat
drying are exceptions. Thus, if these operations are used to achieve
no discharge of pollutants, the influent water rate should be minimized
by all means possible. For example, an upstream reverse osmosis or
ultrafiltration unit can drastically reduce the flow rate of wastewater
to a distillation operation.
Nonwater Quality Asgectis
It is important to consider the impact of each treatment process on air
noise, and radiation pollution of the environment to assure that a
process which reduces water pollution does not result in a more sig-
nificant adverse environmental impact.
8-55
-------
DRAFT
TABLE
NONHATER QUALITY ASPECTS
8-23
OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PPOCFSS
Neutralization
Chemical
Reduction
Sf urging
Clan f icatio1-
Fi.ctatj.or
Chemical
Oxidation
Oxidation
w/Czone
Chemical
Precipitation
Flocc jlation
Coagulation
Sedimentation
Deep Bed
Filtration
Screening
Ion Exchange
Adsorption
Distillation
Reverse
Osmosis
Ultrafalt rat ion
Electrodialysis
Liquid/Liquid
Extraction
Gas Phase
Separation
Freezing
Crystallization
Disinfection
Emulsion
Breaking
ENERGY
Power
Fuel
kw/1000 liter-rain
6-8.7
4.4-9.0
C.01-.3
0.1-3.2
36
4.4-96
4.4-9.0
1.02
1.02
0.1-3.2
2.5
0.02
0.01
30
30
130-390
2.5-26
79.5
6-9.7
68
1080
0.1-0,4
17.7-36
....
— -
....
15
2,500,000
4,240
Energy
Use
Mixing
Mixiig
Skimmer
Duve
Sludge
Collector
Drive
Re circulation
PU.TP, Con-
pressor , Skim
Mixing
Mixing
Flocculation
Paddles
Paddles
Sludge
Collector
Drive
Rotation ,
Backwash Pu^p
Head, Back-
wash p ump ^
Rake Drive
Pumps
Pumps,
Evaporate
During
Regeneration
Evaporate
Water
High
Pressure
Pump
High
Pressure
Pump
Ion
Transport
Mixing
Mixing
Freezing
Chlorine
Pumps
Mixer
Rea'_ Liquid
NONWATER QUALITY IMPACT
Air
PollutlO"
Impact
None
None
None
None
More
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Nore
N'ore
None
None
None
None
None
Minor
None
Noise
Pollution
Impact
Nore
Nore
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
Not
Ooject.ior.able
None
None
Not
Objectionable
Not
3
None
None
Nore
Not
Objectionable
*'3ne
NOPP
Solid
Haste
None
None
Concentrated
Concentrated
Concentrated
None
None
Concentrated
Dewatered
None
None/Waste
Carbon
Concent rated/
Dewatered
Dilute
Concentrate
Dilute
Dilute
Concentrate
None
None
None
None
Concentrated
Solid Waste
Concentration
% Dry Solids
— -
5-5C (Oil)
1-10
3-5
3-10
3-5
1-3
50
N/A
40
50-10C
1-40
1-40
1-5
-- —
50(oil)
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Techn: que
N/*,
N/A
Ir^incr 2 t- or
Lar3f ill
Tnicken , Dry &
Landfill or
Incinerate
Sxir, 2ry,
Landfill cr
Incinerate
N/A
Dewater , Landfill
Dewater (,
Landfill or
Incinerate
Dewater &
Landfill or
Incinerate
Dewater &
Landfill or
Backwash to
Settling
Landfill or
N/A
pec-^-erate or
Lardfill
Landfill or
Incinerate
Distill fc
Incinerate ,
Landfill
Distill t
Incinerate ,
Landfill
Distill,
Landfill
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Incinerate
8-56
-------
DRAFT
o
s
M
;w
f_,
H
,J
g
0
tH
W
H
^
0
2
>«
o
«
«
§
U
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Techniqi
c;
0 w
0) r4 »d
-P -P -H
tfl Rj fH
(0 U 0
a -P to
c
T3 OJ >i
•.-t U h
M d Q
o o
to u *
1J i
fc, n
£
O
H 4J
0) \
8 i
& j<;
til
G-)
u
u
o
tt
&j
,-*
rH M
H 0)
m 4J .
•O "3 >
c: 3 «
«fl)MijM 1-JJ4 to KiVJ
jo oqjooj oi1 oa)co) < o-H '~* i--irOrHfl ^-» (H ^ rHfC rHCJ>i
J Cr-*l-.'HUr--l!-, )^ r-S ^t I-J r-i r-f^rHV-l H-i ^'OJ V(r-(^ -HpVv
,-. (yH(UHC.',-i'(li Or40J-H H r-IHJ^O OIH HCXJ^at-^tD HTJO;
X-
0-
0 000 ^S X! ^
rsj r-ino -or *r \n 3 *
,_j U-( (Vj | r-t lll< ^ Oi_-Pin O
||| m 1 O l/l Q LTl "X J O!-5' °
o d) Cj i i
+J 4\J 4J -P \ -P
^, ^ M li i-i 0) OOIOJO It Oin « QJ
ccc 3^ M ifl O rO n3 fC 11 S3 t 'TJ 23 w O fQ
OOO T! i CD >. i
rO 4) jj3 CoCb*--ML,£ --^ IH TJ r-i I-H 13
C - Qi OJ -P CD-iCC (^ f—i r-i c Ol< QJ P-i (L &i T3 G;
•H -H«J Et3> ^{fiDf-P CUpQJ OH 3(0 fC rHr-40; Q-r- (D-HO-M .CWfX-t-- >•
E; s< u&; o; K'MS; K:K c^o^-x; tc u A, a: «: o -H
1 o r-
0 0 O CD fNI
tiiiooo iicn i ,-H
illtr-mrM III i m i
lli [ - -.-iniio i£> i co r^
— — d> " — "" • """" ••
CTl ffl
fN rH n 1
P5^)c^ ,-i ! ! lujyj^ooi l co r- !
.-(U5fN (N ( 1 !rHM>OC^I 1 «1 c c a; o
t.1 C C C O -P -H Cf> -P Ctf)
^OOH4)-H CpH'O ~Jr-4 (0 o-p-1
CJJ^^-imCJ 3fi3 E Q CQCnE^H H C OJ -HJJ >,
(0 Cf ti O1 3 H d)iH <04' tj C^iOiHC C O"1 O -P-H l-t
dHQJ'H«--*jS i-t-H QJM Q! R) M (0 *H C.) <0 KJ C 0X >i
< Q i< Q t^ E-< ft, [t, KE^ K MC>^U J >J M ^O CL,
8-57
-------
DRAFT
None of the liquid handling processes causes air pollution with the
possible minor exception of disinfection. Incineration and heat dry-
ing of sludges or solids can, however, cause significant air pollution.
In fact, efforts to reduce this air pollution by scrubbing can result
in water pollution. Noise pollution sometimes disturbs equipment op-
erators or even the surrounding community. However, none of the waste-
water treatment processes causes objectionable noise in either respect.
None of the treatment processes has any potential for radioactive radia-
tion hazards.
The solid waste impact of each wastewater treatment process is indi-
cated in three columns on the table. The first column shows whether
effluent solids are to be expected and, if so, the solids content in
qualitative terms. The second column lists typical values of percent
solids of the sludge or residue. The third column indicates the usual
method of solids disposal associated with the process.
The processes for treating the wastewaters from this category produce
considerable volumes of sludges. Much of this material is inert metal
oxides which can be reused profitably. Other sludges not suitable for
reuse must be disposed of to landfills since most of the sludge is
chemical precipitates which could be little reduced by incineration.
Being precipitates, they are by nature relatively insoluble and non-
hazardous substances requiring minimal custodial care.
In order to ensure long-term protection of the environment from harm-
ful constituents, special consideration of disposal sites should be
made. All landfill sites should be selected so as to prevent horizontal
and vertical migration of these contaminants to ground or surface
waters. In cases where geologic conditions may not reasonably ensure
this, adequate mechanical precautions (e.g., impervious liners) should
be used to ensure long-term protection of the environment. A program
of routine periodic sampling and analysis of leachates is advisable.
Where appropriate, the location of solid hazardous materials disposal
sites, if any, should be permanently recorded in the appropriate office
of legal jurisdiction.
8-58
-------
DRAFT
SECTION IX
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1, 1977, (Level
I) attainable through the application of the best practicable control
technology currently available (BPT) are established in this section.
BPT is based upon the average of the best existing performance by
plants of various sizes, ages and manufacturing processes within the
industrial category and its subcategories as discussed in Sections
III through VIII of this report.
In particular, consideration was given to:
(a) the size and age of facilities
(b) the processes employed
(c) nonwater quality environmental impact
(d) the engineering impact on waste treatment facilities
(e) process changes
(f) the total cost of meeting the effluent limitations
The best practicable control technology currently available emphasizes
treatment facilities at the end of pipe, but includes the control tech-
nologies within the plant or process itself when these are considered
to be normal practice within an industry.
A further consideration is that the economic and engineering reliabi-
lities of the waste treatment facilities required to meet these limita-
tions are already known since they are currently in operation by the
majority of the plants treating their wastewaters.
APPLICABILITY
The point source category covered is Machinery and Mechanical Products
Manufacturing. The complexity, variety, and volume of products within
these industries required subcategorization by a method which was inde-
pendent of the actual product produced. After review of the more
traditional factors for subcategorization which included standard
industrial classification, plant size, geographical location, and pro-
ducts produced, categorization by major groupings of manufacturing pro-
cesses common to all industries was selected.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-1
-------
DRAFT
These subcategories are:
1. Casting and Molding - Metals
2. Mechanical Material Removal
3. Material Forming - All materials except plastics
4. Physical Property Modification
5. Assembly Operations
6. Chemical-Electrochemical Operations
7. Material Coating
8. Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous Metals
9. Molding and Forming - Plastics
The identification of best practicable control technology currently
available and recommended effluent limitations presented in this
section cover all the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing
industries and apply to all existing plants, except for those sub-
categories specifically covered by other sets of effluent limitations
as discussed in Section IV of this report. In general, the effluent
limitations in this report cover all industries in subcategories 2,
3, 4, 5, 7 and 9, and most of subcategory 1. Limited portions of sub-
category 6 and 8 are covered as defined in Section IV of this report.
In addition to the above subcategories, separate subcategories were
established for Film Sensitizing, Subcategory 10; Dockside Shipbuild-
ing Activities, Subcategory 11; and Lead Acid Battery Manufacture,
Subcategory 12 due to the specialized processes involved.
Plant data were used to derive limitations which, when applied in a
building block fashion in conjunction with other pertinent effluent
limitations to a particular plant, result in specific limitations
for that plant. A set of effluent limitations was determined for each
industry subcategory. The effluent limitations generally limit pollu-
tant rate rather than water quality. That is, they are expressed in
terms of milligrams of pollutant per hour per square meter of production
floor area rather than concentration.
The wastewater treatment and control technology associated with the
BPT limitations was discussed in Section VII, and typical costs
for this technology were listed in Section VIII. This section defines
the effluent limitations, reviews the technology and estimates the
overall economic impact of effluent limitations implementation.
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Based on the information contained in Sections III through VIII of
this report, it was established that the effluent limitations attain-
able through the application of the best practicable control techno-
logy currently available are as listed in Table 9-1. This table sets
forth the 30 day average effluent limitations for Subcategories 1
through 8, 10 and 12 of the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manu-
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-2
-------
DRAFT
O O O
O O O O
tH 1 O
t 0 1
or-ii
! lot
ousior^o
OO 1 r- O\ O ff<- i-t
g
ooo
t 1 O 1 OA l/l 1
1 0» 1 (
ICD(
O 1 OOO
O'VO
o
o-
a
Iinoii
Q*OiO
tvOTICF: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments receiv«i and further
review by EPA.
9-3
-------
DRAFT
facturing industries. Table 9-2 defines the single-day maximum
effluent limitations for the same subcategories. The units of these
limitations are milligrams of pollutant discharged per hour cf produc-
tion per square meter of active production floor area. The only
exception is pH which for all subcategories is 6-9. Application of
these limitations to particular plants is detailed later ir. this
section.
The effluent limitation for Molding and Forming - Plastics, Subcate-
gory 9, is no discharge of pollutants. This is because no process
water is required for molding of plastics. Some plants use water for
extruding and foaming; however, exemplary plants contacted had r.c
effluent discharge because they recycle the contact coolant water.
The effluent limitation for Dockside Shipbuilding Activities, Subcate-
gory 11, is that the entire work area must be broom cleaned to remove
loose shot, paint, scale, oil spills and other debris before flooding
or submerging of the work area.
No effluent limitations were established for the toxic constituents
(polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's), phenols and chlorinated hydrocar-
bons) since no BPT is available to control them. As a result, their
use should be reduced or eliminated. These constituents may be regu-
lated as toxic pollutants under Section 307A of the Act.
Two definitions are important in implementing these effluent limita-
tions; active production floor area and hours of production. Active
production floor area is defined as that general floor area within a
plant assigned to a specific subcategory (based on the manufacturing
processes performed) which is actively in production. The floor area
does not necessarily have to be contiguous. The area includes
aisles, columns, in-process active storage areas immediately adjacent
to the operation (i.e., storage area necessary to maintain a smooth
flow of work) and any other adjacent floor area actively associated
with operation of the processes in the subcategory. When two
or more processes in different subcategories are so intimately asso-
ciated (integrated or shared) that determination of separate sub-
category floor areas is impossible, the integrated floor area should
be assigned to the more restrictive subcategory involved. If a manu-
facturing process in one subcategory exists as an "island" within the
floor area associated with another subcategory and if the floor area
of the island is no more than five percent of the total of the other
subcategory floor area, the process area may be included as part of
the dominant subcategory floor area. Inactive plant areas, storage
areas other than described above, general office areas, power generat-
ing facilities and similar areas are not included or considered part
of the active production floor area.
Hours of production means the actual time that a manufacturing,
assembly, or other type of production operation in a subcategory is
performed.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-4
-------
DRAFT
u^-ooo
US 1 O CD
f) O i— ' O QO OO i— •
O(N|
lrHIO'CCirO II
lOI
O 1 O I
OOD^-t 1 O^O
NOTICE: These are teitat'we rpcommendatmnr, based upon information in th!s
report and are subject to change based upon conments received and further
review by EPA.
9-5
-------
DRAFT
IDENTIFICATION OF BPT
Best practicable control technology currently available for all the
applicable Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing industries
is the use of physical and chemical methods of wastewater treatment at
the end of the process combined with the best practical in-process con-
trol technology normally practiced to conserve rinse water and reduce
the amount of treated wastewater discharged.
The primary water pollutants generated in most facilities in this
industry category are characterized generally as:
Free and emulsified oils and greases
Suspended and dissolved solids
Dilute acids and alkaline chemicals
Free oils are normally directly removed by use of an oil skimmer
where the oil is swept into a receiving channel and pumped to a hold-
ing tank for ultimate disposal.
Soluble or emulsified oils and greases are removed by adding sul-
furic acid and heat to the emulsion. After initial emulsion breaking
and decanting, the remaining emulsified oil, usually 100 to 150 ppm, is
treated by adding a chemical coagulant, and the resultant floe removed
by either settling or air flotation. Suspended solids are also re-
moved at this time.
Dissolved solids, dilute acids and alkaline chemicals are usually
treated together with any remaining free or emulsified oils using
chemical treatment. Chemical treatment methods are exemplified, as
applicable, by destruction of cyanide by oxidation, reduction of hexa-
valent chromium to the trivalent form, neutralization, and coprecipi-
tation of metals as hydroxides or hydrated oxides (with settling and
clarification to remove suspended solids prior to discharge). The
above technology has been widely practiced by many plants for over 25
years.
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF_ BPT
The following paragraphs summarize factors that were considered in
selecting the categorization, water use rates, level of treatment
technology, effluent concentrations attainable by the technology, and
hence the effluent limitations for BPT.
Age and Sjlze of Facilities
As discussed in Section IV, the age of industry manufacturing facili-
ties has little direct bearing on the quantity or quality of waste-
water generated. Thus, the effluent limitation for a given subcate-
gory applies equally to all plants regardless of age. Land availa-
bility for installation of add-on treatment facilities can influence
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-6
-------
DRAFT
the type of technology utilized to meet the effluent limitations.
This is one of the considerations which can account for a range in the
costs that r,.ight be incurred. The size of a facility by subcategory
is considered directly during implementation of the effluent limita-
tions .
Processes Employed
All plants in a given subcategory use the same or similar manufactur-
ing processes, giving similar discharges. There is no evidence that
operation of any current process or subprocess will substantially
affect capabilities to implement the best practicable control techno-
logy currently available. No changes in process employed are envi-
sioned as necessary for implementation of this technology for plants
in any subcategory. The treatment technologies to achieve BPT are
end-of-process methods which can be added onto the existing treatment
facilities.
Nonw_ater Quality Environmental Impact
The enhancement of water quality provided by these proposed effluent
limitations substantially outweighs the impact on air, solid waste
and energy requirements, as discussed below.
Impact of Proposed Limitations on Air Pollution - Use of Level I
ehd-of-pTpe treatment methods has no effect on air quality. However,
use of recycle systems to help achieve Level I limitations has the
potential for increasing the loss of volatile substances to the
atmosphere. Use of cooling towers, permitting process water reuse,
has contributed significantly to reductions of effluent loads while
contributing only minimally to air pollution problems. Careful opera-
tion of these systems can avoid or minimize air pollution problems.
Impact of_ Proposed Limitations^ ori Solid Waste Problems - Considera-
tTorTlTas also been given~~to the solid waste aspects of water pollu-
tion controls. The processes for treating the wastewaters from this
category produce considerable volumes of sludge. Much of this
material is inert metal oxides which can be reused profitably. Other
sludge not suitable for reuse must be disposed of to landfills since
chemical precipitates form most of the sludge and these cannot: be
appreciably reduced by incineration. Being precipitates, they are by
nature relatively insoluble and nonhazardous substances requiiing
minimal custodial care.
In order to ensure long-term protection of the environment from poten-
tially harmful constituents, special consideration of disposal sites
should be made. All landfill sites should be selected so as to pre-
vent horizontal and vertical migration of any contaminants to ground
or surface waters. In cases where geologic conditions may not reason-
ably ensure this, adequate mechanical precautions (e.g., impervious
liners.) should be used to ensure long-term protection of the environ-
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-7
-------
DRAFT
ment. A program of routine periodic sampling and analysis of lea~/.ates
is advisable. Where appropriate, the location of solid hazardous
material disposal sites, if any, should be permanently recorded in the
appropriate office of legal jurisdiction.
Impact of_ Proposed Limitations cm Energy Requirements - The effect
of water pollution control measures on energy requirements has also
been determined. The additional energy required in the form of
electric power to achieve the effluent limitations proposed for
BPT and BAT amounts to less than one percent of the electrical energy
used by this industry in 1974.
Engineering Impact on Treatment Facilities
The level of technology selected as the basis for BPT limitations is
considered to be practicable since the concepts are proven and are
currently available for implementation and may be readily applied as
"add-ons" to existing treatment facilities. In addition, in many
plants, improved housekeeping and automation of existing treatment faci-
lities is adequate to meet the effluent limitations.
Process Changes
No in-process changes are required to achieve the BPT limitations
although improved housekeeping and recycle water quality changes
may occur as a result of efforts to reduce effluent discharge
rates. Many plants are employing recycle, cascade uses, or treat-
ment and recycle as a means to minimize water use and the volume
of effluents discharged. The limitations are pollutant rate limit-
ations (unit weight of pollutant discharged per unit floor area per
hour worked) only and not volume or concentration limitations. The
limitations can be achieved by extensive treatment of large flows;
however, an evaluation of costs indicates that the limitations can
usually be achieved most economically by minimizing effluent volumes.
Cost of_ Meeting the Effluent Limitations
To accomplish this economic evaluation, it was necessary to establish
the treatment technologies that could be applied to each subcategory
in an add-on fashion, the effluent qualities attainable with each
technology, and the costs. In order to determine the added costs, it
was necessary to determine what treatment processes were already in
place and currently being utilized by most of the plants. This was
established as the base level of treatment. Table 9-3 defines by
subcategory the number of plants that will be governed by these limit-
ations, i.e. plants that have a point source discharge. Eighty
percent of these plants currently have waste treatment facilities
which already meet or approach the limitation levels required. It
should be noted that the total number of plants affected by these
limitations is much less than that listed by subcategory since most
of the plants have manufacturing processes in several subcategories.
These are referred to as multiple subcategory plants.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVFD AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-8
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-3
PLANT EFFLUENT DISCHARGE BY SUBCATEGORY
Subcategory
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Casting and Molding - Metals
Mechanical Material Removal
Material Forming - All Materials
Except Plastics
Physical Property Modification
Assembly Operations
Chemical- Electrochemical
Operations
Material Coating
Smelting and Refining of
Nonferrous Metals
.Voiding and Forming - Plastics
film Sensitizing
Tcckside Shipbuilding Activities
Lead Acid Battery Manufacture
Number of Plants
that Discharge to
Navigable Waters *
921
1,494
666
370
385
8,430
1,786
264
369
112
Not Applicable
61
'D~-r L-ased on random telephone poll of the industries and
Department of Commerce Industrv data base.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS IREPORT AND ARE
SUB^CT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-9
-------
DRAFT
The economic impact was then determined by considering cc-th single
subcar.egory and multiple subcategory plants. Of the estimated 113,032
plants, 85 percent had no point source discharge. Of t.ie balance,
4,527 discharged to navigable waters. Of these, 80 percent already
peri'orm some type of waste treatment. There are thus an estimated
724 plants which discharge to navigable waters without treatment,
and 3,803 plants which treat their waste before discharge. Approxi-
mately 25 percent of these plants have a manufacturing process that
includes the Electroplating and Metal Finishing Point Scarce Category.
These plant totals, adjusted to reflect the metal finishing activities,
were then used to determine the economic impact on the pcir.r. source
category.
Two types of plant situations were then defined. One type required a
new treatment system and the other required add-ons to existing facil-
ities to achieve significant waste load reductions. Capital and oper-
ating costs for these systems were then developed for the average ?ize
facility. The average size was determined by obtaining an -"erage
plant size based on data compiled. The capital costs v:ere developed
from an engineering estimate based on actual plant cost ~ata for
components in each of the systems.
The results of this analysis showed the estimated cost for plants
without treatment facilities. For plants with treatment, the cost to
modify the existing facility to meet the effluent limitations was
determined by estimating a cost to update a typical plant assuming
the plant had an average waste treatment facility. This cost was then
applied to all the estimated plants which have treatment. This total
cost was then added to the total cost for new waste treatment facili-
ties to determine the estimated total cost to the Machinery and
Mechanical Products Manufacturing industries which was one billion
dollars.
PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT 0_F BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The BPT effluent limitations were derived from analysis of the treated
effluent collected from a cross section of exemplary plants within
the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing industries.
Screening Rationale
Because the effluent limitations were to be based on the performance
of exemplary plants, a number of techniques were used to obtain a
final data base. First, the following five sources were asked to
supply names of such plants:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Regional Offices
Industry Trade Associations
State environmental protection offices
Individual manufacturing companies
Consultants
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND APE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIFW BY EPA
9-10
-------
DRAFT
In addition, three other sources were investigated to obtain more
plant, names :
NPDES permit listings
Periodical literature
Technical papers and reports
All of the aforementioned information sources are quantitatively
summarized in the Supplement B to this document, and a list of industry
trade associations contacted is presented in Section III. Addition-
ally, to augment the list of potentially exemplary plants, a list of
about 6,000 plants was screened by inspection.
Based on the information and listings from all of the previously
mentioned sources a total of 1,422 plants were evaluated in detail
by telephone using standardized evaluation forms, and 339 plants
were selected for on-site evaluation. Plants selected for on-site
evaluation were still regarded as only potentially exemplary. In-
deed, subsequent data analysis showed that pollutant rates from some
were excessive. That is the reason why the analytical screening
based on effluent sample analysis, described below, formed a valid
final data base. , -
The plant data collected from these plants were found by the following
methods to be typical of long-term plant effluent data.
1. A comparison of the test data collected with the
plant effluent data supplied by the plant was
made. Forty percent of the plants supplied some
effluent data, thus permitting a good check on
the parameters tested. Where large discrepancies
existed for a particular parameter the sample
analysis was recalculated or redone. If a discre-
pancy was discovered, it was corrected. If no
discrepancy was found, the plant supplied data
was reviewed and if it represented verified data
(i.e., reported to a state agency) it was sub-
stituted for the test parameter. Less than one
percent of all the data collected was revised in
this manner.
2. All test analysis results were sent to the plants
for examination and comments. Over 40 percent
of the plants acknowledged receipt of data and
commented on the analysis. If plant represent-
atives questioned a particular parameter(s)
they were asked if historical or verified data
existed to support their position. If support
existed and subsequent reevaluation of the data
point showed this data was correct, it was in-
cluded in the data base. In general, almost all
NOTr £ THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-11
-------
DRAFT
the revisions decreased the pollutant parameter
concentration. The total number of values
changed in this manner are included in the less
than one percent factor noted previously.
3. All the plant data collected were analyzed employing
a computer program. The data collected were first
examined in terms of effluent concentration for each
subcategory (1 through 9). This analysis provided the
minimum, average and maximum effluent concentrations
for all the plant data collected. Any concentration
data or pollution discharge rate that was much larger
than the mean was flagged, the plant identified, and
the data reviewed. This provided an opportunity to
check parameters which appeared excessively out of
line when compared with other plants. Thus, the data
point highlighted was checked and corrected if pos-
sible. If still high, the plant became a possible
candidate to be defined as nonexemplary.
Thus the plant sample data collected was verified in three ways, by
comparison with previous plant data, by evaluation by plant repre-
sentatives and by comparison with data from other plar.cs performing
similar activities.
Oeternination of 30-Day
The actual effluent limitation was determined as follows. For plants
with a single subcategory, the concentration (mg/1) of each pollutant
was determined and then was multiplied by the plant's average
effluent discharge rate (l/'hr) and divided by the production sub-
category floor area (sq rn) to obtain the normalized average pollutant
discharge rate (mg/hr-sq m). For plants with more than one sub-
category, the concentration of each pollutant was first multiplied by
the plant's average effluent discharge rate to obtain the average
pollutant discharge rate (mg/hr). These pollutant discharge rates
were then apportioned according to subcategory flow rate among the
subcategories where the pollutant occurred, and the resulting sub-
category pollutant discharge rates were divided by the subcategory
production floor areas to obtain normalized subcategory pollutant dis-
charge rates (mg/hr-sq m).
Next, the pollutant discharge rates were screened to eliminate plants
that were not exemplary. This step was necessary because the limit-
ations "shall not be based upon a broad range of plants within an
industrial category or subcategory, but shall be based upon perform-
ance levels achieved by exemplary plants". While the plants to be
visited had been previously screened to give a high probability of
being exemplary, reassessment by means of actual data proved essential,
The first step in the screening process was to establish a reasonable
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-12
-------
DRAFT
water discharge rate for each subcategory. This was accomplished by
using plots of water discharge rate vs production floor area (present-
ed and discussed in Section IV of this report) to establish normalized
water discharge rates (1/hr-sq m). Next, pollutant concentrations
that were generally achieved by exemplary plants were established by
inspection of plant data and consideration of state standards. These
concentrations were then multiplied by the normalized water discharge
rates to determine the tentative pollutant rate limits (mg/hr-sq m)
for exemplary plants. Actual plant pollutant rates were then compared
with these limits to identify plants with rates exceeding the limit.
These plants were then investigated. This investigation often included
reanalysis of the samples and determination of whether the sample had
been taken during upset conditions. Finally, plants with a large
number of excessive pollutant discharge rates were judged not exemplary
and were eliminated from the data base used to develop the effluent
limitations. As a result, 30 percent of the plants were screened
out by this procedure.
The final step in the effluent limitations derivation was to average
for all exemplary plants the pollutant discharge rates (mg/hr-sq m)
for each pollutant parameter within each subcategory. The average
pollutant discharge rate for each parameter was then reviewed by
determining the resultant concentrations and comparing them with the
other subcategories for consistency. One exception to the above dis-
cussion is that for TSS in Subcategory 12, Lead Acid Battery Manu-
facture, the average TSS concentration was unacceptably high and did
not reflect BPT technology. For this TSS parameter, a value of 33
mg/1 was selected based on the effluent data from two battery plants.
Since this figure represented the best treatment currently available
and was reasonably close to that obtained by using BPT, the effluent
limitation was established using this concentration and the average
plant water discharge to average floor area ratio defined in Section
IV.
Table 9-4 summarizes for each applicable subcategory the significant
pollutant concentrations. The table shows the concentrations norm-
ally attainable with BPT (CP). Also shown for each subcategory is
the average pollutant concentration attained by the plants used to
establish the limitations (CL). The third parameter (CF) in Table
9-4 is the average concentration determined by using the limitations
and the average plant discharge to average floor area ratio.
In general there is reasonably good correlation between the three
concentration figures and from subcategory to subcategory. They do
not agree completely because the CL concentration is the actual aver-
age concentration for each pollutant parameter. The average flow
associated for each CL pollutant varies because not every plant within
a subcategory discharged every pollutant. However, the average con-
centration (CF) was determined by using a single average flow for the
whole subcategory as will be the case for a particular plant. Both
concentration figures (CL and CF) reflect integrated concentrations
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-13
-------
DRAFT
o
u
a
o
EH
2
W
u
2
O
U
!3
O
I
CTi
w
:M =
rtr:
NOTICE THESE ARF TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED U^ON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND F UHTHFR INfFR^AL REVIEW BY EPA
9-14
-------
DRAFT
in that they are the concentrations achieved at the end of pipe treat-
ment and include both single and multi-subcategory plants.
In some limited cases the average CL parameter is much higner than
the average CF parameter because some plants with an acceptable pollu-
tant rate had a very high concentration level for a particular pollu-
tant with a very low effluent flow. Also, in some cases, particularly
for cadmium and silver, the values shown for CL and CF are signific-
antly less than what would be expected using BPT. This difference
reflects the fact that many plants are already treating for these
parameters inside the plant and/or that these pollutant effluent
streams normally contribute only a very small percentage of the plant
total effluent.
It should be noted that the concentration values presented are for
reference use only. The actual concentrations for a particular plant
can be higher or lower depending on the quantity of the effluent dis-
charged and the effectiveness of the treatment methods because the
effluent limitations are expressed in terms of mass of pollutant
per hour per unit floor area.
Single-Day Maximum Effluent Limitations
To determine the single-day maximum effluent limitations, data for a
selected group of plants were examined. For each of these plants,
i.ndividual measurements were compared with the average of all such
measurements over a 30-day period. Specifically, the difference
between the maximum measurement and the 30-day average measurement
was determined, and this difference was evaluated as to its overall
pollutant impact. This resulted in conversion factors which were
multiplied by each 30-day average effluent limitation to determine
the single-day maximum effluent limitations shown in Table 9-2.
APPLYING THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
This subsection deals with the procedure for applying the effluent
limitations to actual manufacturing plants. The general principles
of application are discussed and some plant examples are presented.
General Principles of Application
The procedure for applying the effluent limitations to individual
plants consists of identifying the manufacturing processes by sub-
category along with the floor area and number of hours worked per day
in eacn subcategory. If some of the operations within a plant are
covered by other effluent limitations as defined in Section IV of
this report they should also be noted.
wrmre THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-15
-------
DRAFT
Maximum allowable discharges for a plant in grams per day (g/day's for
each pertinent pollutant parameter for eech subcategory ar'i rher de-
termined by multiplying the effluent limitation by the production floor-
area and the number of hoars vorked per day. This calculation pr..cTd-
ure is repeated for each existing plant subcategory with < erC": ;:-nt
discharge.
The maximum allowable discharges for each pollutant from each sab-
category are then added together to establish the pl?nt m=ixir,-,um allow-
able pollutant discharge, Tf part of thn plant- n^rufe.'-turina oper-.
tier: is cover-id by another point source category, the allowable pollu-
tant discharge frcni that Category .-hoi'ld be de^e^i ned 5~d added to
the rnaxi~un allowable pollutant discharge to det'•*>••:'v;i ^e t'• 3 tor.-l -1 - -t
•-Tiaxdruum allowable pollutant d:'s7h?rge, Tf any of the subcitecer;-;s
in a plant have zero end-of-pipe ?pfluert discharge, the T^xinum allr'-"-
able pollutant discharge for that subcategory is zero,
The actual plant pollutant discharge should be. equal to or less than
the above-determined plant maximum allowable pollutant discharge for
each of the pollutant parameters. Tf any value Is e-'ceeded, the -uan-
tity of effluent flow must be reduc-"'] or the e.ff>••"'••'v^nr-ps of th^
waste treatment facility must be improved.,
Examples
The examples presented in ^h-= following p-.ges coves" f.he ~\ost corn^on
variations in the characteristics of J nrl' rldaaJ plant.s. «n underptend-
ing of the examples will enable the reader to determine the proper
approach to other variations. The five exawp]os presented are:
1> Fl.-tnt vrith 'i jinqlc- subc?,tegoty cov?>'en hy Mr-'.chlr-ery -5r.d
Mechanical Product-g ^,--,nuf net ur ^ ^q ^fflj.'r-t 1 i.r.i t.=:t i o ;•---.
2. Plant with two subcategories, one covered by other effluent.
limitations and the second a zero discharge' operation
covered by the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufactur-
ing effluent limitations,
3. Plant with multiple subcategories covered by Machinery and
Mechanical Products Manufacturing effluent limitations.
4. Plant with multiple subcategories with zero effluent dis-
charge in some subcategories.
5. Plant with multiple subcategories partially covered by
other effluent limitations.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS HEPOR • AND ARF.
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-16
-------
DRAFT
Example \_: Plant with a Single Subcategory, Covered by Machinery and
Mechanical Products Manufacturing Effluent Limitation"- The plant
considered Hi this example consists of a single manufacturing subcaie-
gory . The example is carried out in. tour tabl«...-. Table 9-5 presents
pertinent plant data including number of hours worked per day, prou-c-
tion floor area, the quantity of wastewater discharged each day, and
actual effluent concentrations for pollutants covered by Subcategory 3
effluent limitations. Table 9-6 shows how actual pollutant discharges
(g/day) are calculated by multiplying the pollutant concentrations by
the quantity of wastewater discharged each day. Table 9-7 shows how
the plant maximum allowable discharges are calculated by multiplying
the effluent limitations by the floor area and by the number of hours
worked each day. Table 9-8 shows the resulting comparison between the
actual pollutant discharges (from Table 9-6) and the maximum allowable
pollutant discharges (from Table 9-7). All of the actual discharges
are less than the maximum allowable discharges, and the plant is,
therefore, in compliance with the effluent limitations.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-1
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-5
EXAMPLE 1 PLANT DATA
Manufacturing Description: Production of Stampings
Plant Average Effluent Discharge: 60,000 liters per day
Subcategory: 3
Manufacturing Process: Material Forming - All
Materials Except Plastics
Production Floor Area (sq m): 20,000
Hours Worked Per Day: 8
Plant Effluent Pollutant Paramater Concentrations (30 Day Average)
Parameter Concentration
pH 7.9
Total Suspended Solids 22.1 mg/1
Copper 0.30 mg/1
Iron 0.68 mg/1
Lead 0.07 mg/1
Nickel 0.25 mg/1
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/1
Chemical Oxygen Demand 64.0 mg/1
Phosphate 2.0 mg/1
Silver 0.005 mg/1
Zinc 0.92 mg/1
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-18
-------
DRAFT
I
a\
w
(J
m
O
u
r3
<
u
W
U
en
H
a
EH
2
O
(X
w
X
w
\
d
0)
D"1
in
TJ
^
U
U3
•H
Q
C
CD
3
c-H
i[ [
fu
4-)
C
rd
X
O
4-1
VH
4J
G
£3
, — i
rH
O
ft
rH
rd
3
4-J
O
s£
4-1
C
rd
.- — *
Cn
\
o
o
o
r-t
*
rH
\
Cn
£
^-^
r-^1
rd
rQ
X.
Cn
—
(!)
en
M
rd
x:
u
03
H
Q
4J
C
rd
4J
3
,-H
,-H
O
ft
rH
rd
3
4-J
0
4-1
C
rH
ft
^-^
>,
rd
\
Cn
X
rH
CN
CN
[fi
'd
•H
rH
O
co
Ti
dl
T3
C
Q)
dj
03
£j
CO
rH
rd
4J
0
£H
O OO
• •
CO ^3
rH '3'
II II
o o
o o
o o
r-H r-H
\\
O O
0 O
0 0
0 0
UD **D
X X
O CO
n us
o o
^1
01
a c
a o
O in
O I — i
CN O
• •
^ H
II II
O O
O O
O O
rH rH
\ \
O 0
o o
O 0
0 0
VD VD
X X
r~- Ln
O CN
0 O
rH
CU
"us rX
rd CJ
OJ -H
^ Is
0 5
CTl CD
V
ro
II II
0 0
O 0
o o
rH rH
\\
O O
O 0
O 0
O 0
VO ^£>
X X
O 0
ID T
rH U3
T3
C
rfl
E
0)
Q
C
0)
Cn
CJ ^*i
03 X
rC O
O
^ i — 1
O rd
U
"-$ -iH
s
rH OJ
•H x;
O O
CN
i — !
II
O
o
o
rH
\
o
O
O
0
vc
X
0
CN
OJ
JJ
rd
x:
a
w
o
x:
ft
0
ro
0
II
O
O
o
rH
\
O
O
O
0
{D
X
LT>
O
0
O
H
QJ
^>
rH
•-H
CO
(N
LT)
II
O
O
O
rH
\
O
o
o
0
^rj
X
CN
CTi
0
U
c
• H
rs]
LO
1
a\
QJ
rH
Q
rd
EH
E
O
iH
fiOTICt: These are tentative recommendations bastd upon information m this
report and are subject to charge based upon comments receivad and further
review by EPA.
9-19
-------
DRAFT
r^
I
CTi
W
m
P.
tr1
Q)
g
•H
EH
O
•H
•P
U
3
TJ
0
M
CM
X
*
•fc
e
CO
2
O
H
Cj
c^
D
U
i_l)
<£
U
Pi
l
(d
T3
"x^
j_l
x;
— '
'-
\
tji
_e
o
o
-
rH
X
c
o
•H
-p
-p
• H
E
•H
i-}
•P
C
0)
rH
4-1
<4H
W
II
0)
H
,Q
id
^
o
rH
rH
<
g
2
E
•H
X
id
s
•P
c
id
n.
m
*
1
D1
01
I
x;
"x^
CP
—
^-^
^(
id
r^J
\
CT1
•~^
1
13
^\
cn
0)
tn
M
Tj
r-*
A-<
o
•H
Q
X
o
o
o
rH
\
o
0
0
0
(N
X
CM
CTl
E
cr
w
i
\
CP
E
CN
CTl
01
•H
O
CO
rrj
M
0)
•P
(I)
E
id
(d
CM
Q)
t!
C
Q)
a
01
rj
CO
rH
id
4J
O
£H
CO
CD
(N
II
CO
X
o
o
o
rH
\
o
0
0
o
CN
X
CO
•-t
o
CD
•H
o
^j
0)
a
o
u
••
CN
,4
in
II
CO
X
0
o
o
rH
\
O
O
0
o
CN
X
CN
ro
o
CN
n
o
£
£
V
H-
r f i
IN
rH
in
II
CD
X
o
o
o
rH
\
O
O
O
O
CN
X
CN
rn
o
o
CN
ro
o
o
ro
id
d)
t-^l
ir-
r^
en
rH
II
CO
X
o
o
o
rH
\
O
o
0
o
CN
X
CN
rH
o
CN
•-H
o
,— \
(a
^
Q
•H
^
1 • I
CN
M- ro O
U3 0 VO 0* yi
ro co rj m
rH ^ rH r-^
». «.
^ CO
II II II II II
CO CO 00 CO CO
X X X X X
0 O 0 0 O
o o o o o
o o o o o
rH rH — 1 rH rH
\\\\\
o o o o o
o o o o o
0 0 0 0 O
o o o o o
CN (N CN CN CN
X X X X X
CN
en o
rH o r- o ^o
r^ ro o o rH
in
CN
CTl O
rH o r» o u>
r~ m o o rH
in
13
m
E
(U
Q
•H in
C I I
D cTi o
CT1
0) >i (]J u M JH
' — 1 QJ O rH fj ["T ( CT |
•H x; x; -H -H *
O CJ P-i CO tO -K He
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon Information in this
report and
review by
ore
subject
to
change based upon comments receiv«d and further
LPA.
9-20
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-8
EXAMPLE 1 COMPLIANCE COMPARISON
Parameter
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphate
Silver
Zinc
Plant Actual
Pollutant Discharge*
1
3
,326
18
40
4
15
900
,840
120
0
55
7.9
.0
.8
.2
.0
.30
.2
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
Plant Maximum
Allowable Pollutant
Discharge**
6 to 9
1,472 g/day
28.8 g/day
51.2 g/day
5.12 g/day
19.2 g/day
1,136 g/day
8,480 g/day
126.4 g/day
0.32 g/day
256.0 g/day
*From Table 9-6
**From Table 9-7
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-21
-------
DRAFT
Example 2_: Plant with a Subcategory Covered by_ Other Effluent
Limitations and a Zero Discharge Subcategory Covered by Machinery and
Mechanical Products Manufacturing Effluent Limitations -The plant"con-
sidered in this example manufactures a product covered by the Machinery
and Mechanical Products Manufacturing Point Source Category. Their one
operation having an effluent discharge is chrome plating. Their second
operation, a machining operation, does not have an end-of-pipe discharge
because its pollutants are removed by a contractor. Effluent limitations
promulgated for the Electroplating and Metal Finishing Point Source Cat-
egory apply to this plant. Table 9-9 presents pertinent plant data in-
cluding number of hours worked per day for each Subcategory, production
floor area for each Subcategory, and the total quantity of wastevater
discharged each day. Other plant data (such as area plated per hour and
number of associated operations) needed to determine the Subcategory 6
limitations are defined in the Electroplating and Metal Finishing Devel-
opment Document and are not shown here because it is not within the scope
of this document. The Subcategory 2 maximum allowable discharge is zero
because the plant has no end-of-pipe discharge from Subcategory 2. The
plant is, therefore, in compliance with the Machinery and Mechanical
Products Manufacturing effluent limitations.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-22
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-9
EXAMPLE 2 PLANT DATA
Manufacturing Description: Production of machined and plated
components
Plant Average Effluent Discharge: 50,000 liters per day from
Subcategory 6
Subcategory: 2 6
Manufacturing Process: Mechanical Electroplating*
Material Removal
Production Flocr Area (sq m) : 4,000 5,000
Hours Worked Per Day : 8 8
Plant Effluent Pollutant Parameter Concentrations
Not shown because there is no end-of-pipe discharge from
Subcategory 2.
*Electroplating is not covered by the Machinery and Mechanical Products
Manufacturing industries effluent limitations (refer to Section IV of
this report). Effluent limitations should be determined using the pro-
cedures defined for the Electroplating and Metal Finishing industries.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED U™*"™™*™"™™**"™™"0 *RE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-23
-------
DRAFT
Example _3_: Multiple Subcategory Plant, Covered bv^ Machinery and
Mechanical Products Manufacturing Effluent Limitations - In this
example, the plant under consideration has three manufacturing su'c-
catecrcries. The example is carried out in seven steps. Table 9-10
presents pertinent plant data including number of hours worked per
day for each subcategory, production floor area for each subcategory,
the total quantity of wastewater discharged each day, and actual
effluent concentrations for pollutants with Subcategory 3, 5, or 7
effluent limitations. Table 9-11 shows how actual pollutant discharges
are calculated by multiplying the pollutant concentrations by the
quantity of wastewater discharged each day. Table 9-12 shows how
the subcategory 3 maximum allowable discharges are calculated by
multiplying the subcategory 3 effluent limitations by the subcategory
3 fleer area and by the number of hours worked each day in subcategory
3. Table 9-13 shows how the subcategory 5 maximum allowable dis-
charges are calculated by multiplying the subcategory 5 effluent
limitations by the subcategory 5 floor area and by the nurJber of
hours worked each day in subcategory 5. Table 9-14 shows how the
subcategory 7 maximum allowable discharges are calculated by multi-
plying the subcategory 7 effluent limitations by the subcategory 7
floor area and by the number of hours worked each day in subcategory
7. Table 9-15 shows how the plant maximum allowable discharges are
calculated by adding the subcategory maximum allowable discharges
(from Tables 9-12, 9-13, and 9-14). Table 9-16 shows the resulting
comparison between the actual pollutant discharges (from Table 9-11)
and the maximum allowable pollutant discharges (from Table 9-15). All
of the actual discharges are less than the maximum allowable dis-
charges, and the plant is, therefore, in compliance with the effluent
limitations.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-24
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-10
EXAMPLE 3 PLANT DATA
Manufacturing Description: Production and assembly of painted
stampings
Plant Average Effluent Discharge: 320,000 liters per day for
Subcategories 3, 5, and 7
Subcategory: 357
Manufacturing Process -. Material Assembly Material
Forming Operations Coating
Production Floor Area (sq m): 20,000 21,000 5,000
Hours Worked Per Day : 16816
Plant Effluent Pollutant Parameter Concentrations (30 Day Average)
Parameter Concentration
pH 6.7
Total Suspended Solids 23.0 mg/1
Cadmium 0.013 mg/1
Chromium, Hexavalent 0.02 mg/1
Chromium, Total 0.07 mg/1
Copper 0.34 mg/1
Fluoride 1.1 mg/1
Iron 1.2 mg/1
Lead 0.06 mg/1
Mercury 0.004 mg/1
Nickel 0.09 mg/1
Oil and Grease 12.5 mg/1
Chemical Oxygen Demand 56.0 mg/1
Phosphate 2.2 mg/1
Silver 0.005 mg/1
Zinc 0.9 mg/1
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-25
-------
DRAFT
T)
<
en
2
O
U
U
u
en
EH
D
A
-5
O
ro
W
X
a
rH
* —
a;
er>
j_i
rd
x;
u
eo
•H
Q
4J
c
HI
UJ
D
rH
4-i
4-1
U
(U
CT1
rd
S-i
(U
f<
-P
(-*
X*
rd
rH
ft
^— ^
£*1
rd
\
k— CT
ey ' —
\
tn -P 0)
e c tn
~— rd k
o ft x:
0 O
O rH LO
*> rd -H
rH 3 Q
1)
HM
0 -P
< C
rd
-P
^
rH
O
ft
UD O 00
rH^^TOO CNCNOO ^D
O'S'VOCNOOCN^'Wi-IOOOO^rHOO
l£l CNOinoOrH CNOCNO 00
ro r-troro OCTif^CN
*w *. *.
r*" ^* r*"*
rH
II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
ooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooo
rHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHiHrHrHrHrHrH
*\ ^\ ^^ ^\ ^\ "^x ^\ ^\ ^*x ^\ — ^ ^^ "\ ^x "\
ooooooooooooooo
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooooooooo
CNrNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCNCN
mr^r^romrorororororororororo
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ro •sr in
rHCNr^^ voocn o
OOOrOrHCNOOOin CNOCT,
rOOOOOiHrHOOOCNVOCNOO
CN rH in
X
c
o
•H
-p *
Cn
-p
C
a)
u
c
0
u
-p
C
rd
-p
0\
ft tr>
rd 0)
3 en
-P M
U l
M
3
T3 O
rd k
eu H
O
rH
Q) *-3
^|
U rH
•H -H
2 O
en Demand
tn
>i
X
O
rH
rd
U
'E
U
rH C
•H -H
en rsi
o
H
I
cn
0)
rH
X!
rd
EH
E
O
CM
*
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change basfld upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
9-26
-------
DRAFT
0)
e
•H
E-i
C
O
•H
-P
U
d
13
O
^
P-i
•X
^
>,
05
\
SH
r\
— .
X
CN
rH
1
CTv
W
l_3
CQ
E-1
CO
f»
o
H
1
U
1-5
u
W
o
PH
f^C
J^
u
H
Q
u
)_3
CQ
rij
3*
O
l_3
h3
^
S
r^4
1- ^.
T-N
F^
- '
U
D
TJ
O
SH
(X
CT
x^
>ji
g
—
O
O
„
rH
X
£
o
•H
4J
4-J
•rH
e
•H
^
4J
C
OJ
p
• — 1
U-t
U--I
W
1
0)
H
43
OS
[$
O
I — 1
rH
f-^
E
E
•H
X
OJ
s
4->
C
03
•K
^?
D1
tn
I •
SH
^
\
D1
E
~ —
"
<0
13
tr>
—
0)
CP
SH
oJ
4^
O
W
•H
Q
4J
C
oJ
3
-—
oj
T3
^\
cn
^-^
SH
OJ
f") 4^
O
>i w
SH -H
0 Q
Cn
1) (1)
1 1 , i
05 43
U OS
43 S
3 0
CO rH
i — 1
E
E
•rH
X
OJ
VD
~v r-'
^r ID
(T*
*.
CN
II II
>£> «D
rH rH
X X
O O
O O
O O
rH rH
\\
O O
O 0
0 0
0 0
CN CN
X X
OO
CN rH
CTi O
cn
C
O
•r-l
4J
o3 E
4J
•rH tJ1
S cn
•rH 1
^
4J \
C cn
^3
rH rH
X X
O O
O O
o o
rH rH
\x
0 0
0 O
O O
0 O
CN CN
X X
iN
r-H rH
o r-
CN
rH r-l
O r-
V
•J)
t!
(L
S-i
^"'
, — (
0) '-a
^
U r-(
•rH -H
Z C
NOTICE: These are tentative
O
V^Q
O^
v
I^O
rH
II
^D
rH
X
O
O
O
rH
\
o
O
O
o
CN
X
o
"-,
LO
O
ro
LO
T3
C
05
E
01
n
G
01
Cn
>1
X
0
H
05
U
E
•"-
O
u
rH C
-H -H
CO CO
recommendations
( ,
1 1
o> o\
C 'i1
r-, rH
•^ -Q
fl 03
EH c<
G S
0 0
'-j (jj
•K
•K *
based upon
•-1 report and are su&iect to change based upon consents receded and further
r~i
O review by EPA.
9-27
-------
DRAFT
ro
rH
1
CTl
W
I— ]
CQ
EH
en
^4
0
M
<
r-^
P
i-^
H
O
O
w
EH
f3^
U
CG
03
ro
W
r3
OH
S
j
w
0)
E
•rH
EH
0
•rH
-P
U
13
o
fX
X
*
•K
—
E
tr
en
(C
)H
O
O
fa
c
o
•H
u
3
0
(— 1
X
c
o
•H
-p
4-!
•H
E
•H
rH
-P
C
(U
rH
MH
IH
W
II
Q)
rH
X!
(0
^
O
rH
rH
<
C
E
•H
X
(^
S
-P
C
to
*
*
">,
03
T3
\
s7
-£
°~^
--^
tn
&i
E
o
o
o
••
rH
•X
"?
tJ1
1
SH
^\
tn
E
*" —
^-v
r**1
us
13
tn
**" *
0)
tn
*-i
fT3
rC
O
•H
O
-p
c
-p
3
in
>i
SH
0
tn
0)
i j
-t-J
Q
X!
CO
en
C
O
.,-1
-p
..
•H
E
-H
-i
I — I
-P
C
,_J
, — 1
HH
W
• ,^
id'
,-. *
O
tn
—
0)
tn
(0
Q
tn
•H
Q
0)
_£J
fH
^
O
J 1
g
1
•H
X
E
tr
i
£
^^
tn
"^
M
(1)
-P
0
E
^
rfl
o- ui
n o
in
•=}•
II II
CO OO
X X
0 O
o o
0 O
,— 1 rH
0 O
o o
0 O
rH rH
X X
ro
r^ o
(N O
0
p^ O
CN O
tn
-o
•H
0
C/2
T3
0)
^3 E
C 3
(1) -rH
CO Tl
^ m
w u
n,
' l " Th'J
1^^ V
LO
ro ^0 '' — '
CM 0 CM
r^ ^
II II II
CO CO OO
XXX
000
o o o
000
rH rH rH
\\ \.
0 O 0
0 O 0
0 0 O
rH rH rH
XXX
"*
rH CN U~)
O ^ CN
O O 0
••*
O *^t* CN
o o o
0)
-d
M -H
Q) rH
D-l r^ O
O rH S-l
U PM H
SC <>rc tf.r,t
• » — « •
CO
vD in
rH 0
II II
CO CO
X X
0 0
O 0
0 0
rH rH
O 0
O O
O 0
rH rH
X X
rn
O 0
o o
rH 0
o o
O 0
>
(Tj *-J
QJ OJ
r— ^ r**
•ivi- r.,<-
co
in
o-5
II
CO
X
o
O
o
t— i
^,
o
o
o
rH
X
r-^
LO
0
o
r-
Q
o
rH
0)
rj
•H
^j
-inr
1
r-- O
, ( Qj Q ^ fc
•H j5 rC -H -H
O U C-i CO CJ
ne-iatiens based ur^n
0
rH i— 1
1 1
O^ O^
tt) 0)
rH rH
X) XI
03 03
EH EH
E E
O O
VH rH
t, d-l
*
* -X
it-,-. -•,,
by E
9-28
-------
DRAFT
w
L)l
si
o
J
s
D
OJ
e
•H
£
O
4J
u
•3
^
I— A
X
*
-K
-J-
*~*
C71
^
r^
H
et;
J_,
0
0
r-H
fa
«
H
Vj
c
*
>
q
o
•H
4-1
nj
4-1
•H
p
P-.
•H
— i
4J
C
O
3
rH
4-4
0)
ro
^5
c
i — '
i — j
<
£
rj
E
•H
X
TJ
S
K
K
>< -,
fl5 >^
^ T"
H
" !
en
!_
tO
r-, ^C
L'l
<"l
r""1! ' — f
tT*'
-LJ '* 1
-4— i — ;
r1 r-0 i
*j iJ j
CT' 3 O
\ CT, rH
i" <
•+~s
l
p.
c 3
° e
0 -M
X
r"""' rQ
in
< C
O
•H
4->
ftS g
-K 4-J
^ -HO1
6 goi
•H 1
CT HH1 r-J
w x;
1 4-) \
M c Cn
r^ Q> E
Cf "H
g 4-i
-" 4-1
M
>i
nJ
^
— ' S-!
ID
OJ 4J
CT1 ^j
M
J^ *-!
O (0
tfi (Hj
•H
Q
4J
C
^* U3 "^T
X O c" O.1 O O V£) CTi O O O
C "•' CC T ,"^J O VD CTi O O O CD rH <3-
•% o L.^ ir in o o c-j o
r— 00 v'M ""> o o o o
_ ,_ _, „ ,-, r-, rH rH r- -H ,H ;-, rH r-,
o o o" o o o o o o o o o o c
OOOOOOOOCOOvOOO
oooooooooooooc
L.'^ m m in in m m ui in LO in in in m
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
00 CN ro
^T O Hr-i^D fxirHO HOn
o^ o o — i o o ri o c t^- in en o r—
Li —1 ,--1 VO
rH
CO (N ^
^ O kD rj r— ' r~1
O rH ro vc rxi -H ^*^ r-i c n
CTi O C rH O O r^l O O r"~ IT) CT\ O rH
in i— 1 r-i xO
. — j
4J nj
C C
0) QJ
-H O
73 > rH C
•H 13 JtJ Q)
rH X 4-1 tP
O OJ O O >i
L/j UI bj MX
(0 C
"3 v ^ (D 01
OJ £ E (U i-( rH 4-1
rr^gr-jr^ rj-i ^>lOn3tl3
C d -H -H S-l -H S-4 0 A S-l
0) -H E E CD M 3 ^a -rH DJ 0)
CjgOOO.OCnJU E Ul > 0
01 73 ^4 M Qi 3 O (0 ^-t ^ QJ O iH C
3 nJxlrC o i— i s-i (D (U-Hxlxi-H-r-i
tnouuutiMiJSocjdiCTts
&4
NOTICE: These are te'-'ai've recommendations base-1 upo.' - '
report and are subject to change based upon comments rece -
review by tPA.
9-29
-------
DRAFT
m
rH
1
CTI
W
CQ
EH
LO
2
o
, — 1
EH
j_q
,^j
^
2
6
,_q
<£
^
D
2
H
X
f3"
^
H
<;
j
PI
m
W
j
CM
5
X
W
g 4J *
•H G *
X rd — -
rd 4-J >i
S 3 rrj
r-~ r~l \
O 0^'
>, CL, —
^
G CJ O
O"' i — < ^T>
CJ X< !--
d O U
JQ rH !/)
^j , — j — i
oo < a
4-
f-
^
-H C *
V1 f4 __
re -u >i
•H TJ
in rH X
O CP
^>-j Q_| "--— '
M
O GJ OJ
tT1 r- ! tjl
QJ _Q M
4-1 ro fd
fl5 *5 J^
u o o
^3 rH W
3 rH -H
CO < C
4^
g
g 4-1
-H C *
X rd —
r$ 4~) ^>i
S 3 rd
rH n3
ro rH X
0 Cn
O OJ 0)
CDr— 1 tT1
QJ ft 5-1
•p fd i
-Q rd
S X
O Cn
rH-- •
CTi O O
OrOCO^cMOuDCTiO OOCOrH'«d-
CN OinOLT) viJOCN O
r- ^HCOCN rOCNf^rH
^ H. ^
^T1 rH ro
r— 1
+ + + + + + + +-i-4+ +
u~i co in oo r~ CN
I^Q LO ro ^O CD *sD C? LO CD CN i — 1 LO
'"O O CM CD CN r-i CTi "^? CO Lf"^ CD fO
in r~ -=t o co CN CN
•qi LO UD
•>
CM
"i~ ~f~ "^~~l~ "i~-t~4"-i"'4'~i"
^f *vf
^O ^ CM ^ CO ^D O
• * • * • • •
•^ r- CM o OOCNO^OCM
rf m OrH rnr^-iom rH
en rH CN en CM in
«. ». ».
CN CN VD
rH
"d
f4
4J rd
fi g
QJ OJ
rH Q
03 rd
rO ^ rH d
•H rd rd 0)
rH X 4J fjl
O 0) O (U >i
CO K EH W X
rd O
i Ofdrd
C 3 -H -H SH -H SH rH O ,£ ^
0) .,H g £ QJ i-i ^5 d) LQ -H pi (D
QjgOO&iOC'dU-^ g03>rj
OJ^cJ^^trJ-iI^OftSMrji — IQJO1 — 1C
3 rdXnC OrH S-i
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-16
EXAMPLE 3 COMPLIANCE COMPARISON
Parameter
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Cadmium
Chromium, iJexavaient
Chromium, Total
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Denand
Phosphate
Silver
Zinc
Plant Actual
Pollutant Discharge*
6.7
7,360 g/day
4.16 g/day
6.40 g/day
22.4 g/day
g/day
g/day
108.8
352
384
19.2
g/day
g/day
1.28 g/day
28.8 g/day
4,000
17,920
704
1.6
288
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
Plant Maximum
Allowable Pollutan
Discharge**
6 to
8,118
4.34
8.0
104.0
112.8
870.6
400.4
21.52
1.46
47.98
4,136
32,848
1,006
1.85
639.5
9
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
g/day
*Fron Table 9-11
**From Table 9-15
NOTICE: THESF ARt I tNTATI VE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGt BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-31
-------
DRAFT
Example 4_: Multiple Subcategory Plant, with Zero Effluent Discharge
— §ome Subcategories - In this example, the plant under consideration
has four manufacturing subcategories, but only three of these subcate-
gories have an end-of-pipe discharge. Subcategory 1 has no effluent
discharge due to contract removal of concentrated waste. This zero
discharge subcategory is allowed no pollutant discharge and is, there-
fore, treated as if it did not exist. Therefore, all of the pollutants
are attributed to the three discharging subcategories, and these three
subcategories are treated exactly as they were in Example 3.
Table 9-17 presents pertinent plant data including number of hours
worked per day for each subcategory, production floor area for each
subcategory, the total quantity of wastewater discharged each day,
and actual effluent concentrations for pollutants with Subcategory
3, 5, or 7 effluent limitations. The calculation results are identi-
cal with those performed in Example 3, and the plant is, therefore,
in compliance with the effluent limitations.
NOTICE THESC ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REF'OR T AND AFU
SUBJECT TO CHANGt BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL RfVIEVJBY tPA
-------
DRAFT
<
< ^
CP
•rH
CX
g
0)
C
•H
CU
03
in
CP
G
•H
4J
in
03
O
o
en
in
03
G
oS
G
O
•H
C)
£3
n
rH
C
O
•H
4J
o.
•H
CU
Q
CP
C
•H
O
03
UH
3
G
03
2
rti
IT!
en
0)
•H
O
0)
4->
m
u
3
CO
g
o
rH
rH
CD
en
n
CD
4J
•rH
o
o
o
CN
0)
CP
(0
o
en
•H
4->
G
CU
3
W
0)
03
M
CD
•P
d
Cu
-H G
M -H
0) 4J
4J (0
03 C")
S U
>i C
rH O
XJ -H
*" -p
CD 03
en M
in CD
< CX
o
03 CP
•H C
rH -H
CD g
4-> M
03 O
CO
fd 4-)
C CD
03 S
CP I
G
'H CP
•P G
m ._j
U r-,
O
a
o
O MD
O rH
O
O
fN
oo
o
o
o
o
o
o
D1
in
VD
»
£X|
^(
o
CP
CD
4J
03
CJ
XI
3
en
in
CD
u
o
J^
CM
CP
C
•H
S_|
3
4J
O
03
m
3
03
g
03
CD
rH
U
3
TJ
0
(X
><
>
03
Q
^
CD
CM
rrj
0)
^
j_i
O
2
en
i_i
3
O
0)
tn
03
SH
OJ
03
Q
O
n
—
en
£j
O
•rH
4->
!H
4J
G
CD
O
G
0
CJ
j_i
CD
0)
g
03
rH
0)
p
+J
C
03
4.)
3
rH
rH
O
CM
4-1
C
0)
3
G
O rH rH rH rH rH rH
•H \\\^\v\\
4-J CP CP CP CP CP CP
03 g g g g g g
^J ["•"•*
4-1 • CO
C ^D rH CN P~ •>*
CD O O O O n rH
C n o o o o rH
O CN
CJ
en
'd
•rH 4-1
rH G
0 CU
CO rH
03
rl T3 > rH
Cu CD ro rd
t) r— ( M •_<
CD d CD O
£ fi) K E-i
03 O-i
rH en - -
rd 3 g g 0)
CM CO g 3 3 t)
3 -H -H H -H
rH -rl g g CD ,H
03 g O O CX O
4-1 T! M >H (X 3
tc o o3 x; x; o rH
CX H O CJ CJ CJ fa
rHrHrHrHrHrHrHrH
\\\\\\\\
ty tP &* &> D^ O"1 D1 O
gggggggg
T m
«£> O CTi O
CNOOOinOCNO
rHOOOCNyaCNO
rH in
'd
C
03
g
0)
Q
C
QJ CD
en CT>
03 >i
U) X
rH O
CJ 0)
rH 4-1
^i T3 ft$ f^
H rH C O .£ rH
3 CD rd -H ex (D
C T3 u ^ g in >
OOjrlCJrHCDOrH
S-l CD CD -H -H XI X! -H
HJSSOCJPMC/)
UH
4H
W
4J
C
03
NOTICt: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in I
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and fun
review by EPA.
9-33
-------
DRAFT
Example 5_: Plant with Multiple Subcategories Partially Covered by_
Other Effluent Limitations - The plant in this example consists of two
manufacturing subcategories. The effluent limitations promulgated for
the Electroplating and Metal Finishing Point Source Category apply to
Subcategory 6 of this plant. The example is carried out in six steps.
Table 9-18 presents pertinent plant data including number of hours
worked per day for each subcategory, production floor area for each
subcategory, the total quantity of wastewater discharged each day, and
effluent concentrations for pollutants covered by Subcategory 3 efflu-
ent limitations. Table 9-19 shows how actual pollutant discharges are
calculated by multiplying the pollutant concentrations by the quantity
of wastewater discharged each day. Table 9-20 shows how the Subcategory
3 maximum allowable discharges are calculated by multiplying the Sub--
category 3 effluent limitations by the Subcategory 3 floor area and by
the number of hours worked each day in Subcategory 3. The Subcategory
6 maximum allowable pollutant discharges are calculated based on the
instructions in the Development Document for the Electroplating and
Metal Finishing Point Source Category (the method of calculation is
described in that document and is not shown here). Table 9-21 shows
how the plant maximum allowable discharges are calculated by adding the
maximum allowable discharges {from Table 9-18 and 9-20). Table 9-22
shows the resulting comparison between the actual pollutant discharges
(from Table 9-19) and the maximum allowable discharges (from Table 9-21)
All of the actual discharges are less than the maximum allowable pollu-
tant discharges, and the plant is, therefore, in compliance with the
effluent limitations.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-34
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-18
EXAMPLE 5 PLANT DATA
Manufacturing Description:
Production of plated
stampings
Plant Average Effluent Discharge: 100,000 liters per day from
Subcategories 3 and 6
Subcategory:
Manufacturing Process-.
Production Floor Area (sq m)
Hours Worked Per Day:
Material
Forming
20,000
8
Electroplating*
10,000
8
Plant Effluent Pollutant Parameter Concentrations (30 Day Average)
Parameter Concentration
PH
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil and Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphate
Silver 0.003 mg/1
Zinc 0.92 mg/1
7
13.3
0.5
0.5
0.05
0.18
9.0
38.0
1.2
.9
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
electroplating is not covered by the Machinery and Mechanical
Products Manufacturing industries effluent limitations (refer
tc Section IV of this report). Effluent limitations should be
determined using the procedures for the Electroplating and
Metal Finishing industries.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-35
-------
DRAFT
PG
m
X
O
U
K
H
<
U
a
D
LQ
1
C/j
2
o
H
EH
<
i-5
D
U
»-3
<
U
-_T
M
O
«
S
u
CO
M
Q
EH
2
<
EH
D
t-3
J
0
ft
LO
H
-i
*•*
^
c
0)
3
rH
MH
4-1
CU
Cn
tO
M
/it
\U
>
<
4->
a
fO
rH
ft
Si
?•
£
O
•H
4J
fO
M
4-1
C
0
U
c
o
u
1
4J
f4
tO
4->
3
rH
•H
o
ft
rH
fO
d
4->
U
<
I ]
•4-J
a
fl
,_,
Cn
X
Cn
s_»
o
Q
O
1
1 1
4
1
*
^-^
rH
X
Cn
g
,— ,
>i
rfl
T3
X
Oi
(U
tj!
>H
(0
X!
U
•H
Q
,_^,
>i
tO
•o
X
Cn
—
4-1 OJ
C Cn
*rt LJ
iw M
rH (0
ft A
U
rH Cfi
fO -H
r-< /^>,
•-J 1—4
4-)
O 4->
O
EH
0
•
0
in
II
o
0
0
rH
X
o
o
o
o
o
rH
X
in
o
SH
0)
QJ
Q4
O
U
o o
• •
o in
m
II II
o o
o o
o o
•H rH
XX
0 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
O 0
rH rH
X X
in m
O 0
C TJ
O fO
)H (1)
H ,-q
0
•
CO O
rH 0
1
X
0
0)
rH 4J
tO (0
0 X!
•H P.
6 co
a) o
x! ^
U ft
m
•
o
II
o
0
o
rH
X
o
o
o
o
o
•H
X
rn
o
o
o
S-l
a)
>
rH
•H
CO
(N
cn
II
o
o
0
rH
X
o
O
0
O
O
iH
X
rsj
en
o
0
C
•H
N
CO
rH
1
CTi
0)
rH
X!
tO
EH
g
0
>H
CM
*
ft
NOTICE: These ere tentative recommendations based upon information In this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
9-36
-------
OJ
g
-H
^
C
0
•rH
-P
U
3
rrj
0
l-t
w
•K
*
. — *
>1
id
T)
^\
VH
x;
^^
X
o
rsi
1
cn
-.1
-H.
^i~
H
to
2
o
I— 1
£-<
H
pi
Q
o
a
£-4
^
'^j
CM
D
o:
LD
U4
J
r>
E
<
X
-*3
•X
*
"E
cr
cn
—
id
a)
M
C
o
• rH
-P
H
fO
x;
u
tn
-H
Q
C
JJ
rj
rH
rH
O
a,
g
3
g
-H
X
5
K^L,
ro
tj1
o
Cn
0)
-P
jw
ID
o
X)
3
cn
0
•H
id
-P
•rl
g
•H
-P
c
i
id
^^
Cn
— -
0)
cn
M
id
u
•H
Q
(D
rH
"rd
>
o
, |
<£
p^
•*
^
rH
11
CO
X
o
0
o
rH
\
0
o
0
0
CM
X
CM
cn
£
D1
n
i
{-^
AH
CJ1*
CM
CT>
tn
-H
rH
O
to
T3
0)
-P
0)
g
id
i-i
id
ew
Q)
f«
0)
P-i
cn
3
CO
rH
id
-P
o
H
»^« •t*^ i i
CN CM
oo CM rH oj M- n o
• • • • • • •
oOrHincntootjDOvo
CM in i — i co co CM in
rH ^J1 rH CM
«. ^
rH 00
II II II II II II II II II
oocococococooococo
xxxxxxxxx
ooooooooo
ooooooooo
ooooooooo
rHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrH
\\\\\\\\\
ooooooooo
ooooooooo
ooooooooo
ooooooooo
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
xxxxxxxxx
CM CM
co CM ro CM cn o
rHC^Oi-HrHOr^OlO
oooor^moOrH
m
CM CM
CO CM CO CM Cn O
rHCOOrHrHOr~-OVO
oooor~-noOrH
in
T)
c
E
0)
Q
c
0)
Cn
cn x
rd O
(D 0)
^_J f—l I 1
O id id
M rH U X; rH
a) oj i-a -r-i a, 01
ac'-d^ gtn>u
DjOmUrHCUOrHC
o SH cu -H -rH x; x; -H -H
CjMiJlZOUHitONi
CO
rH rH
1 I
cn cn
0) d)
rH rH
X) XI
fd (d
E~* £H
g g
o o
fa fa
*
* *
NOTICE- These are tentative recommendations based
rc,x "1
review
and ..••• subject lo change based
by IP A.
g
0
* 0) — <4H
* rH >1
(1J
Cn
^-|
id
x;
u
tn
•r)
Q
0)
rH
XJ
id
1^
O
rH
rH
H OJ
id 13
Ex:
•HO tn
X tn id
id -H
s a c
U
o
X!
in
tn -p
13 O
•H a
rH
O T)
tn o
x:
flj OJ OJ
•P T) g
OJ C
g OJ C
id a o
rH W -rH
rd 3 -P
d, to rd
rH rH r-H
rH OJ OJ 3
(d a>i o u
4J CU U C rH
O O -H -H Id
£H U 2: N O
*
-K
upon information in this
c
OJ
3
rH
tH
MH
Q)
^J
(H
o
Cn
OJ
Mp
id
u
0)
0
3
O
to
-p
-H
O
CP
C
•H •
-P tn
fd C
rH O
O.-H
O -P
M id
-p -p
U -H
OJ g
rH -rH
W -H
upon comments receivtd and further
9-37
-------
DRAFT
£
3 -P
e c *
•H rd ~
X +> >.
rd 3 re
S rH rrj
rH \
w O tn
fll •—
CO >i
2 r-l OJ i
CO rO 3 rrj
M S rH 13
Q rH \
oo o Cn
rH W CH — '
CN i-3 >i
1 03 in d) 0)
!
0) rd
H rH t)
2 X) \
^ cd tT1
i-3 S % —
P-i O
rH 0)
m rH tr>
f^ ^-4
w (d
1-3 g A
Oi 3 U
s e 03
<^ -H -fH
X X P
W rd
S -P
C
-P rd
C -P
rd 3
,— ^
>1 CN
rd CO (N rH CN
rrj . . , .
\ CN CO rH u~) O^ U3
CT* OO ^T LD ro ro
— ^c 01 n rH
E *•
3 (D (N r- 1
E Cj>
-H rJ II II II II II II
X (d
rd,£ oooooo
SO vo
rH rH i-H
-t T3
(U (1)
•P T3
OJ C (U
g d) 01
rd D-j rrj
M U3 0)
id 3 >-i
fli CO O
^-1 rH
rH 0! 0) 03
(d d< C tj ^
-P tt O rd O rH
O O SH OJ -H -H
H U H ^3 2 O
CN
^y ro
. .
O ^ O ^O
oo r\i r-
^ ( — ! if]
-,
CO
II II II +
o o o o
^ ;
ro
+ + + +
(N
*3* ro O
...
O *£> O i cr<
X
O OJ
0) rH
rH -P Xt
rd (d fd
u x; SH t<
•rH fi CD
g 03 > o e
OJ O rH C3 O
X! -C -H -H !H
O OH CO N (in
.£
o
fJCTiCH These are tentative recommendations based upon information m this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by tPA.
9-38
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9-22
EXAMPLE 5 COMPLIANCE COMPARISON
Parameter
pH
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Phosphate
Silver
Zinc
Plant Actual
Pollutant Discharge*
7.9
1,330 g/day
50.0 g/day
50.0 g/day
5.0 g/day
18.0 g/day
900 g/day
3,800 g/day
120 g/day
0.30 g/day
92 g/day
Plant Maximum
Allowable Pollutant
Discharge**
6 to 9
2,432 g/day
348.8 g/day
51.2 g/day
5.12 g/day
339.2 g/day
1,136 g/day
8,480 g/day
126.4 g/day
0.32 g/day
576 g/day
*From Table 9-19
**Fron Table 9-21
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
9-39
-------
DRAFT
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Level II effluent limitations are based on performance using the best
available technology economically achievable (BAT). That is, they are
based on performance of the very best plant or other practical demon-
stration of the technology. The BAT limitations are to be implemented
by 1983.
This section of the report lists and provides the rationale for the
effluent limitations, reviews BAT, discusses application of the limi-
tations to individual plants, and estimates the overall economic impact
of the limitations.
APPLICABILITY
The BAT effluent limitations are applicable to all of the Machinery and
Mechanical Product Manufacturing subcategories as defined in Section
IV of this document. The limitations apply to direct contact process
water discharginy into navigable waters. The control and treatment tech-
nology capable of achieving the BAT limitations is described in Section
VII. The cost, to individual plants for achieving the limitations for
each subcategory is covered in Section VIII.
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
With one exception, the Level II effluent limitations are uniform for
all subcategories of the Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufactur-
ing Point Source Category. The limitation is no discharge of pollu-
tants for both the thirty-day average and the single-day maximum limit-
ation. For Dockside Shipbuilding Activities, the recommended Level II
regulation is that the entire work area must be cleaned by vacuum
cleaning to remove loose shot, paint, scale, oil spills and other debris
before flooding a graving dock or submerging a floating drydock.
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF_ BAT
By aefir.it.ion, BAT effluent limitations are "...not based upon an
average of the best performance within an industrial category, but are
-'• o be determined by indentifying the very best control and treatment
technology employed by a F-poci.fic point source within the industrial
category or subcatogorv". However, a large number of plants satisfy the
lie-discharge limitations at the present time. This is achieved either
by use of manufacturing processes that do not require water, by re-
cycle of wastewaters, or by contract removal of concentrated waterborne
wastes. Some plants achieve no discharge through the use of advanced
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.
10-1
-------
DRAFT
technology. Table 10-1 summarizes by subcategory the percentage and
number of plants that have no point source discharge as estimated from
the project data base. Table 10-2 lists specific plants contacted which
have no pollutant discharge in Subcategories 1 thi\nujh 7 and 9. The
general reasons for no pollutant discharge are a 1 <•,'•> noted. The list of
plants illustrates that, with proper consideration, many plants are able
to achieve BAT today.
At the present time in Subcategory 8, Smelting and Refining of Nonfer-
rous Metals, there is only one plant in our survey which had no pollu-
tant discharge; however, several plants were recycling a large portion
of the process water. With the application of the BAT techniques noted
in Section VII, all plants will be able to achieve EAT limitations as
required.
Because the BPT effluent limitation for Subcategory 9, Molding and
Forming - Plastics, is no discharge of pollutants, BAT requirements
for this subcategory remain the same as BPT.
The effluent limitation for Subcategory 10, Film Sensitizing, and Sub-
category 12, Lead Acid Battery Manufacture, is also no discharge of
pollutants on the basis that the technology used to obtain no discharge
of pollutants for Subcategories 1 through 9 is directly applicable and
has been adequately demonstrated. It should also be noted that one
plant in Subcategory 12 is now implementing waste treatment plant
changes that will be completed in July 1975 which will result in no
effluent discharge.
The recommended BAT regulation for Subcategory 11, Dockside Shipbuilding
Activities, is that the entire work area must be cleaned by vacuum clean-
ing to remove loose shot, paint, scale, oil spills, and other debris
before flooding or submerging the work area. The means for implement-
ing this regulation are well within the technology currently available.
APPLICATION OF BAT
Introduction
BAT may be represented by any of several techniques that tend to elim-
inate end-of-pipe pollutant discharge. When these techniques are effec-
tively combined into a system, the result is practical achievement of
no pollutant discharge. Systems that approach or achieve no pollutant
discharge use one or more of the following techniques:
Pollutant Reduction or Elimination
Water Use Reduction or Elimination
In-Plant Water Reuse
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse
Contract Removal
Figure 10-1 represents an overview of a water reclamation system to
achieve no discharge of pollutants. The box at the left-hand side of
Figure 10-1 represents the plant and its manufacturing Subcategories
and the in-plant techniques for achieving no pollutant discharge. The
balance of the figure is a generalized representation of wastewater
NOTICE: THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGC BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-2
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-1
NO POINT SOURCE PLANT SUBCATEGQRY DISCHARGE LIST
Subcategory
1 - Casting and Molding - Metals
2 - Mechanical Material Removal
3 - Material Forming - All Materials
Except Plastics
4 - Physical Property Modification
5 - Assembly Operations
6 - Chemical-Electrochemical Operations
7 - Material Coating
8 - Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous
Metals
9 - Molding and Forming - Plastics
10 - Filir Sensitizing
11 - Dockside Shipbuilding Activities
12 - Lead Acid Battery Manufacture
Percent of
Plants With
No Point
Source
Discharge*
Number of
Plants With
No Point
Source
Discharge*
89.
82.
97.
93.
95.
22.
83.
66.
7
5
3
2
2
5
2
7
10,
65,
61,
30,
84,
6,
45,
753
742
632
557
076
943
453
527
92.2 13,020
0 0
Not Applicable
0 I**
*Data based on a random telephone survey using Department of Commerce
plant data base. Data includes multi-subcategory plants.
'*To be implemented by July 1975.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-3
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: I-CASTING AND MOLDING-METALS
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does not require contact process water
•Coolant water is recycled
•Air scrubbing water is recycled
Plants With No Point Source Discharge
17
45
53
100
120
132
140
194
235
357
359
363
368
369
371
372
376
380
392
398
427
447
464
482
511
520
532
537
542
543
558
612
647
687
689
694
715
717
741
799
803
835
942
975
1497
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by tPA.
10-4
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cent.
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 2-MECHANICAL MATERIAL REMOVAL
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does not require contact process water
•Coolant fluid is recycled
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
•process fluid is recycled by use of an advanced
technology (R.O.-Ion exchange)
Plants Wi
^
8
12
15
25
26
30
46
53
54
59
61
64
69
74
78
88
100
108
109
111
116
118
125
1J2
140
143
149
153
158
171
177
180
182
221
223
225
242
246
276
282
287
300
304
321
339
342
345
3 5 6
357
359
365
th No
366
368
370
372
376
380
382
387
392
394
404
410
429
Point Source Discharge
464
475
476
514
515
518
519
520
521
525
526
529
531
532
535
537
543
549
552
569
590
598
602
606
617
618
624
625
656
664
665
678
687
694
700
715
717
727
732
739
749
756
786
787
803
826
923
928
929
948
949
954
955
958
961
970
975
981
983
1017
1495
NOTICE. These are tentative recommendations based upon information In this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and furthw
rtview by EPA.
10-5
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 3-MATERIAL FORMING
ALL MATERIALS EXCEPT PLASTICS
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does not require contact process water
^Coolant fluid is recycled
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
*Process fluid is recycled by use of an advanced
technology (R.O.-Ion exchange)
Plants With No Point Source Discharge
5
7
11
12
15
17
25
26
29
34
45
"3
58
64
70
74
88
100
110
111
118
120
121
^ _\ [
132
140
141
143
144
149
153
177
182
193
194
I9j
214
217
221
222
223
224
225
229
234
235
242
246
278
282
283
286
287
298
3UO
301
310
311
324
Jib
339
343
345
356
359
360
Jbi
365
366
368
374
J / U
378
388
392
399
404
410
413
425
429
431
447
/! -- I
t O **
475
476
511
514
515
520
521
529
531
532
537
:.Jo
539
543
549
552
558
561
569
579
590
602
612
O -1 O
623
624
625
656
665
677
678
679
687
689
707
/ 12
713
715
721
739
741
749
755
756
786
826
835
o^d
983
932
940
942
948
949
954
958
961
967
968
969
9 75
1496
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
rtview by EPA.
10-6
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 4-PHYSICAL PROPERTY MODIFICATION
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does not require contact process water
*Coolant fluid is recycled
»Air scrubbing water is recycled
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
Plants With No Point Source Discharge
6
7
3
12
15
17
2b
29
34
41
50
54
59
61
70
74
88
100
108
118
125
136
140
141
144
149
153
171
182
193
214
217
221
225
235
248
278
282
296
298
300
301
310
324
336
339
342
345
357
359
360
361
365
366
371
372
374
382
383
387
388
391
392
410
413
416
425
431
446
475
476
482
511
514
515
521
533
537
539
542
543
552
569
612
624
625
654
665
678
679
687
700
713
721
727
732
a-waasr"-* T" • KKsnOTuraioi
741
749
756
803
826
835
929
932
942
949
954
970
976
1110
NOTICE: These are tentative recarmsnjat.ons based upon information In thfe
report and are subject to change based upon comments rsceiv*) and further
review by EPA.
10-7
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
-i.MOO.Lri
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does nor require contact process water
•Coolant fluid is recycled
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
'Process fluid is recycled by use of an advanced
technology (R.O.-Ion exchange)
Plants With No Point Source Discharge
5
6
7
11
12
15
17
25
26
29
30
34
41
45
50
53
61
64
88
100
108
110
111
116
118
121
140
143
144
149
153
158
177
180
193
194
195
214
217
221
222
223
225
234
241
246
278
282
286
300
301
304
310
321
324
336
339
345
347
356
357
359
360
365
366
368
369
370
371
372
379
382
383
384
387
388
390
392
398
399
404
409
410
413
416
427
437
465
511
514
515
518
519
525
526
529
531
532
533
535
537
538
539
543
548
550
552
558
561
569
572
579
590
598
602
609
612
618
621
624
625
647
654
656
665
677
678
679
682
687
698
707
715
717
737
739
741
749
755
756
786
799
835
923
928
929
931
932
934
940
941
942
943
949
951 14 3 r~
954
955
958
961
967
969
974
975
981
983
1017
1110
1495
NOTICE: These are tentative .ecommendations based upon information in this
upon comments receivad 'nd (urthw
10-8
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.)
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 6-CHEMICAL-ELECTROCHEMICAL OPERATIONS
Reasons for no discharge:
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
•Process fluid is recycled by use of an advanced
technology (R.O.-Ion exchange)
•Air scrubbing water is recycled
Plants With
8
371
410
No Point Source
431 526
477 ' 712
518 721
Discharge
732
803
983
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
10-9
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.)
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 7-MATERIAL COATING
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process does not require contact process water
*Process fluid is recycled
•Expended fluid is disposed of by contractor,
incineration or reclaimed
•Process fluid is recycled by use of an advanced
technology (R.O.-Ion exchange-ultrafiltration)
Plants With No Point Source Discharge
1
5
7
8
15
25
30
45
58
64
74
78
88
100
111
116
118
136
140
144
149
153
182
214
221
222
241
278
301
304
310
324
336
342
356
360
365
366
369
370
382
383
390
427
431
514
515
520
525
526
531
532
533
548
561
564
602
612
618
624
625
654
664
687
698
704
715
721
737
739
741
749
756
786
799
826
833
835
836
923
934
949
951
954
955
958
966
968
975
981
983
NOTICE: These ate tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
10-10
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10-2 (cont.)
PLANT PROCESS WATER EVALUATION
SUBCATEGORY: 9-MOLDING AND FORMING-PLASTICS
Reasons for no discharge:
•Process
Plants
fluid is
With No
1
12
30
64
67
79
131
136
144
153
180
193
214
recycled
^^s.ii.t.MV.1. £^-i- w^t: £3 o WCll-
Point Source Discharge
224
254
282
283
356
366
368
388
397
404
515
519
520
535
538
567
632
646
707
712
755
924
940
975
978
1495
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and ire subject to change based upon comments receive and further
levit* by IP\
10-11
-------
DRAFT
^
0
4J
IB
3
T3
(U
eclai
a
\
M
u
OS
C/3
Water
T3
^
H
Recla
>j
OS
E-"
O
•J '*';
3 £i
2 *
S3 <
OS V
tl
1 1 1 .
o
•z.
LO
M
J
o
t.
t
1
0
M
^H
gg
$ ^
Cu
,
M-J ^
^S
^
s<
or" t-M
C«
M-l
1
u to
x w
M KH
« w rt
u in O
E-I W t.1)
•^ O t'
U, ,". <
u o, u
;', a
< y
S crj
SOLUTION
LIDS DISPOSAL
Q ui
w
^ Q
5 z
£<
~~ S H
2 3
o w
• i
1
tTJ
O
OS
w
o
o
.-?
u
os
u
g
M
OS
, „' hese are tentative recommendations ba-,ed upon inlorniation in this
report and are subject ta cnangi basid upon comments itt*iv*l >"<* further
10-12
-------
DRAFT
reclamation systems. The first stage separation step represents sepa-
ration of water from pollutants by means of BPT. Water recycled dir-
ectly from this step should be of a quality adequate for about 60 per-
cent of the water consuming operations at a typical plant. Plant No.
924 is an example of a plant which satisfies 60 percent of its water
needs by recycling effluent water. The step labeled Water Purification
in Figure 10-1 represents advanced techniques which, together with the
polishing operation, generate water adequate for reuse anywhere in a
plant. Residues or concentrates from these proc2sses have additional
water removed in the residue management step. The resulting dry or
semidry residue is removed by a licensed contractor or used for land-
fill. Surge control is provided by adequate retention time in a holding
tank or lagoon. This permits continued operation even if the manufac-
turing processes or waste treatment facility is temporarily inoperative
or upset.
Figure 10-2, Water Reclamation Alternatives, is a more detailed version
of the overview showing specific alternative techniques for achieving
each step in the reclamation process. Although cost is a factor, selec-
tion of techniques should be based mainly on which ones are technically
most appropriate for the characteristics of the manufacturing process
and of the waste stream.
The left-hand block in Figure 10-2 represents both the manufacturing
process subcategories within the plant and the six techniques that may
be used either singly or in combination, as appropriate, to achieve no
discharge of pollutants. Techniques that may extend outside the imme-
diate manufacturing area are shown in expanded form on the balance of
the diagram.
The first stage separation step represents use of conventional equip-
ment to separate water from the pollutants it contains. The terms
"filtration", "flocculation/clarification", and "oil separation" re-
present both the main processing step and any auxiliary operations.
For example, if the wastewater contains an emulsified oil, "oil sepa-
ration" may include both addition of heat and chemicals to break the
emulsion and removal of the resulting oil layer by decantation. Each
technology includes many variations in chemicals and/or equipment, and
these technologies may be used either singly or in combination, as
appropriate.
The water purification technologies are the key to water reuse for
two reasons. First, they produce a permeate stream of adequate quality
(with appropriate polishing) for any potential reuse application.
Second, they reduce the quantity of polluted wastewater requiring fur-
ther treatment by a factor of ten or more. Reverse osmosis separates
dissolved salts from the reclaimed water, and ultrafiltration separates
emulsions such as oils and paints.
The reclaimed water stream from the water purification step is often
"polished" to remove minor impurities. The most common techniques are
adsorption on charcoal and ion exchange. Adsorption is used mainly to
remove organic impurities such as emulsifying agents from the reclaimed
water. Ion exchange may be used specifically to remove traces of heavy
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-13
-------
DRAFT
NO i ICE: These are tentative recommendat.ons based upon information in this
«pon and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
10-14
-------
DRAFT
metals, but its more general application is generation of deionized
water for final rinses in the manufacturing process.
Sludge from the first stage separation step or concentrate from the
water purification step is dewatered in the residue control step.
Thickening followed by vacuum filtration is the most common of the
techniques shown. The separated water is often recycled to the clar-
ifier. Use of centrifugation is much less common, but it is increas-
ing. Distillation to evaporate nearly all of the water from the res-
idue is accomplished in a few plants within the Machinery and Mechanical
Products Manufacturing Category. It requires a wiped-film evaporator,
more usually found in other industries.
Residues, concentrates, or even raw wastewater may be treated for re-
covery of useful constituents or it may be disposed of by landfill,
incineration, or contract removal, as appropriate. Landfill is used
for nearly dry insoluble residues such as metal hydroxides. Incinera-
tion is used for organic concentrates such as oils. Materials recla-
mation may recover either metals or processing chemicals. Contract
removal is used for everything from raw wastewater to dry residue.
Many variations on the illustrated schematic arrangement are possible.
For example, ultrafiltration and reverse osmosis may be used together
in series instead of one or the other alone.
The paragraphs to follow give specific examples of how some of these
techniques are used to achieve no discharge of pollutants in existing
plants today.
Pollutant Reduction or Elimination
The first step in achieving no discharge of pollutants is pollutant
reduction or elimination, because it may simplify the overall waste-
water treatment process. For example, the following chemical agents
or processes may be used in place of existing ones:
Nonphosphate cleaners
Nonchromium dips and pickles
Noncyanide plating and stripping solutions
Nonoily forming lubricants
Each of these techniques is in actual full-production use at this
time. For example, nonphosphate acidic cleaners are used at Plant
Number 924. Although the acid is a potential pollutant, it is easily-
neutralized, and the resulting salt is separated and landfilled. This
plant also substitutes a hydrogen peroxide pickling solution for chrom-
ic acid and uses a noncyanide (alkaline or acid chloride) plating solu-
tion. This plant also uses a "dry coat" forming lubricant (a soap-boraj
solution) instead of an emulsified oil. Since the manufacturing opera-
tions at this plant are very typical of those at thousands of other
plants, the pollutant elimination techniques are broadly applicable.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBXC7 TOCHANGE BASED UPON^COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-15
-------
DRAFT
Water Use Reduction or Elimination
Pollution rate generally depends on the quantity of wastewater treated
because effluent concentrations from exemplary plants tend to be rela-
tively uniform. This uniformity results both from the dependency of the
wastewater treatment process driving force on concentration and from
regulations requiring control of effluent wastewater to recognized
maximum limits. Thus, if the quantity of water used is minimized, the
quantity of wastewater treated is reduced as is the quantity of pollu-
tant discharged. Water use reduction also decreases treatment costs.
Water usage reduction in rinsing can be achieved by means of (1)
minimum effective rinse flow rates, (2) automatic control of water
addition, (3) counterflow, multiple tank rinsing, (4) spray rinsing,
(5) chemical rinsing, and (6) rinse water agitation. Minimum effective
flow rates are determined by reducing rinse water rates until a further
reduction would cause manufacturing problems. Sometimes required rinse
water flow rates are variable and can be automatically controlled to a
variable minimum through continuous measurement of rinse water purity.
Counterflow multiple tank rinsing, practiced in many plants, can easily
decrease water usage by a factor of more than 100. Spray rinsing is
often much more efficient than immersion rinsing, minimizing water re-
quirements. Chemical rinsing (use of rinse water containing a treat-
ment chemical such as sodium bisulfite) sometimes makes rinsing more
efficient by breaking down the diffusion layer at the workpiece sur-
face. Rinse tank agitation (by impellers, air jets, water jet mixers,
or ultrasonic means) produces the same result.
Water usage reduction or elimination is also achieved by a funda-
mental modification of the manufacturing processes. Examples are re-
duction of coolant (especially emulsified oils) use by decreasing
machining speed; reduction of coolant use by material changes in the
cutting tool or workpiece; elimination of machining coolants by use of
die casting, molding, or powder metallurgy in place of machining; use
of materials that do not require painting or coating; elimination of
overspray waterwalls by substitution of electrostatic spray painting;
and use of air cooling in place of direct water quenching.
Finally, a simple method of water conservation is turning off the
water when it is not needed. Many plants have let water run continu-
ously, even when the manufacturing process or rinse tank is not in
operation, because there is little incentive to turn it off. Reducing
such waste may require operator retraining or use of automatic shutoff
controls.
MOTire THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
ABJECT T£ CHANGE BASED UPOf!COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-16
-------
DRAFT
Pollutant Control Measures
Dragout minimization and good housekeeping tend to keep process liquids
(potential pollutants) where they are used. Dragout is the quantity of
active chemical solution carried out of a process tank by an emerging
piece of work. It results in the chemical process solution reaching a
spent condition sooner (requiring disposal) and increased contamination
of rinse water. Dragout is minimized in many plants by: (I) use of low
viscosity chemical agents,- (2)-use of effective wetting agents, (3) low
withdrawal velocity, (4) workpiece orientation for maximum drainage, anc
(5) racking to provide free drainage paths.
Good housekeeping measures also control potential pollutants. These
measures include: (1) an inspection and maintenance system that mini-
mizes leakage of process liquids (such as hydraulic oils and machinery
lubricants) that become pollutants, (2) minimization of careless waste
such as unnecessary paint overspray into a waterwall, (3) steps to
minimize spillage, and (4) provision to contain and treat spillage.
Examples of the latter item are Plant Number 53, which has floor tren-
ches that carry spills to neutralization and filtration equipment, and
Plant Number 926, which uses epoxy-lined underfloor trenches both to
carry spills to the waste treatment equipment and to house water trans-
fer lines. In general, provision should be made to contain spills by
means of dikes, floor trenches, or wastewater surge ponds.
In-Plant Water Reuse
Treatment and reuse of water-based solutions at the point of use is
becoming widespread. Machining coolants are used over and over by
means of continuous filtration. Grinding solutions are screened, fil-
tered, and reused. Plant Number 380 is a good example. It has four
grinding operations, each with its own grinding fluid recycle system.
Used fluid flows by gravity through a magnetic separator into a
centrifuge ana then to a reservoir. It is pumped from the reservoir
through a C.5 rr.icron filter back to the grinding machine. Based on
eight years cf operating experience, fluid changes because of contami-
nation are never necessary.
A number of r.ore advanced techniques may be applied in either of two
ways. These techniques process contaminated rinse water to generate
a pure water stream and a concentrate stream. Depending on the parti-
cular application, the concentrate stream may be either reused in the
manufacturing process or disposed of in some manner. When the con-
centrate is reused, the treatment equipment is generally closely
coupled with the manufacturing process. Such applications are discussed
in the following paragraphs. Applications that generate a nonuseful
concentrate are discussed under the next subheading, Wastewater Re-
clamation and Reuse.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-17
-------
DRAFT
Distillation is applied to reuse of rinse water associated with
chemical treatments such as plating and pickling. Contaminated rinse
water is evaporated, often under vacuum, in a single or double effect
evaporator. The condensate is reused in the rinse tank, while the
concentrate returns to the plating or pickling tank to replace drag-
out. Equipment of this type from one manufacturer alone is installed
at 57 plants, including Plant Numbers 9, 214, 371, 520, 561, 679, 717
and 932 used in the data base for this report.
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse
Advanced waste treatment concepts have been used independently or as
a supplement to existing systems to achieve zero discharge of waste-
water. The major techniques are reverse osmosis, ultrafiltration,
centrifugation, and distillation. Adsorption and ion exchange are
often used in association with these techniques.
Reverse osmosis is used in Plant Numbers 230, 526 and 984. As shown
in Figure 10-3, Plant Number 230 uses reverse osmosis in two ways.
In the first application, the reverse osmosis unit separates chromic
acid from a wastewater stream. The acid stream is polished by an ion
exchange unit before reuse in the manufacturing process, and the
remaining wastewater is neutralized together with wastewater from
other operations. The neutralized wastewater then goes to the second
reverse osmosis unit for further purification before reuse in the
manufacturing process. The concentrate goes to an evaporator which
is described in a later paragraph.
Reverse osmosis is used in a somewhat similar way in Plant Number 526
which is planned to be on line in July 1975. The plant design was based
on successful pilot type operations. As shown in Figure 10-4, used
rinse water is filtered (in a two-stage cartridge filter) and then en-
ters the reverse osmosis unit. The permeate is polished by adsorption
on charcoal before reuse in the manufacturing process. The concentrate
goes to an evaporation step, described in a later paragraph.
Figure 10-5 shows reverse osmosis is used for the same purpose as above
at Plant Number 984. The only difference is that the concentrate is
processed through more conventional equipment. Thus, it is clarified
in a decanter, neutralized, and sent to the sewer. With further
treatment this water could be recycled, but there was no reason to do
so at the time the plant was surveyed. Even so, Plant Number 984 very
closely approaches no discharge of pollutants.
Ultrafiltration is used to achieve no discharge of pollutants for
two applications in Plant Number 983, as shown in Figure 10-6. One
application processes rinse water containing 30 to 40 mg/1 emulsified
oil from a phosphate washing operation. Ninety-nine percent of the
wastewater emerges from the ultrafiltration unit as permeate. Low
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-18
-------
DRAFT
I
•V.3YIJJ3
o
ro
CM
fO
I
o
D
O
H
W
W
EH
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
10-19
-------
DRAFT
-,--±
•i
a
(N
in
O
2
§
CU
W
to
D
W
W
EH
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendstions based upon information in this
raurt and are subject to change basad Upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
10-20
-------
DRAFT
CO
CTl
LD
I
O
O
2
EH
2
CM
a
M
W
cn
D
w
NOTICE: These *re tentathr* MKoffiiiMdltlOnt based upon information in this
report and art subject to change basfd 1901 comments receivid and further
review by EPA.
10-21
-------
DRAFT
z
r-l
E-l
M
cn
O
a.
w
Q
M
D
Q
M
W
c
EH
0
u
w
D
Q
J}
a
a;
EH
i ii §
S s d §
Ctf " H g
(X, •*
i
c
o;
c-<
Z
O
u
o
X
P
H
a .^
s
5
u
a
OCESS
—
"X
Z
(-4
IK
D
H
^
o
05
E-i
Z
O
u
5
0.
1
M
Q
<
EH
<
^FILTR
^
i S
5 ^
O M
fe
i
t
in
a
CO
a
t
a,
^i
^
n
L^
O
CJ
J
0
z
3
0
i
^
>J
>
2
frl
a
k
^
z
<
b-i
k
Z
O
H§
P H
(u
M W
< H
hJ <
^ i S
^r
G
si
s
U
§|
Z
^ k
' Uj
z =
^§
00
CTl
I
o
W
«
D
O
H
w
w
D
Pi
W
s
NOTICE: These are tentative recommenaanons uase
-------
DRAFT
molecular weight organic contaminants are removed from this permeate
by adsorption and dissolved salts are removed by ion exchange before
the water is reused. The volume of concentrate lost from the rinse
system is made up with city water. The other ultrafiltration appli-
cation in Plant Number 983 processes water from several water wall
paint booths. The processing is carried out batchwise, as required.
Ninety-five percent of the feed water is recovered as paint-free
permeate. The concentrate from both applications is removed by a
contractor, and the plant discharges no process wastewater whatever.
Centrifugation is used in Plant Number 230 (shown earlier in Figure
10-3) to reclaim water from the clarifier sludge. The resultant water
from the centrifuge is not clean enough for reuse and is, therefore,
recycled back through the neutralization and clarification operations
before undergoing filtration and reverse osmosis prior to reuse. The
centrifuge removes sufficient water from the clarifier effluent that
high temperature drying, described in the next paragraph, of the
resulting sludge is considered practical.
Distillation (evaporation) is used in Plant Number 230 (Figure 10-3) to
achieve no discharge of pollutants. In this plant, evaporation takes
place both in a wiped film evaporator and in a multiple hearth furnace
dryer. The evaporator processes concentrate from the reverse osmosis
unit described earlier. The resulting salt residue is stored as a
nearly-dry powder prior to disposal. Vapor from the evaporator is
condensed and returned for recycle though the neutralization and clari-
fication steps, which were also described earlier. Residue from the fu
nace dryer, which processes centrifuge sludge, consists of dry metal
oxides that are ready for landfill. Water vapor from the operation is
scrubbed and exhausted.
At Plant Number 526 (shown earlier in Figure 10-4), reverse osmosis
concentrate is also fed to a distillation unit (wiped film evaporator).
However, the evaporator is preceded by a first stage pre-evaporator
which removes about 50 percent of the water. The pre-evaporator uses
a vapor compression cycle (the heat of condensation is utilized to
provide the energy for evaporation) to reduce energy demand substan-
tially. The condensate is recycled to the manufacturing process for
reuse along with the reverse osmosis permeate discussed earlier. The
residual salts are removed by a contractor for disposal at an approved
site. No discharge of process water occurs with this system.
Contract Removal
From the manufacturer's standpoint, contract removal of concentrates
and sludges is not a treatment but rather an alternative way of
achieving zero water discharge. Contract removal is not restricted
NOTICE: THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-23
-------
DRAFT
to small plants, and the plant does not always pay for this service,
due to the value of materials in the concentrates or sludges. Plant
Number 15, which has a production floor area of over 500,000 sq m,
reduced its cyanide treatment cost by 83 percent by having all cyanide-
bearing wastewater hauled away, although a modern treatment facility
is available. A contractor pays Plant 983 for its reverse osmosis
concentrate because of its heavy metal values.
APPLYING THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The only way to provide absolute assurance of no discharge of pollu-
tants for all subcategories except for subcategory 11, Dockside Ship-
building Activities, is to have no discharge of process wastewater.
Application of these effluent limitations is, therefore, straight-
forward.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The economic impact of implementing the BAT effluent limitations was
determined by computing the average cost to add BAT equipment to update
BPT equipment assuming BPT limitations were already being met. This
average cost was then multiplied by the total number of plants assumed
to meet BPT limitations, producing a total economic impact on the
Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing Point Source Category of
approximately two billion dollars.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SU^ECT TOCHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
10-24
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
AND PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
New source performance standards (NSPS) contained herein apply immediate
ly to all new sources which discharge effluent to navigable waters.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Anunendment of 1972 defines the
term "new source" as "any source, the construction of which is commence'
after the publication of proposed regulations prescribing a standard of
performance". NSPS are to be based on best available technology econo-
mically achievable (BAT) and, in addition, on further pollution reduc-
tion through major changes in the manufacturing processes.
Pretreatment standards contained herein apply to plants which discharge
to sanitary sewers, with particular emphasis on those pollutant para-
meters which are not removed by municipal treatment plants. Municipal
treatment plants are defined as well designed and operated publicly
owned activated sludge or trickling filter wastewater treatment
systems. Pretreatment standards are established for both existing and
new sources.
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Applicability, standards, rationale, technology, and economic impact
of NSPS are discussed under the subheadings to follow.
Applicability
New source performance standards are applicable to all of the Machinery
and Mechanical Products Manufacturing subcategories as defined in Secti
IV of this document.
New Source Performance Standards
New source performance standards are identical with BAT effluent
limitations as described in Section X of this document.
Rationale for New Source Performance Standards
New source performance standards are identical with those for BAT lim-
itations, which are based mostly on relatively new plants. Thus they
reflect what the best new plants are now doing. This clearly provides
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.
11-1
-------
DRAFT
a sound basis for the selected new source performance standards. Com-
pliance with NSPS requires that adequate attention be given to control
and treatment of all process water during design of new plants.
Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology
New source performance standards are based on the best available demon-
strated control technology, which encompasses the entire range of
BAT as described in Section X of this document. However, it is rec-
ommended that maximum emphasis be placed on manufacturing process
changes. These changes should result in pollutant reduction or elimin-
ation, more positive pollutant control, water use reduction or elimin-
ation and in-plant water recycling.
Accomplishment of the above changes was discussed in Section X of this
document and will be reviewed at this time. Often, pollutants can be
eliminated at the source by using chemical formulations that do not
contain pollutants. This generally requires using material substitutes
and sometimes necessitates adjustments in the manufacturing process.
Use of nonphosphate cleaners is an example. A potential pollutant can
also be eliminated by removing the manufacturing process that causes it,
Examples are use of vacuum-metalized plastics or hot stamping foils in-
stead of plated metals, use of powder metal gears in place of machined
metal gears, and use of carbonitriding or induction hardening in place
of cyaniding.
The term "more positive pollutant control", used above in the first
paragraph really means good design and maintenance to prevent pollu-
tion. Plant Number 926 is a good example. The waste treatment
equipment is designed right into the production floor plan. This
places the more critical equipment under the factory roof, minimizing
waste transfer distance, and allowing servicing even under the worst
weather conditions. Pipes and tanks are made of corrosion-resistant
materials, and the possibility of leakage is minimized. If spills
should occur, the only place they can go is into epoxy-lined trenches
in the production floor. These trenches lead to a sump which is
pumped into the waste treatment system. In case the waste treatment
system malfunctions or if there is a power failure, the wastewater
holding tanks overflow to a large "panic pond", rubber lined to
prevent infiltration into the aquifer. Constant attention to
waste treatment is a must at this plant—there are no connections
to either sewers or streams.
Water use reduction or elimination goes hand-in-hand with pollutant
reduction or elimination. That is, manufacturing process changes can
reduce or eliminate both pollutants and water use. Water use re-
duction or elimination reduces or prevents wastewater contamination
by the particular manufacturing process. It also makes recycling of
essential process water more economically attractive because there is
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
11-2
-------
DRAFT
no extra water "going along for the ride."
In-plant water recycling should be maximized because it drastically re-
duces wastewater. It is most efficient because water treatment at the
machine or process tank can be designed specifically for that process.
Furthermore, in-plant recycling often pays dividends in the form of cosl
savings from recovered chemicals. Screening, filtering, centrifuging,
oil separation, and distillation are in fairly common use. As discussec
in Section X of this document, reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration are
finding increasing application as a means to permit recycling of waste-
water. Use of more specialized processes such as electrolytic copper
recovery is also increasing.
Economic Impact
As described in Section VIII of this document, the economic impact of
NSPS on a particular plant is much the same as the impact of BAT limi-
tations. Since the new sources do not exist at this time, adequate
information is not available to predict the impact of NSPS on the
Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing Point Source Category.
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
Pretreatment standards are nearly as important as effluent limitations
because 75 percent of all plants with a wastewater effluent in the
Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing Point Source Category
discharge their wastewater to sewers. The municipal treatment plant
adequately removes some pollutants. For others, it acts simply as a
pipeline to a stream or other navigable body of water. Still other
pollutants interfere with the municipal treatment process. Applicabil-
ity, standards, rationale, and technology for pretreatment are consi-
dered under the following subheadings.
Applicability
The pretreatment standards are applicable to all of the Machinery
and Mechanical Products Manufacturing subcategories defined in Section
IV of this document where process water is discharged to a sanitary
sewer.
NOTICE: THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
11-3
-------
DRAFT
Pretreatment Standards
Pretreatment standards for existing sources are defined as the pre-
treatment standards effective on the same date (July 1, 1977) as BPT
effluent limitations. Pretreatment standards for new sources are de-
fined as the pretreatment standards applying to any new source as de-
fined earlier in this section. For Subcategory 9, Molding and
Forming - Plastics, the pretreatment standards are the same as the BPT
effluent limitation, which is no discharge of pollutants. For Sub-
category 11, Dockside Shipbuilding Activities, pretreatment standards
are not applicable. The pretreatment standards for each of the sub-
categories listed are as follows:
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources - Thirty-day average stan-
dards, defined in the same manner as thirty-day average effluent limi-
tations, are listed in Table 11-1. Single-day maximum pretreatment
standards are listed in Table 11-2.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources - Thirty-day average pretreatment
standards are listed in Table 11-3, and single-day maximum pretreatment
standards are listed in Table 11-4.
Pretreatment Standards Rationale
In municipal treatment plants, various pollutants are either controlled
by the treatment process, compatible with the treatment process, or
incompatible with the treatment process. The parameters that are con-
trolled are pH, suspended solids, and BOD. Therefore, standards are
not defined for these parameters.
Fluorides, iron, and phosphates are pollutant parameters compatible
with municipal treatment processes. However, they are not generally
controlled by municipal treatment plants and they are therefore even-
tually discharged to a stream. Hence, pretreatment standards are re-
quired. COD and oil and grease require pretreatment standards because
they are only partially controlled by the municipal treatment process
although they are generally compatible with it. Because these above
pretreatment standards should be identical with the effluent limita-
tions.
Incompatible pollutants such as zinc, mercury and lead interfere with
the municipal treatment process and must therefore be controlled to
minimum practical levels as defined by the effluent limitations.
Thus, pretreatment standards for existing sources are essentially iden-
tical with BPT effluent limitations, except for pollutants normally
controlled by municipal treatment plants.
NOTICE THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
11-4
-------
W
O
W
>
<
g
g
S
U
§
O
DRAFT
rH «
n
o a
CU Q.
§
IH
X
u
!
o
a
s:
a,
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change bas«d upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
11-5
-------
DRAFT
(N
e
^
X
O'
e
£
H
X
<
Q
1
W
rH
g
H
CO
Q
2
Q
§
g
(0
g
§
w
PH
K
CJ
Bi
D
0
W
g
H
H
«
X
U
u
0)
-H
O
cr
•P
Q
(0
JJ
c
«
-p
3
«
-1
o
rH
CO
o
9"
n
N
H
W
0)
2
rH
rH
0
O
o
m
to
o
o
(N
r»
o
o
1
1
1
o
o
o
1
1
1
1
m
o
o
rH
rH
0
1
U
o
CO
rH
•«*
o
CN
fl
*""*
O
o
rH
rH
01
j
l l -"J1 r*
r-4 IO IflfflO 1 rH t£> M 1
O 1 O IrHfHOI OCO»H 1
t£> 1O rH rH
i I ui i i cn n i 01 i o
1 1 • I 1 • • 1 • 1
1 |OI | (N 0 1 0 (N 1 O
CO
rH
fl
4J X i M «
O €) W *O tH M *H O -G tn
§E D -^ U 30) 0*0)
oacoc-aux - to >
Mlna.«?O«rtUrHO-<
££O>i-H M O OJ-H-HX-H
uuuufc.M,jS2oa*oi
t r-
1 O
o
1 O
I fn
1 rH
1 .
1 -H
1 |
! !
1 rH
1
i •
1 O
i r-
1 rH
10
•a
-H
rH
0
CO U
C
M -H
NOTICE.- These are tentat »e recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
11-6
-------
DRAFT
CM r-
CN r* mcNo^tnrHo
o o i-imooo* c*o r-
OOI tOICNrHOOOinOOlO
OODI |0(OOOOOrHOOIO
o
^r oo o
1 lllOtOrMlrH 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 • t • • 1 1 1 1 1
l**l 1 IOICNOIOOI 1 1 1
r- M
O V£) O rH
1 IIOIIfHOIOVD^TOtCO
1 | | . | | . . | . . . . | .
ir-i 101 looiomooio
0 OIO!«TTfOIO i V-|RJ -H
OJlUU'a-rt WrHOJ^^rH
•H*EgflJ-Hr4 3fl> OtOJO
eoooojcoc-oo^ *w>oiu
*Q r4r(D4«)rlOlOMUrHOrH C
Id •.CjGO>»rHWa)a)-H-H.C— lyj-H
UUUUUUtL.H_lS2OO*WEHN
NOTICE: These are tentative recommendations based upon information in this
report and are subject to change based upon comments received and further
review by EPA.
11-7
-------
DRAFT
NEW SOURCE PRETREATMENT STANDARDS (SINGLE-DAY MAXIMUM) ^l/'^-rn2
Subcategories
s
-i
u
H
10
f~
M)
in
^
m
u">
in -*j* o in in in r~*
o o o i i i r- >H i o mi i ro
i i i • • i -ii.
GOOOI 1 1 O O 1 Q i M«J -H
3 VW^'O-rt H r-t U J3 M rH
t-l • S S 4> -H M ^0) D* O O
doooacocT3u>; - w > w u
•6 tH^aid^o«r4Ot r-l M 0) 01 •<-( •<-! ,C -H Cfl -H
UUOUUUhMrlSZOfcWHtsJ
NOTICE. These are tenta:,ve recommendations basad upon information in this
and further
11-8
-------
DRAFT
Pretreatment standards for new sources are equal to one half of the
BPT effluent limitations. This reduction is based on achieving a fifty
percent decrease in effluent concentrations by using advanced waste
treatment technology such as BAT while maintaining the same wastcwater
discharge rates. This will result in a corresponding reduction in pol-
lutant discharge by municipal treatment plants as these parameters are
not normally treated. These pretreatment standards are less stringent
than the BAT effluent limitations in order to encourage combined mu-
nicipal and industrial waste treatment as required by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972.
Technology
The technology needed to comply with the pretreatment standards is, in
general, the same as that required to meet the BPT and BAT limitations
discussed in Sections IX and X of this document, and originally de-
scribed in Section VII. In specific instances, however, certain waste-
water treatment steps can be eliminated or designed for reduced residence
time. This difference in technology results from differences between
the effluent limitations and the pretreatment standards.
NOTICE: THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA
11-9
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared by the Hamilton Standard Division of
United Technologies Corporation. The program was under the overall
direction of Mr. Daniel Lizdas, Project Manager. Mr. Gilbert Kleiner
directed the engineering activities, and field operations were under
the direction of Mr. Albert Krivickas. Significant contributions to
this report were made by Messrs. Walter Drake, Robert Blaser, Eric
Auerbach, Robert Lewis, Jeffrey Robert, and Miner C. Friend.
Project members who assisted in the collection, analysis and presenta-
tion of data for this report were:
Mr. Clark Anderson
Mr. Arthur Birch
Miss Nancy Broderick
Mr. John Carmody
Mr. Vincent Celino
Mr. Benjamin Delson
Mr. Michael Emery
Mr. William Fawcett
Mr. William Fisher
Mr. Thomas Gagliardo
Mr. Everett Galligan
Mr. Richard Kearns
Mr. Rene LaPointe
Miss Susan Pelkey
Mr. Thomas Pietrycha
Mr. Clark Rees
Mrs. Patricia Rohrbach
Mrs. Lorraine Rosser
Mr. Allen Ryan
Mr. Robert Scagni
Mr. James Scanlcn
Mrs. A. J. Scogna
Mr. James Taylor
Mr. Robert Waleryszak
Mr. Jeffrey Wehner
Mr. Edwin Young
The following consultants provided assistance in the designated areas
Dr. Theo Z. Kattamis
University of Connecticut
Dr. John E. Williams
University of Connecticut
Daniel F. Hefler
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Dr. James P. Bell
University of Connecticut
Dr. T. Helfgott
University of Connecticut
Primary Metal Products &
Fabricated Metal Products
Nonelectrical Machinery &
Miscellaneous Products
Electrical Machinery &
Electronic Instruments
Plastic Products
Wastewater Treatment Technology
-------
DRAFT
The technical direction and guidance of the Project Officer, Mr.
Ernst P. Hall, Assistant Director, Effluent Guidelines Division,
throughout the conduct of the study are greatly appreciated, as are
the assistance and support of Mr. Harold B. Coughlin, Chief, Effluent
Guidelines Implementation Branch, Mr. John Newbrough and Dr. Mike
Shamaiengar.
The cooperation of the hundreds of individual plants and the many
trade associations within the Machinery and Mechanical Products manu-
facturing industries who offered their plants for on-site verifica-
tion and who contributed pertinent data is acknowledged and is
greatly appreciated.
Acknowledgement is also made of the assistance of personnel in all
the EPA Regional offices and in many state agencies that were con-
tacted to obtain assistance in identifying those plants in the
Machinery and Mechanical Products Manufacturing industries that are
achieving effective waste treatment.
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XIII
REFERENCES
INDUSTRY DESCRIPTION
1. "American Power Conference", 31st Meeting Illinois Institute
of Technology, April 1970.
2. Bennett, K. V?., "Plastic Solid Waste Recycling", Iron Age,
June 1972.
3. Berkowitz, J. B., Schimke, G. R., "Assessing Water Pollution
Potential of Manufactured Products", Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA R 2-73-179 A, April 1973.
4. "1972 Census of Manufacturers, Preliminary Report, SIC 3079",
U. S. Department of Commerce, January 1974.
5. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 33",
U. S. Department of Commerce, February 1974.
6. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 34",
U. S. Department of Commerce, January 1974.
7. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 35",
U. S. Department of Commerce, March 1974.
8. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 36",
U. S. Department of Commerce, January 1974.
9. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 37",
U. S. Department of Commerce, March 1974.
10. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 38",
U. S. Department of Commerce, February 1974.
11. "1972 Census of Manufactures, Preliminary Reports, SIC 39",
U. S. Department of Commerce, March 1974.
12. "Chrysler's Winfield Foundry Solves Pollution Problem", Foundry
Vol. 97, page 1962, September 1969.
13. "Coated Steels Give Designer Multiple Choice Plus", Product
Engineering, page 40, September 1974.
-------
DRAFT
14. Coyne, J. E., M.cKeogh, J. D., "What's New in Forging", Machine
Design, page 39, December 1974.
15. "CPI-Equipment Makers Founder on Foundries", Chemical Engineer-
ing, page 82, December 1974.
16. Dreger, D. R., "Cast Nylon for Rugged, Long-Wearing Parts too
Large to Mold", Machine Design, page 75, June 1974.
17. "Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology", Interscience Publishers,
Vol. 8, page 17, and Vol. 17, page 863, 1966.
18. "Environmental Protection Occupational Safety and Health Manual
for the Metal Treating Industry", Metal Treating Institute,
October 1973.
19. "Final Report Industrial Waste Study of the Automobile Industry",
Gurnham and Associates, Inc., EPA Report, September 1971.
20. "Final Report Industrial Waste Study of the Basic Nonferrous
Metals Industries Part 1: The Aluminum Industry", Gurnham and
Associates, Inc., EPA Report, Contract No. 68-01-0019, October
1971.
21. "Final Report Industrial Waste Study of the Basic Nonferrous
Metals Industries Part II: The Copper and Brass Industry",
Gurnham and Associates, Inc., EPA Report, 1971.
22. "Final Report Industrial Waste Study of the Basic Nonferrous
Metals Industries Part III: The Lead and Zinc Industries",
Gurnham and Associates, Inc., FPA Report, 1971.
23. "Foundry Waste", Foundry, page 74, July 1972.
24. Franklin, W. E., "Machine Tools Show Strength", Business Week,
page 15, November 1973.
25. Franklin, W. B., "Tool Orders Highest in Years", Business Week,
page 15, May 1973.
26. Hollowell, J., Shea, J. F., Smithson, G., Tripler, A., Gonser,
B., "Water Pollution Control in the Primary Nonferrous Metals
Industry" EPA Report, EPA-R2-73-247b, September 1973.
27. Hemens J., Warwick, R. J., "Effects of Fluoride on Estuarine
Organisms", Water Research, Vol. 6, page 1301, December 1972.
-------
UHAf- I
28. Huskonen, VI. D., "Ford's Team for Pollution Control Maintenance'
Foundry, page 108, April 1971.
29. Markstein, H. W., "Modern Die Bonding: Techniques and Equip-
ment", Electronic Packaging and Production, January 1974.
30. McGrath, J. J., "Treatment of Brass Mill Effluents at Anaconda
Toronto Plant", Proceedings of Ontario Industrial Waste Con-
ference, 1969.
31. Merle, R. L., "Kodak Emphasizes Economics in Controlling Pollu-
tion", Metal Progress, page 61, December 1971.
32. "Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory", Metals and Plastics
Publications, Inc., 1975.
33. "Mineral Facts and Problems", Bureau of Mines, 1965.
34. "Minerals Yearbook", Bureau of Mines, 1970.
35. "Minerals Yearbook", Bureau of Mines, 1972.
36. "Numerical List of Manufactured Products (New 1972) SIC Basis",
U. S. Department of Commerce, 1974.
37. Patton, W. G., "Foundries Face Up to the Crisis", Iron Age, pa
-------
DRAFT
45. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Copper. Part 1 Introduction and Executive Summary",
Charles River 7\ssoc., December 1°71.
46. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Copper. Part II Structure of the Industry", Charles
River Assoc., December 1971.
47. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Lead. Part I Introduction and Executive Summary",
Charles River Assoc., December 1971.
48. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Lead. Part II Structure of the Industry, Charles
River Assoc., December 1971.
49. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Zinc. Part I Introduction and Executive Summary",
Charles River Assoc., December 1971.
50. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals
Industries Zinc. Part II Structure of the Industry", Charles
River Assoc., December 1971.
51. "Water Pollution Control in the Primary Nonferrous - Metals
Industry - Vol. 1 Copper, Zinc and Lead Industries", Environ-
mental Protection Agency, September 1973.
52. "Water Use in Manufacturing", 1967 Census of Manufacturers,
U. S. Department of Commerce, April 1971.
53. Watson, J. A., "Pollution Control in Metal Finishing", Noyes
Data Corp., Park Ridge., N. J., 1973.
54. Watson, J. A., "The Treatment of Liquid Wastes from an Auto-
mobile Manufacturing Operation", General Motors Corp.
55. "With Primer, Plastics can be Powder Coated", Design Engineering
News, page 17, August 1974.
IN-PLANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY/RECYCLING
1. Anderson, E., "Small Pumps Play Big Role in Auto Plant", Water
and Wastes Engineering, Vol. 8, page E4, September 1971.
-------
DRAFT
2. "An Etch Systen Worth Its Salt", Electronic Packaging and Pro-
duction, page 44, January 1974.
3. Balden, A. P.., Erickson, P. P.., "The Treatment of Industrial
Wastewater for Reuse - Chrysler Indianapolis Foundry", Proceed-
ings 25th Industrial Waste Converence, Purdue University, page
62, May 1970.
4. Berkebile, D. G., "Water Conservation by Reuse at Republic",
Metal Progress, page 64, December 1970.
5. Bland, M. R., "Three Ways to Minimize Water Pollution in Cleanin
Finishing", Metal Progress, Vol, 98, No. 6, page 60, December,
1970.
6. "Chips Go Through the Wringer", Iron Age, October 24, 1963.
7. Clifford, Vaaler, Gurklis, Layer and Safranek, "Development
Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards of
Performance for the Metal Finishing Industry", Environmental
Protection Agency, March 1974.
8. "Cleaners for Today's Ecology", Staff Report, Metal Progress,
page 40, June 1972.
9. "Closed Loop System Turns Wastewater Back Into Oil", Iron Age,
page 55, March 9, 1972.
10. Dalton, T. F., "Cut Your Oil Waste", Industrial Engineering,
Vol. 38, August 1974.
11. Decaigny, R. A., Krikau, F. G., "Blast Furnace Gas Washer Re-
moves Cyanides, Ammonia, Iron and Phenol", Proceedings 25th
Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, page 512, May
1970.
12. "Environmental Control", Ford Motor Co. Foundry, paqe F8, March
1972.
13. Goetzelmann, W., "Metal Recovers", Galvanotechnik, Vol. 61,
Issue 7, page 548, July 1970.
14. Lackner, R. J., "Recovering Acid and Salable Ferrous Sulfate
from Waste Pickle Liquor", Metal Progress, page 59, December
1970.
-------
DRAFT
15. Lackner, R. J., "Recovering Acid and Salable Ferrous Sulfate
from Waste Pickle Liquor", Metal Progress, page 59, December
1970.
16. Lancy, L. E., et al, "Brass Wire Mill Process Changes and Waste
Abatement, Recovery and Reuse", National Technical Information
Service, U. S. Department of Commerce, page 1, November 1971.
17. Lancy, L. E., "Metal Finishing Waste Treatment Aims Accomplished
by Process Changes", Water, Chemical Engineering Progress Sym-
posium Series, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, page 439,
1970.
18. McMichael, R. C., Marehnich, E. D., Samples, W. R., "Recycle
Water Quality from a Blast Furnace", Water Pollution Control,
Vol. 43, page 595, April 1971.
19. Miller, H., "Total Water Recycling - Is it the Ultimate Answer?",
Plant Engineering, page 130, October 4, 1973.
20. Ottinger, R. S., Banks, M. E., Lusk, W. D., "Utilization of Waste
Plastics Through New Chemical Concepts", American Chemical Soc.,
Div. Water, Air and Waste Chemistry Reports, Vol. 10, Issue 2,
page 223, September 1970.
21. "Plastic Ducts, Scrubbers and Fans Aid in Water Treatment and Oil
Recovery", Water and Sewage Works, No. 118, page IW9, July 1971.
22. "Plastics Recycling Capability Expands", Chemical and Engineering
News, Vol. 50, page 6, May 22, 1972.
23. "Pollution Control Systems Eliminate the Problem", Metal Progress,
Vol. 198, No. 3, page 10, September 1970.
24. Potts, J. E., "Reclamation of Plastic Waste by Pyrolysis", Ameri-
can Chemical Society, Div. Water, Air, Waste Chemistry Reprints,
Vol. 10, Issue 2, page 229, September 1970.
25. "Recycling of Solvents", Metals and Materials, Vol. 8, No. 7-8,
page 342, July-August 1974.
26. "Removing Three Air Pollutants at Once", Environmental Science
and Technology, Vol. 8, No. 9, page 788, September 1974.
-------
DRAFT
27. Renn, C. E., "Experience in the Treatment and Reuse of Indus-
trial Wastewaters", Proceedings 24th Industrial Waste Conference,
Purdue University, page 962, May 1969.
28. Schjerven, W. N., "Effluent Control for a Copper Rod and Wire
Mill", Technical Digest, No. 20, page 20, October 1970.
29. Scholl, E. L., Balden, A. R., "The Treatment of Industrial Waste-
water for Reuse - Closing the Cycle", Proceedings 28th Industrial
Waste Conference, Purdue University, May 2, 1973.
30. Sismey, B., "Reclamation of Cutting Oils", Industrial Lubrication
and Tribology, Vol. 23, Issue 2, page 73, February 1971.
31. Tallmadge, J. A., "Improved Rinse Design in Electroplating and
Other Industries", Proceedings of the Second Mid-Atlantic
Industrial Waste Conference, Drexel Institute of Technology,
November 1968.
32. "Total Foundry Environment", Foundry, Vol. 100, page 34, July
1972.
33. Tropea, L. C., et al, "Water Reuse and Treatment at an Inte-
grated Wire and Cable Plant", Report, Reynolds Metal Co.,
Richmond, Virginia, May 1974.
34. Zajic, J. E., "Water Pollution Disposal and Reuse", Dekker,
Vol. 1 & 2, 1971.
35. "Zinc Replaces Nickel in Prototype Molds", Product Engineering,
page 5, November 1974.
SCREENING
1. Berger, Otto, "Solids Separation from Industrial Waters and
Effluents", Chemistry and Industry, page 50, January 19, 1974.
EMULSION BREAKING -—--
1. Bennett, E. O., "The Disposal of Metal Cutting Fluids", Lubrica-
tion Engineering, page 300, July 1973.
2. Evans/ R. A., "Solving the Oil Pollution Problem", Journal of
the American Society of Lubrication Engineers, page 521,
November 1968.
13-7
-------
DRAFT
3. Fowkes, F. M., Anderson, F. W., "Bimetallic Coalescers: Elec-
trophoretic Coalescence of Emulsions in Beds of Mixed Metal
Granules", Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 6,
page 510, June 1970.
4. Haden, V. G. J., "Cutting Oils and Methods for Their Disposal",
Institute of Sewage Purification, Journal and Proceedings, Vol.
6, page 544, 1963.
5. "Oil is Chemically Separated from Wastewater", Machine Design.
6. Paulson, E. G., "Keeping Pollutants Out of Troubled Waters",
Lubrication Engineering, page 508, November 1968.
7. Schutt, G. J., Keil, C. C., Halasz, S. J., "Recovery and Reuse
of Oil Extracted from Industrial Wastewater", page 493.
8. Sismey, B., "Reclamation of Cutting Oils", Industrial Lubrica-
tion and Triology, page 73, February 1971.
9. Sparks, R. E., Stafford, I. D., "Continuous Breaking of Emulsions
by Coalescence on Supported Liquid Films".
10. "Tecumseh Diecase Division Has Found a Totally New and Better
Way to Treat Soluble Oil Wastes", Pollution Engineering, page
18, August 1974.
SKIMMING/OIL REMOVAL
1. Clyne, R. W., "Mechanical Retrieval of Waste Oils and Solids
from Water", Lubrication Engineering, page 514, November 1968.
2. Garceau, H. S., "Operation of a Treatment Works Handling the
Wastes from the Processing of Truck Bodies".
3. Goodspeed, R. F., "Working with Local Government", Metal Pro-
gress, page 90, May 1969.
4. Hurwitz, Beaudoin, R. E., "The need for Conservation and Dis-
posal of Oils and Greases at the Source", Lubrication Engineer-
ing, page 410, October 1963.
5. McKay, W. C., "Development of an Oily Water Separator System for
the United States Coast Guard", American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Publication 74 ENAs-7, April 1974.
13-8
-------
DRAFT
6. "Oil is Common Waste in Metalworking Plants", Metal Progress,
page 63, December 1971.
7. "Oil Skimmer Belts Help Control Water Pollution", Water and
Sewage Works, Vol. 117, page IW2, November 1970.
8. Rabosky, J. G., "Removing Oil from Plant Effluents", Plant
Engineering, page 84, May 1972.
9. Sagi, G. G., "The Economical Design of Oil-Water Separators",
Heating Piping, Air Conditioning, page 39, December 1973.
10. Taylor, T. A., "New Techniques in Emulsion Disposal", Paper
Annual Convention of American Society of Lubricating Engineers,
April 1973.
FLOTATION
1. Balden, A. R. , "Wastewater Treatment at the Chrysler Corporation
Toledo Machining Plant", Proceedings 24th Industrial Waste
Conference, Purdue University, page 254, May 1969.
2. Bleakley, A. Stinson, W. S., "$14,000 per Year By-Product
Recovery", Food Processing, January 1974.
3. Coulter, R. B., Carpenter, D. A., "New Vistas for Dissolved Air
Flotation in Wastewater Treatment", paper WWEMA Industrial
Water and Pollution Conference Exposition, Chicago, Illinois,
March 1973.
4. Grieves, R. B., "Foam Separations for Industrial Wastes: Pro-
cess Selection", Journal WPCF, Vol. 42, No. 8, Part 2, page 336,
August 1970.
5. "Variable-Density Fluid is Separator for Scrap Metals in NASA
Tests", Product Engineering, page 33, September 1974.
SEDIMENTATION
1. "Brackenridge Adds Dual Waste Control Facilities", Iron and Steel
Engineer, Vol. 49, page 90, August 1974.
2. Christian, J. P., Dollimore, D., "Settling Characteristics of
Sludge Sedimented from an Industrial Effluent Containing Lead
Compounds", Water Research, Vol. 5, No. 5, page 177, May 1971.
-------
DRAFT
ULTRAFILTRATION
1. Del Pico, J., White, P. W., "Reverse Osmosis and Ultrafiltration",
Metal Finishing, page 29, August 1974.
2. Forbes, F., "Role of Ultra Filtration in Industrial Effluent
Problems", Chemistry and Industry, page 56, January 19, 1974.
3. Goldsmith, R. L., Roberts, D. A., Burre, D. L., "Ultrafiltration
of Soluble Oil Wastes", Journal Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion, Vol. 46, No. 9, September 1974.
4. Horton, B. S., "Whey Processing by Sanitary CIP Membrane Separa-
tion Equipment", Paper presented Annual Invitational Italian
Cheese Seminar.
5. Mock, J. A., "Electrodeposited Organic Paints are Nonpolluting,
Uniform", Materials Engineering, page 36, July 1974.
6. Nordstrom, R. P., "Ultrafiltration Removal of Soluble Oil",
Pollution Engineering, page 46, October 1974.
7. Selitzer, R., "Crowley Begins Membrane Processing of Cottage
Cheese Whey", Dairy and Ice Cream Field, June 1972.
8. "Ultrafiltration in Metal Washer Cleanup", Pollution Engineering,
page 197, Vol. 8, No. 3, March 1974.
REVERSE OSMOSIS (HYPERFILTRATION)
1. Adamson, W. L., "Reverse Osmosis Treatment of Selected Shipboard
Generated Wastestreams", July-August 1974.
2. Chian, E. S. K., Fang, H. P., Aschauer, M. N., "Removal of
Toxic Compounds by Reverse Osmosis", Society of Automotive
Engineers, No. 740925, July-August 1974.
3. Cruver, J. E., "Waste-Treatment Applications of Reverse Osmosis",
Journal of Engineering for Industry, page 1, September 1974.
4. DeBussy, R. P., Whitmore, H. B., "Reverse Osmosis: Some Aspects
of Industrial Water/Waste Treatment", National Engineer, page 10,
February 1972.
5. Del Pico, J., White, P. W., "Reverse Osmosis and Ultrafiltra-
tion", Metal Finishing, page 29, August 1974.
-------
DRAFT
6. Golomb, A., "Application of Peverse Osmosis to Electroplating
Waste Treatment, Part 1, recovery of Nickel", Plating, page
1001, October 1970.
7. Golomb, A., Besik, F., "Reverse Osmosis for Wastewater Treat-
ment", Industrial Water Engineering, Vol. 7, Issue 10, page 16,
October 1970.
8. "How RO Works", Electronic Packaging and Production, page 42.
9. Kohout Radovan, "Ultrapure Water and Reverse Osmosis Technology",
Solid State Technology, page 60, June 1974.
10. Lacey, R. E., Loeb, S., "Industrial Processing with Membranes",
Wiley Interscience, 1972.
11. Leitner, G. F., "Reverse Osmosis for Wastewater Treatment",
Metal Progress, page 62, December 1970.
12. Lonsdale, H. K., Podall, H. E., "Reverse Osmosis Membrane
Research", Plenum Publishers, 1972.
13. Luttinger, L. B., Hoche, G., "Reverse Osmosis Treatment with
...", Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 8, No. 7,
page 614, July 1974.
14. "Membrane Use Aimed at Industrial Waste", Chemical and Engineer-
ing News. Vol. 49, page 49, September 27, 1971.
15. Pizzino, J. F., "Reverse Osmosis Treatment of Selected Shipboard
Generated Waste Streams", An American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Publication 74-ENAS-12, July-August 1974.
16. Rees, E. C., "Reverse Osmosis and the Search for 18 Megohm Water
Purity", Electronic Packaging and Production, page 111, May 1973.
17. "Reverse Osmosis", California Industry, June 1974.
18. "Reverse Osmosis Closes the Loop on Plating Wastes", Iron Age,
page 51, August 1973.
19. Pozelle, L. T., Kopp, C. V., Cadotte, J. E., Colrain, K. E.,
"NS-100 Membranes for Reverse Osmosis Applications", American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, 74-ENAs-l, August 1974.
-------
DRAFT
20. Schmitt, R. P., "Reverse Osmosis and Future Army Water Supply",
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers 74-ENAS-6, July-
August 1974.
21. Spatz, D. D., "Industrial Waste Processing", Osmonics Inc.,
Hopkins, Minnesota, August 1, 1971.
22. "Ultrathin Membranes for Treating Metal Finishing Effluents by
Reverse Osmosis", by North Star Research and Development Insti-
tute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, November 1971.
23. "Where Should the Waste Oil Go?", Factory, page 44, July 1974.
OTHER FILTRATION
1. "Filtration of Cutting Oils and Coolants", Machinery, Lloyd,
No. 16, page 249, July 31, 1965.
2. Purchas, D. B., "Media Filtration in Effluent and Wastewater
Treatment", Chemistry and Industry, page 53, January 19, 1974.
3. Nebolsine, Ross, "New Methods for the Treatment of Oily Waste-
water Streams", Proceeding 25th Industrial Waste Conference,
Purdue University, page 885, May 1970.
4. Zievers, J. F., "Pressure Filtration of Clarifier Underflow",
Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 67, No. 12, December 1971.
LIQUID-LIQUID EXTRACTION
1. Clifford, J., Ibid.
2. Gurnham, F., "Industrial Wastewater Control", Academy Press,
1965.
3. "New Recovery Process Can Yield Both Electrolytic Nickel and
Copper", Engineering and Mining Journal, Vol. 173, page 94,
January 1972.
4. Powell, H. E., Smith, L. L. , Cochran, A. A., "Solvent Extraction
of Nickel and Zinc from a Waste Phosphate Solution", Bureau of
Mines, Report of Investigation 7336, January 1970.
5. Rydberg, J., Reinhardt, H., Lunden, B., Haglund, P., "Recovery
of Metals and Acids from Stainless Steel Pickling Bath", Int.
Symposium on Hydrometallurgy, page 589, 1973.
13-12
-------
DRAFT
6. Zaj ic, J., Ibid .
ADSORPTION
1. Brunotts, V. A., Lynch, R. T., Van Stone, G. R., "Granular
Carbon Handles Concentrated Waste", Reprinted from Chemical
Engineering Progress, Vol. 69, No. 8, page 81, August 1973.
2. "Carbon Adsorption An Approach to Industrial Wastewater Treat-
ment", Professional Engineer Report, August 1973.
3. "Carbon Adsorption Process Design Manual", Swindell-Dressier
Co., Environmental Protection Agency Technology Transfer,
October 1971.
4. "Carbon Cleans Up Industry Wastes", Chemical Engineering News,
page 26, October, 1973.
5. Cheremisinoff, P. N., Morresi, A. C., "Carbon Adsorption",
Pollution Engineering, page 66, August 1974.
6. "Color, Heavy Metals Removed by Adsorption", Reprinted from
Chemical Processing, September 1972.
7. DeJohn, P. B., "Comparative Properties of Various Granular Acti-
vated Carbons", Paper New England Water Pollution Control Asso-
ciation Conference, Hartford, Connecticut, October 1974.
8. Gruenwald, D., "Carbon Adsorption", Paper Delivered at the Inter-
national Pollution Engineering Congress, McCormick Place,
Chicago, September 1974.
9. Hager, D. G., Rizzo, J. L. Zanitach, R. H., "Experience with
Granular Activated Carbon in Treatment of Textile Industry Waste-
waters", For EPA Technology Transfer Seminar, Atlanta, Georgia,
September 1973.
10. Hager, D. G., "Industrial Wastewater Treatment by Granular Acti-
vated Carbon", American Dyestuff Reporter, page 69, November
1973.
11. Hager, D. G., Rizzo, J. L., "Removal of Toxic Organics from
Wastewater by Adsorption with Granular Activated Carbon", For
EPA Technology Transfer Session on Treatment of Toxic Chemicals,
Atlanta, Georgia, April 1974.
13-13
-------
DRAFT
12. Henshaw, T. B., "Adsorption/Filtration Plant Cuts Phenols from
Effluent", Reprinted from Chemical Engineering, May 1971.
13. Humphrey, M. F., "Carbon V.'astewator Treatment Process", The
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, July-August 1974.
14. Humphrey, M. R., Simmons, G. M., Dowler, W. L., "Carbon Waste-
water Treatment Process", American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers Publication, No. 74-ENAS-46, July-August 1974.
15. "Inroads to Activated Carbon Treatment", Environmental Science
and Technology, Vol. 8, Xo. 1, page 14, January 1974.
16. McCrodden, B. A., "Water Pollution Abatement at BP Oil Corpora-
tion", Marcus Hook Refinery, Paper Water Pollution Control
Federation Conference, Cleveland, Ohio, October 1, 1973.
17. Peoples, R. R., et al, "Nonbiological Treatment of Refinery
Wastewater", Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, November
1972.
18. "Pollution Prevention", Chemical Processing Reprint, January
1974.
19. "Report on Total Organic Carbon Removal from Municipal and In-
dustrial Wastewater", March 1971.
20. "Simpson, R. M., "The Separation of Organic Chemicals from
Water", Rohm and Haas, April 1972.
21. "Sorption Wins Phosphoric Acid from Finishing Wastes", Chemical
Engineering, page 60, June 1972.
22. Stark, M. M., Rizzon, J. L., "Carbon Adsorption - Case Studies
at Several Textile Plants", Paper Midwinter Conference on Textile
Wastewater and Air Pollution Control, Hilton Head Island, South
Carolina, January 1974.
ION EXCHANGE
1. Dorfner, K., "Ion Exchangers, Properties and Applications", Ann
Arbor Science, 1972.
2. Fulmer, M., "Rid Sewage of Toxic Inorganics", Water and Wastes
Engineering, Vol. 8, page 26, January 1971.
13-14
-------
DRAFT
3. Gardiner, W. C., Muniz, F., "Mercury Removed from Waste Effluent
Via Ion Exchange", Chemical Engineering, page 57, August 1971.
4. Kunin, R., "Removal of Boron from Aqueous Media by Means of a
Boron Selective Ion Exchange Resin", Paper American Chemical
Society: Div. Water, Air and Waste Chemistry, Vol. 11, Issue 2,
page 204, September 1971.
5. Pilot, J., "The Treatment of Industrial Effluent", Effluent and
Water Treatment Journal, Vol. 10, Issue 4, page 11, April 1970.
6. Robinson, D. J., Weisberg, H. E., "Ion Exchange Process for
Recovery of Chromate from Pigment Manufacturing", Mineral Pig-
ments Corp., EPA Report, 670/2-74-044, June 1974.
7. Thompson, J., Miller, V. J., "Role of Ion Exchange in Treatment
of Metal Finishing Wastes", Plating, page 809, August 1971.
8. "Waste-Treating Methods Show Their Mettle", Chemical Week, page
41, September 25, 1974.
9. "Winning Heavy Metal from Wastestreams", Chemical Engineering,
page 62, April 19, 1971.
GAS PHASE SEPARATION
1. Cole, C. and Genetelli, E., "Decarbonation and Deaeration of
Water by Use of Selective Hollow Fibers", Reprint Environmental
Science & Technology, Vol. 4, page 514, June 1970.
2. Cole, C. and Genetelli, E., "Prevaporation of Volatile Pollutant!
from Water Using Selective Hollow Fibers", Journal Water Pollu-
tion Control Federation, Vol. 42, Part 2, page R290, August 1970
3. Hannah, S. A., "Control of Nitrogen in Wastewater Treatment",
Environmental Protection Agency, Advanced Waste Treatment
Research Lab, Cincinnati, Ohio, PB-214 684/2, Presented Tech-
nology Transfer Seminar, Atlanta, Georgia, October 1971.
ELECTRODIALYSIS, ETC.
1. "Electrolysis Speeds Up Waste Treatment", Environmental Science
and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 3, page 201, August 1972.
13-15
-------
DRAFT
2. "An Electromembrane Process for Regenerating Acid from Spent
Pickle Liquor", EPA Report, Southern Research Institute,
No. 12010 EQF, March 1971.
3. Helfgott, T., Hunter, J. V., and Duvel, W. A., Jr., "Analytic
and Process Classification of Wastewaters", Reprinted from
Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, Vol. 67, No. 107, 1970.
4. Jones, D. L., "Electrolytic Treatment of Wastewater", American
Dyestuff Reporter, Vol. 61, page 28, August 1972.
5. Kuhn, A. T., "Review of the Electrolytic Recovery of Copper from
Dilute Solutions", Chemistry and Industry, page 473, May 1971.
6. Potter, J. L. , "Waste Treatment Utilizing Electrolytic Processes",
Pacific Engineering and Production Company, Henderson, Nevada.
7. Surfleet, B., "The Electrochemical Treatment of Industrial
Effluents", Electronics and Power, page 418, November 1970.
DISTILLATION/EVAPORATION
1. Brown, George G., et al, "Unit Operations", John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York, N. Y., 1950.
2. Fosberg, T. M., "Brine Concentration Technique for Industrial
Wastewater Disposal", American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Publication, No. 72-WA-PWR-14, August 1972.
3. Hougen, 0. A., Watson, K. M., Ragatz, R. A., "Chemical Process
Principles", John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1954.
4. Lund, Herbert F., "Industrial Pollution Control Handbook",
McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1971.
MISCELLANEOUS REMOVAL TECHNIQUES
1. Besselievre, "The Treatment of Industrial Wastes", McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1969.
2. Clifford, J., Ibid.
3. Francke, H. C., et al, "Disposal of Oil Wastes by Microbial
Assimilation", Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Distributed by National
Technical Information Service, May 1974.
13-16
-------
DKAh 1
4. Haigh, D. H., Hall, F. H., "Expansion Imbition for Practical
Pollution Particulation or Separating Things from Stuff",
Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper 710654, October 24, 1970.
5. Ganzi, G,, Personal Communication, Ionics, Inc.
6. Kungelman, I. J., "Status of Advanced Waste Treatment", Distri-
buted by National Technical Information Service, May 1972.
7. Lacy, W. J., "Projects of the Industrial Pollution Control
Branch", Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
Published by National Technical Information Service, January
1970.
8. Mueller, J. A., Melvin, W. W., "Biological Treatability of
Various Air Force Industrial Wastes", Proceedings 23rd Indus-
trial Waste Conference, Purdue University, page 398, May 1968.
9. "Water Treatment and Cooling - Environmental Handbook Series",
Pollution Engineering.
10. Zajic, J., Ibid.
CHEMICAL OXIDATION OF CYANIDES, ETC.
1. Besselievre, E., Ibid.
2. Chamberlin, N. S. and Snyder, H. B., Jr., "Treatment of Cyanide
and Chromium Wastes", Reprinted from Proceedings - Regional
Conference on Industrial Health, Wallace and Tiernan, RA-2120-C-2
September 1951.
3. Hill, E. A., Neff, F. J., "Cyanide Waste - Oxidized in the Plat-
ing Room", Plating, August 1957.
4. Evans, F., "Ozone in Water and Wastewater Treatment", Ann Arbor
Science, 1972.
5. "New Processes and Technology ...", Chemical Engineering, page
110, July 1973.
6. "Ozonation: Another Way to Treat Plating Wastes", Products
Finishing, page 98, July 1974.
13-17
-------
DRAFT
7. Parsons, W., "Chemical Treatment of Sewage and Industrial
Wastes", National Lime Association, Washington, D. C., page 33,
1965.
8. Vivian, G., "Disposal of Cyanide Heat Treating Wastes", Pollu-
tion Control, page 61, December 1970.
9. Zievers, J. F., Grain, R. W., and Barclay, F. G., "Metal Finish-
ing Wastes: Methods of Disposal", Plating, page 56, January
1970.
CHEMICAL REDUCTION OF_ CHROMIUM, ETC.
1. "A Cleanup Agent that Recovers Precious Metal", Business Week,
page 80, November 2, 1974.
2. Bro, P., Lang, K. C., "Pressure Drop and Corrosion in Zinc Fil-
ters for Mercury Removal from Wastestreams", Environmental
Science and Technology, Vol. 8, No. 10, page 925, October 1974.
3. Case, 0. P., Jones, R., "Final Report Treatment of Brass Mill
Effluents", Anaconda American Brass Co., Research and Technical
Center, Waterbury, Conn., September 1969.
4. Case, 0. P., "Metallic Recovery from Wastewaters Utilizing
Cementation", Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 670/2-74-008,
January 1974.
5. Chamberlin, N. S., Day, R. V., "Technology of Chrome Reduction
with Sulphur Dioxide", Proceedings llth Industrial Waste Con-
ference, Purdue University, May 1956.
6. Chamberlin, N. S., Snyder, H. B., Jr., "Treatment of Cyanide and
Chromium Wastes", Proceedings - Regional Conference on Indus-
trial Health, Houston, Texas, September 1951.
7. Chamberlin, N. S., Snyder, H. B., Jr., "Technology of Treating
Plating Wastes", Proceedings 10th Industrial Waste Conference,
Purdue University, May 1955.
8. Parsons, W., Ibid.
9. "Chromium Disposal, Two Variations", Industrial Water Engineer-
ing, Vol. 6, No. 6, page 22, June 1969.
-------
DRAFT
10. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Copper, Nickel,
Chromium and Zinc Segment of the Electroplating Point Source
Category", Ed., Krickenberger, K. R., Environmental Protection
Agency, March 1974.
11. Jula, T. F., "Inorganic Reductions with Sodium Borohydride
Principles and Practices", Publication Ventron Corp., Beverly,
Mass., January 1974.
12. Hoeke, B., Wittbold, H. A., "Catylytic Oxidation of Nitrite and
Cyanide", Galvanotecknik, Vol. 61, No. 6, page 468, June 1970.
13. Jesten, T. L., Taylor, T. H., "Industrial Waste Treatment at
Scovill Manufacturing Company", Proceedings 28th Industrial
Waste Conference, Purdue University, May 1973.
14. Litt, Jay, "A Small Plant Can Treat Wastes Economically", Metal
Finishing, page 52, November 1971.
15. "Metallic Recovery from Wastewaters Utilizing Cementation",
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 670/2-74-008, January 1974
16. "Reduction of Toxic Chromium Wastes with Sulphur Dioxide",
RA-2118-C-1, Wallace and Tiernan, Inc., New Jersey, April 1952.
17. Smithson, G. R., Jr., "An Investigation of Techniques for
Removal of Chromium from Electroplating Wastes", Battelle
Memorial Institute for Environmental Protection Agency, March
1971.
18. Waters, R. F., et al, "Recovery of Metals and Phosphates from
Waste Phosphate Sludge", Metal Finishing, page 39, August 1971.
NEUTRALIZATION WITH ACIDS
1. Fukuyama, Misa Ka, Y., Kato, K., "Recovery of Aluminum Hydroxid
from Fabricating Plant of Aluminum Products", Paper Purdue In-
dustrial Water Conference, Purdue, University, May 1974.
2. Heckroth, C. W., "Metal Finishing: What Whirlpool Accomplished
Water and Wastes Engineering, Vol. 9, page E18, September 1972.
3. Palmer, R., "Neutralization In Most Water Treatment, pH Must Be
Adjusted", Metal Progress, page 59, December 1971.
13-19
-------
DRAFT
4. Rabosky, J. G., "Neutralizing Industrial Wastes", Plant Engineer-
ing, page 75, June 1972.
5. "Simple Process Keeps Aqueous Photoresist Waste Non-Polluting",
Electronic Packaging and Production, page 13, February 1974.
NEUTALIZATION WITH BASES
1. "EPA Has Waste-Treatment Process for Metalworking", Iron Age,
page 25, November 2, 1972.
2. Hoffmann, F., "How to Select a pH Control System for Neutraliz-
ing Waste Acids", Chemical Engineering, page 105, October 30,
1972.
3. Kozak, M. A., Baczuk, R. J. , Landoom, G. K., "Get the Lead Out:
Methods for Removing Lead from Plant Wastewater Streams", Dis-
tributed by National Technical Information Service, August 13,
1971.
4. Parsons, W., Ibid.
5. Sienko, M. and Plane, R., "Introduction to College Chemistry".
FLOCCULATION (COAGULATION)
1. Fitzgerald, C. L., et al, "Coagulants for Wastewater Treatment",
Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 66, No. 1, page 36, January
1970.
2. Kieszkowski, Marek; Bartkiewicz, Bronislaw; "Effluent Treatment
of Emulsion Cleaners", Metal Finishing Journal, Vol. 18, Issue
215, page 384, December 1972.
3. "Magnetic Flocculation Removes Metallic Solids", Water and
Sewage Works, Vol. 118, page IW12, March 1971.
4. Parsons, W., Ibid.
5. Reilly, P. B., "Wastewater Treatment for Removal of Suspended
Solids", Plant Engineering, page 88, May 1972.
-------
DRAFT
6. Sussman, D. L. , "Chemical and Physical Factors in the Flocculci-
tion of Metal Plating Wastes with Polyclectrolytes", Distri-
buted by National Technical Information Service, June 1972.
CLARIFICATION
1. Curry, N. A., "Philosophy and Methodology of Metallic Waste
Treatment", Proceedings of the 27th Industrial Waste Con-
ference, Purdue University, Vol. 1, page 85, 1972.
2. Page, L. J., "Controlling Pollution in Machining Operations",
Metal Progress, page 97, May 1969.
3. Wing, R. E., et al, "Insoluble Starth Xanthate: Use in Heavy
Metal Removal", USDA, August 1974.
4. Wing, R. C., et al, "Heavy Metal Removal from Wastewater with
Starch Xanthate", Paper, May 1974.
5. Schjerven, W., Ibid.
MISCELLANEOUS CHEMICAL TECHNIQUES
1. "Acid Complexes Recover Effluent Metals", Chemical and Engineer-
ing News, Vol. 48, page 84, June 1970.
2. "A Starchy Way to Save Metals", Industrial Research, page 33,
August 1974.
3. Cheremisinoff, P. N., "Treatment Chemicals for Pollution Con-
trol", Pollution Engineering, page 30, September 1974.
4. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Copper, Nickel, Chro-
mium and Zinc Segment of the Electroplating Point Source Cate-
gory", Environmental Protection Agency, 440/1-74-003-a, March
1974.
5. Leslie, M. E., "Peat: New Medium for Treating Dye House
Effluent", American Dyestuff Reporter, August 1974.
6. Obma, C., et al, "Phosphorus Removal by Use of Iron Salts in
Activated Sludge Aeration Tanks", Third Advanced Water Con-
ference, Stillwater, Oklahoma, College of Engineering,
Oklahoma City University, page 9-1, March 29-30, 1971.
13-21
-------
DRAFT
7. Parsons, W., Ibid.
8. Michelsen, D. L., "Removal of Soluble Mercury from Wastewater
by Complexing Techniques", Virginia Polytechnic Inst., PB 232256,
page 88, 1973.
9. Wing, R. E., et al, Ibid.
BIOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES
1. Gulp, G., Gulp, R., "New Concepts in Water Purification", Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1974.
2. Eckenfelder, W., Jr., "Industrial Water Pollution Control",
McGraw-Hill, 1966.
3. Franzan, A. E., Skogan, V. G., Grutsch, J. R., "Pollution Abate-
ment: Tertiary Treatment of Process Water", Chemical Engineer-
ing Progress, Vol. 68, No. 8, page 65, August 1972.
4. Lawrence, C., Block, S., "Disinfection, Sterilization and Pre-
servation", Lea & Febiger, 1968.
5. Lund, H., "Industrial Pollution Control Handbook", McGraw-Hill,
1971.
6. McKinney, R., "Microbiology for Sanitary Engineers", McGraw-Hill,
1962.
7. Moores, C. W., "Wastewater Biotreatment: What It Can and Can-
not Do", Chemical Engineering, page 63, December 1972.
8. Speidel, H. K., Conversion of Deteriorated Metal Cutting Fluids
Into Protein", Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Vol. XIV,
Issue 3, 1972.
9. "Wastewater Engineering", Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., McGraw-Hill, 1972.
10. Zajic, J., Ibid.
SLUDGE DEWATERING
1. Anderson, J. R. et al, "Gravity Dewatering of Metal Hydroxide
Sludges", Plating, page 1135, December 1972.
-------
DRAFT
2. Gulp and Gulp, Ibid.
3. Eckenfelder, W., Ibid.
4. Imhoff, K., Muller, W., and Thistelthwayte, D., "Disposal of
Sewage and Other Waterborne Wastes".
5. Lund, H., Ibid.
6. "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants", by the Subcommittee
on Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants WPCF Manual of
Practice Mo. 11, 1970.
7, Rich, L., "Unit Operations of Sanitary Engineering", John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1961.
8. "Wastewater Engineering", Ibid.
THICKENING
1. Lund, H., Ibid.
2. Eckenfelder, W., Ibid.
3. "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants", Ibid.
4. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Ibid.
5. Young, R. A., "Scrap Metal Reclamation from Smelting and Elec-
tric Furnaces", Pollution Engineering, page 46, November 1974.
CENTRIFUGATION
1. Ford, Jeffrey, "Centrifugal Dewatering of Secondary Waste
Sludges", Chemistry and Industry, page 58, January 1974.
2. Eckenfelder, W., Ibid.
3. Keith, F. W., Jr., Moll, R. T., "Matching a Dewatering Centrifi
to waste Sludge", Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 67, No. '
page 55, September 1971.
4. Kincannon, Dr. D. F., et al, "The Hydrocyclone for Water
Clarification", Flow Study in Air and Water Pollution Jt Meet,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, June 20-22, 1973,
page 39, published by ASME, N. Y. 1973.
5. "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants", Ibid.
6. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Ibid.
-------
DRAFT
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
1. "Ford Calls in the Sludge Experts...", Business Week, page 32F,
June 1973.
MISCELLANEOUS DISPOSAL
1. "Ash-Handling System Eliminates Runoff Pollution", Electrical
World, Vol. 181, page 50, February 1974.
2. Bascom, Willard, "The Disposal of Waste in the Ocean", Scienti-
fic American, Vol. 231, No. 2, page 16, August 1974.
3. "Containing the Flow of Sewage Sludge", Environmental Science
and Technology, page 702, August 1974.
4. "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 55th Edition, 1974-1975.
5. "Hose, Steel and Pickle Liquor", Compressed Air Magazine, page
16, December 1969.
6. Larkman, F. G., "The Handling of Metal Bearing Sludges - Dis-
posal or Recovery -", October 1974.
INCINERATION
1. Blanchard, T. A., "Incinerators for the Metalworking Industry",
Pollution Control, page 57.
2. "Liquor/Sludge Incinerator", Chemical and Process Engineering,
page 43, July 1972.
3. Gulp, G. and Gulp, R., Ibid.
4. Parker III, W. H., "Total Energy Concept in the Design of Sludge
Handling Facilities", Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the New England Water Pollution Control Association in Hartford,
Conn., October 1974.
5. "160,000 Pounds of Steam Generated per Hour by Burning Plant
Wastes", Combustion Equipment Associates, Bulletin A1008.
6. "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants", Ibid.
7. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Ibid.
-------
DRAFT
8. Wiedemann, C. R., "Control Considerations in Washing, Painting
and Soluble Oil Removal", Metal Progress, page 66, December 1970.
PYROLYSI5
1. Potts, J. E., "Continuous Pyrolysis of Plastic Wastes", Indus-
trial Water Engineering, Vol. 7, Issue 8, page 32, August 1970.
2. "Pyrolysis Destroys Wastes, Eliminates Pollution at Jeep Plant",
News and New Products, Vol. 80, No. 5, page 63.
CONTRACTOR REMOVAL
1. Philipbar, W. B., "Options and Responsibilities in Hiring an Out-
side Liquid Waste Disposal Service", Plant Engineering, page 93,
August 1974.
2. "Scavenger Processing Set-Up", Printed by Chem-Trol, July 1974.
MONITORING AND CONTROL
1. Ed. Eckenfelder, W., "Advances in Water Pollution Research",
Vol. 2, Proceeding of International Conf., London, September
1962.
2. Ed. Pearson, E., "Advances in Water Pollution Research", Vol. 3,
International Conf., London, September 1962.
3. Ed. Jenkins, S., "Advances in Water Pollution Research", Vol. 4,
International Conf., Prague, April 1969.
4. Ed. Jenkins, J. H., "Advances in Water Pollution Research", Vol.
4, Proceedings 6th Conference, International Association of Water
Pollution Research, Jerusalem, June 1972.
5. "Annual Book of Standards, Part 23, Water, Atmosphere Standards,
1972".
6. Arin, M. L., "Monitoring with Carbon Analyzers", Environmental
Science and Technology, Vol. 8, No. 10, page 898, October 1974.
7. "Containing the Flow of Sewage Sludge: the Technological and
Financial Effort Needed Might Turn Out to be an Investment with
Some Return", Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 8, No.
8, page 702, 1974.
-------
8. "Disposal of Hazardous Wastes", Report to Congress, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, SW 115, 1974.
9. Bela G. Liptak, "Environmental Engineers Handbook", Vol. I,
Water Pollution, Editor Chilton Book Co., Radnor, Pa., 1974.
10. "Environmental Pollution, Guide to Current Research", Smithsonian
Institution, 1971.
11. Gurnham, C. F., "Industrial Wastewater Control", Academic Press,
1965.
12. "Handbook for Monitoring Industrial Wastewater", U. S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency Technology Transfer, August 1973.
13. Ed. by Thomas, W., "Indicators of Environmental Quality", Pro-
ceedings of Conference, Philadelphia, Pa., December 1971.
14. "Laboratory Procedures Analysis for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Operators", Environmental Protection Agency, June 1971.
13-26
-------
DRAFT
15. Mancy, K. H., "Instrumental Analysis for Water Pollution Con-
trol", 1971.
16. "Manual on Industrial Wastewater", 2nd Ed., ASTM, 1965.
17. "Manual on Industrial Water and Industrial Wastewater", 2nd Ed.,
ASTM, 1960.
18. "McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Environmental Science", Lapedes
Editor-in-Chief and Staff of McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science
and Technology, 1974.
19. "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Vlater and Wastes", EPA-625-/
6-74-003, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Tech-
nology Transfer, Washington, D. C. 20460.
20. Ed. Mindler, A. B., Brennan, T. E., Papers, "Pollution Control
Engineering", New York, December 1961.
21. "Pollution Engineering and Scientific Solutions", Conference
Tel Aviv, June 1972.
22. Phillips, R. C., Ferguson, F. A., "Industrial Water Pollution
Control", page 3.
23. Sittig, "Pollutant Removal Handbook", Noyes Data Corp., Park
Ridge, N. J., 1973.
24. "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater",
13th Edition, 1971, Prepared and Published by American Public
Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water
Pollution Control Federation.
25. Ciaccio, L. L. ed, "Water and Water Pollution Handbook", Dekker,
1973.
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
1. "Administrative Regulations of the State of West Virginia for
Water Quality Criteria on Inter- and Intrastate Streams 1974",
Department of Natural Resources Division of Water Resources,
1974.
-------
UltMr I
2. Delaware River Basin Commission, "Basin Regulations - Water
Quality, Pules of Practice and Procedure", April 1974.
3. "Department of Environmental Protection Revised Statutes of 1964,
Title 38, (as amended) Chapter 3: Protection and Improvement of
Waters", State of Maine, October 1973.
4. Department of Health, "Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems",
State of Hav/aii, Effective date August 1973.
5. "Foreward to Water Quality Standards, State of Iowa", February
1974.
6. "Laws of New York Chapter 801, Title 8: State Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System", State of New York, June 1973.
7. "Preliminary Data - Suggested Effluent Guidelines", Copper and
Brass Fabricators Council, October 1974.
8. "Rules and Regulations State of Missouri - Water Quality Stan-
dards", Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 212, November 1974.
9. "Rules Governing Disposal of Waste Oil, Oil Field Brine and all
Other Materials Resulting from the Drilling for, Production of,
or Transportation of Oil, Gas or Sulphur", Adopted by the Stream
Control Commission State of Louisiana, January 1953.
10. "Rules of the Department of Pollution Control; Pollution of
Waters", State of Florida, Effective January 1, 1973.
11. "Rules of the Texas Water Quality Board", Texas Water Quality
Board, March 1970.
12. "Rules, Regulations, Classifications and Water Standards, Minnne-
sota Pollution Control Agency", Supplement, 1973.
13. "Standards of Water Quality for Waters of the Territory of Guam",
Water Pollution Control Commission, April 1968.
14. State of New Mexico Environmental Improvement Agency, "New
Mexico Water Quality Control Commission Regulations and New
Mexico Water Quality Standards", August 1973.
15. "State of Texas Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contin-
gency Plan", Texas Water Quality Board, June 1974.
-------
UM\Ml I
16. "The Solid Waste Disposal Act", Texas Water Quality Board, 1969.
17. "The Texas Water Quality Act", Texas Water Quality Board, Feb-
ruary 1972.
18. "Tri-State Compact for Pollution Abatement", Interstate Sanita-
tion Commission, 1936.
19. "Water Pollution Control", Department of Health, State of Hawaii,
Effective date May 1974.
20. "Water Quality Criteria", Resources Agency of California, State
Water Control Board, Sacramento, California, 2nd Edition, McKee
and Wolf, Pub. No. 3A, 1963.
21. "Water Quality Criteria", Report of National Tech. Advisory
Commission, 1968, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
Reprinted U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972.
22. "Water Quality Control in Oregon", Department of Environmental
Quality, State of Oregon, December 1970.
23. "Water Quality Standards", Department of Health, State of Hawaii,
Effective date May 1974.
INTEGRATED TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
1. Balden, A. R., "Industrial Water Management at Chrysler Corpora-
tion - 1969", Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 41, No. 11, page 1912, November 1969.
2. Balden, A. R., "Wastewater Engineering - Pollution Prevention",
National Pollution Control Conference, April 1971.
3. Beeton, P. E., "Treating Spray Painting Wastewater", Plant
Engineering, page 64, June 1972.
4. Cadman, T. W., "Techniques for Removing Metals from Process
Wastewater", Chemical Engineering, page 79, April 1974.
5. Cave, R. W., "Effluent Disposal in an Integrated Works", Journal
of the Iron and Steel Institute, page 202, March 1971.
6. Ciancia, J., "New Waste Treatment Technology in the Metal Finish
ing Industry", Plating, page 1037, October 1973.
-------
DRAFT
7. Conway, R. A., "Treatability of Wastewater from Organic Chemical
and Plastics Manufacturing - Experience and Concepts", February
1973.
8. Corwin, S. J., "Chemical Techniques to Enhance Effluent Quality",
Wire Journal, Vol. 5, Issue 6, page 59, June 1972.
9. Cowles, E. R., "New Facilities Based on Advanced Pollution Con-
trol Techniques are Now Treating Liquid Manufacturing Wastes
at P&WA the Product is Clean Water", Bee-Hive, Spring 1973.
10. Crowle, V., "Effluent Problems as They Affect the Zinc Die-Cast-
ing Plating-on-Plastics Industries", Metal Finishing Journal,
Vol. 17,1 No. 194, page 51, February 1971.
11. Curran, J., Machu, Prof. W., "Control of Pretreatment Pollution",
Metal Finishing, page 54, October 1972.
12. Fisco, R., "Plating and Industrial Waste Treatment at the Fisher
Body Plant", Water and Sewage Works, Vol. 117, R236-9, November
1970.
13. Ju-Chang Huang, et al, "A New Approach for Water Reclamation -
Complete Treatment of Waste by Physico Chemical Processes",
National Technical Information Service, August 1972.
14. Kohl, P. L., "Attacking Production Pollution", Automation,
January 1974.
15. "Largest Treatment Plant for Metal Finishing Wastes", Industrial
Finishing, Vol. 49, page 36, September 1973.
16. Lin, Y. H., Lawson, J. R., "Treatment of Oily and Metal-Contain-
ing Wastewater", Pollution Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 11, page 45,
November 1973.
17. Maass, W. B., "Water Pollution and Industrial Organic Finishing",
Metal Finishing, page 61, January 1972.
18. MacLeod, M., "Deinking Mill Gets Outstanding Results with Pioneer
Treatment", Air Water Quality, April 1974.
19. McGrath, J. J., Ibid.
-------
20. O'Connor, S. R., et al, "Western Electric Builds Modern Plant
for Treating Metal Finishing Wastes", Water and Wastes Engineer-
ing, Vol. 6, page D16, July 1969.
21. "Process Water Gets New Treatment", Industrial Wastewater Treat-
ment, August 1974.
22. Schatz, R. J., "Problems with Regard to Treatment and Disposal of
Wastewaters Containing Heavy Metals".
23. Seels, F. H., "Industrial Water Pretreatment", Chemical Engineer-
ing, page 27, February 1973.
24. Silman, H., "Treatment of Rinse Water from Electrochemical Pro-
cesses", Metal Finishing, page 62, June 1971.
25. Staff Report, "Technology for Pollution Control; How is Metal-
working Doing", Metal Progress, page 48, December 1972.
26. "State-of-the-Art Review of Metal Finishing Waste Treatment",
Public Works, Vol. 102, page 128, April 1971.
27. Thompson, R. J., "Water Pollution Control Program", Iron and
Steel Engineer, page 43, August 1972.
28. VanStone, G. R., "Treatment of Coke Plant Waste Effluent", Iron
and Steel Engineer, page 63, April 1972.
29. "Water and Liquid Waste", Pollution Engineering, August 1974.
30. "Water Pollution Control Industry", Environmental Science and
Technology, Vol. 8, No. 10, page 882, October 1974.
ECONOMICS DATA
1. "Analysis of Treatment Plant Costs Offers...", Engineering News
Record, Vol. 184, page 98, June 1970.
2. "A Study of the Economic Impact on the Steel Industry of the
Costs of Meeting Federal Air and Water Pollution Abatement Re-
quirements Part I Executive Summary, Council on Environmental
Quality, July 1972.
3. Balden, A. R., "Flexibility Key to Design of Machining Plant's
Treatment Facilities", Water and Sewage Works, Vol. 117, page
IW6-10, March 1970.
-------
DRAFT
4. Banker, R. F., "Water Rates and Water Works Financing", Third
Advanced Water Conference March 29-30, 1971, Stillwater, Okla-
homa, College of Engineering, Oklahoma State University, page
11-1.
5. Berthouex, P. M., "Design and Economics of Joint Wastewater
Treatment-Discussion", American Society of Civil Engineers Proc.,
Vol. 98, (SA No. 9225), page 804, October 1972.
6. Berthouex, P. M., Polkowski, L. B., "Optimum Waste Treatment
Plant Design Under Uncertainty", Water Pollution Control Fed.
Jl, Vol. 42, page 1588, September 1970.
7. Berthouex, P. N., "Probability Theory as an Aid to Research
Planning", American Water Works Association Journal, Vol. 61,
Issue 12, page 652, December 1969.
8. Bramer, H. C., Motz, D. J., "Overview of Industrial Water Costs",
Industrial Water Engineering, Vol. 6, Issue 3, page 20, March
1969.
9. Buehler, J. D., Figge, G. J., "Operating vs. Capital Costs:
Evaluating Tradeoff Benefits", Chemical Engineering, Vol. 78,
page 96, February 1971.
10. Burton, F. L., Theisen, H. M., Snoevink, V. L., "Water Treatment
Costs for Small Plant", Industrial Water Engineering, Vol. 6,
Issue 3, page 24, March 1969.
11. Calvert, J. T., "Disposal of Industrial Effluents with Domestic
Sewage", Chemistry and Industry, page 733, June 1970.
12. Camin, K. Q., "Economic Evaluation: Alternatives for Industrial
Treatment", Water and Sewage Works, Vol. 116, Issue 7, page IW10,
1969.
13. Chia Shun Shih and P. Krishnan, "Dynamic Optimization for Indus-
trial Waste Treatment Design", Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 41, No. 10, page 1787, 1969.
14. "Construction Cost Requirements for Water and Wastewater Facili-
ties", Public Works, Vol. 98, Issue 12, page 112, 1967.
15. Davis, R. K., "Some Economic Aspects of Advanced Waste Treat-
ment", Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 37,
Issue 12, page 1617, 1965.
-------
UHAf I
16. DiGregorio, D., et al, "Cost of Wastewater Treatment Processes",
U. S. Department of Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, National Technical Information Service, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, December 1968.
17. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr. and Adams, C. F., Jr., "Design and
Economics of Joint Wastewater Treatment", Proceedings of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of the Sanitary
Engineering Division, February 1972.
18. "Economics of Clean Water - 1973", 93 Congress, 2 Sessions,
Environmental Protection Agency, 92-30 (Congress), January 19,
1974.
19. Evans, D. R., Wilson, J. C., "Capital and Operating Costs-AWT",
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 44, No. 1,
page 1, January 1972.
20. Goldberg, A. S., "A Procedure for Treatment and Disposal of
Wastewater Sludge", page 137, May 1973.
21. Haecker, C. R., "Iron Melting and Pollution Control: An Oppor-
tunity to Progress", page 74, June 1972.
22. "Iron Foundry Pollution Report", Foundry, page 30, May 1972.
23. Lancy, L. E., Nohse, W., Wystrach, D., "Practical and Economic
Comparison of the Most Common Metal Finishing Waste Treatment
Systems", Plating, Vol. 59, page 126, February 1972.
24. Leonard, R. L., "Pricing of Industrial Wastewater Treatment
Services", Institute of Water Resources, University of Conn.,
Storrs, Connecticut, November 1973.
25. Logan, J. A., Hatfield, W. D., Russel, G. S., Lynn, W. R., "An
Analysis of the Economics of Wastewater Treatment", Journal
Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 34, Issue 9, page 860
September 1962.
26. Malim, T. H., "Profits from Pollutants?", Iron Age, Vol. 204,
No. 18, page 93, October 1969.
27. Michel, R. L., "Costs and Manpower for Municipal Wastewater
Treatment Plant Operation and Maintenance, 1965-1968", Journa]
Water Pollution Control Federation, page 1883, November 1970.
-------
DhfAf I
28. "New Systems Control Plating Wastes", Canadian Chemical Process-
ing, Vol. 56, page 29, April 1972.
29. Partridge, E. P., Paulson, E. G., "Water-Its Economic Reuse Via
the Closed Cycle", Chemical Engineering, Vol. 74, No. 21, page
244, October 1967.
30. Patankar, U., Stapler, A., "Cutting the Costs of Pollution Con-
trol", Foundry, page 74, June 1972.
31. Patterson, W. L. and Banker, F. F., "Estimating Costs and Man-
power Requirements for Conventional Wastewater Treatment Facili-
ties, Black and Veatch, October 1971.
32. Pinner, R., Corr, F. I., et al, "Cost Factors for Effluent Treat-
ment and Recovery of Materials in the Metal Finishing Department",
Electroplating and Metal Finishing, Vol. 24, No. 3, page 13, March
1971.
33. "Reuse Water Instead of Dumping It", Manufacturing Engineering
and Management, page 18, July 1971.
34. Roberts, J. B., "Solving the Process Wastes Problem", Chemical
Engineering Progress, September 1973.
35. Rowan, P. P., Jenkins, K. L., Howells, D. H., "Estimating Sewage
Treatment Plant Operation and Maintenance Costs", Journal Water
Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 33, Issue 2, page 111,
February 1961.
36. Roy F. Weston, Inc., "Inplant Wastewater Control", Chemical
Engineering, page 137, May 1973.
37. "Savings from Swarf Crushing and Cutting Oil Reclamation",
Machinery and Production Engineering, Vol. 117, Issue 3007,
page 33, July 1970.
38. Shah, K. L., Reid, G. W., "Techniques for Estimating Construction
Costs of Waste Treatment Plants", Journal Water Pollution Con-
trol Federation, Vol. 42, Part I, No. 5, page 776, 1970.
39. Smith, C. V., DiGregorio, D., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment -
An Overall Survey", Chemical Engineering, Vol. 77, page 71,
April 1970.
-------
DRAFT
40. Smith, R., "Cost of Conventional and Advanced Treatment of
Wastewater", Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
Vol. 40, No. 9, September 1968.
41. "Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution Control on the Iron
Foundry Industry Part I Executive Summary", A. T. Kearny and
Company, November 1971.
42. "Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution Control on the Iron
Foundry Industry Part II Structure of the Iron Foundry Industry,
A. T. Kearny and Company, November 1971.
43. "Study of Economic Impacts of Pollution Control on the Iron
Foundry Industry Part III the Economic Impact of Pollution
Abatement Upon the Iron Foundry Industry, A. T. Kearny and
Company, November 1971.
44. Sullivan, G. V. and Davis, E. G., "Development and Economics of
Treating a Brass Foundry Waste", Paper Delivered at Internatiom
Pollution Engineering Congress, September 1974.
45. Swanson, C. L., "New Wastewater Treatment Processes: EPA Encou:
ges Adoption", Civil Engineering, Vol. 41, Issue 9, page 49,
September 1971.
46. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals In-
dustries Copper Part III the Economic Impact of Pollution
Abatement on the Industry", Charles River Associates, December
1971.
47. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals In-
dustries Lead Part III the Economic Impact of Pollution Abate-
ment on the Industry", Charles River Associates, December 1971.
48. "The Effects of Pollution Control on the Nonferrous Metals In-
dustries Zinc Part III the Economic Impact of Pollution Abate-
ment on the Industry", Charles River Associates, December 1971.
49. Tihansky, D. P., "A Cost Analysis of Waste Management in the
Steel Industry", Air Pollution Control Association Journal,
Vol. 22, Issue No. 5, page 335, May 1972.
50. U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Administration, "Sewer and Sewage Treatment Plant Constru<
tion Cost Index", Washington, D. C., November 1972.
-------
DRAFT
51. U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Monthly
Labor Review", Washington, D. C., Vol. 95, No. 12, December
1972.
52. U. S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, "Sewer and Sewage Treatment Plant Construction
Cost Index", Washington, D. C., 1968.
53. Wehner, N. J., Connecticut Light and Power Co., Danbury, Conn.,
"Telephone Conversations of 10/7/74, 10/8/74 and 1/27/75".
COMPUTER PROGRAMMING
1. Eilers, R. G., Smith, R., "Executive Digital Computer Program for
Preliminary Design of Wastewater Treatment Systems", November
1970.
2. Eilers, P. G., Smith, R., "User's Manual for Executive Digital
Computer Program for Preliminary Design of Wastewater Treatment
Systems", Environmental Protection Agency, March 1973.
3. Executive Digital Computer Program for Preliminary Design of
Wastewater Treatment Systems", U. S. Department of the Interior,
August 1968.
4. Meier, P. M. and Fisette, G. R., "Modifications to the Executive
Computer Program for Steady-State Simulation of Wastewater
Treatment Facilities", Office of Research and Monitoring U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, National Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 1974.
GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS
1. Clifford, J. E., Vaaler, L. E., Gurklis, J. A., Layer, C. H.,
Safranek, W. H., "Final Report on Development Document for
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
Metal Finishing Industry", June 1974.
-------
DRAFT
2. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Copper, Nickel, Chro-
mium and Zinc Segment of the Electroplating Point Source Cate-
gory", EPA, March 1974.
3. "Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guide-
lines and New Source Performance Standards for the Lead Segment
of the Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Point Source Category",
EPA, November 1974.
4. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations and New Source
Performance Standards for the Major Inorganic Products Segment
of the Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing", U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, March 1974.
5. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Primary Aluminum Smelt-
ing Subcategory of the Aluminum Segment of the Nonferrous Metals
Manufacturing", U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, March
1974.
6. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Secondary Aluminum Smel
ing Subcategory of the Aluminum Segment of the Nonferrous Metals
Manufacturing", U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, March
1974.
7. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Smelting and Slab Pro-
cessing Segment of the Ferroalloy Manufacturing Point Source Cat
gory", EPA, February 1974.
8. "Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Ne
Source Performance Standards for the Synthetic Resins Segment of
the Plastics and Synthetic Materials Manufacturing Point Source
Category", EPA, March 1974.
9. "Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guide-
lines and New Source Performance Standards for the Steel Making"
February 1974.
-------
DRAFT
10. "Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guide-
lines and New Source Performance Standards for the Zinc Segment
of the Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing Point Source Category",
EPA, November 1974.
11. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards of Performance Electrolytic Process Segment of the
Ferroalloys Industry", Datagraphics, Inc. for the EPA, March
1974.
12. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards Iron and Steel Foundry
Industry", Cyrus W. Rice Division for the EPA, July 1974.
13. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards, Iron and Steel Industry
Hot Forming and Cold Finishing Segment and Addendum", Cyrus W.
Rice Division for the EPA, July 1974.
14. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards of Performance Alloy and Stainless Industry", U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, January 1974.
15. "Draft Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards of Performance, Miscellaneous Chemicals Industry",
Roy F. Weston, Inc. for the EPA, February 1975.
16. "Electroplating Point Source Category; Copper, Nickel, Chromium
and Zinc on Ferrous and Nonferrous Materials Subcategory",
Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 61, Part II, March 1974.
17. "EPA Water Program Proposed Toxic Pollutant Effluent Standards",
Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 247, page 35388, December 1973.
18. "Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing Point Source Category",
Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 49, Part II, March 1974.
19. "Notices", Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 136, page 19070, July
1973.
20. "Part 104-Public Hearings on Effluent Standards for Toxic Pollu-
tants", Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 3, page 1027, January
1974.
-------
DRAFT
21. "Part 129-Toxic Pollutant Effluent Standards", Federal Register,
Vol. 38, No. 173, page 24342, September 1973.
22. "Plastics and Synthetics Point Source Category", Federal Regis-
ter, Vol. 39, No. 184, September 1974.
23. "Proposed Rules EPA Water Pollution Prevention and Control",
Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 129, page 18044, July 1973.
24. "Proposed Rules", Federal Register, Vol. 38, No. 193, page 27698
October 1973.
25. "Proposed Toxic Pollutant Effluent Standards; Correction",
Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 56, page 10503, March 1974.
-------
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XIV
GLOSSARY
Abrasive Belt Grinding
Roughing and/or finishing a workpiece by means of a power-driven
belt coated with a substance, usually in powdered form, which removes
material by scratching the surface.
Abrasive Belt Polishing
Finishing a workpiece with a power-driven abrasive-coated belt in
order to develop a very good finish.
Abrasive Blasting
(Surface treatment and cleaning) Using dry or wet abrasive particles
under air pressure for short durations of time to clean a metal sur-
face.
Abrasive Cutoff
Severing a workpiece by means of a thin abrasive wheel.
Abrasive Jet Machining
Removal of material from a workpiece by a high-speed stream of abra-
sive particles carried by gas from a nozzle. The process is used
chiefly to cut materials that are sensitive to heat damage and thin
sections of hard materials that chip easily, and to cut intricate
holes that would be more difficult to produce by other methods.
Abrasive Machining
Used to accomplish heavy stock removal at high rates by use of a
free-cutting grinding wheel.
Acceptance Testing
A test, or series of tests, and inspections that confirms product
functioning in accordance with specified requirements.
Acid Cleaning
Using any acid for the purpose of cleaning any material. Some methods
of acid cleaning are pickling and oxodizing.
-------
DRAFT
Acid Dip
An acidic solution for activating the workplace surface prior to
electroplating in an acidic solution, especially after the workplace
has been processed in an alkaline solution.
Acidity
The quantitative capacity of aqueous solutions to react with hydroxyl
ions. It is measured by titration with a standard solution of a base
to a specified end point. Usually expressed as milligrams per liter
of calcium carbonate.
Act *
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
Adhesive Bonding
Joining two or more pieces with a substance such as glue or cement.
Administrator
Means the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency.
Adsorption
A physical or chemical bond process in which molecules of gas, of
dissolved substances, or of liquids adhere in an extremely thin layer
to the surface of solid bodies with which they are in contact.
14-9
-------
Aerobic Digestion
(Sludge Processing) The biochemical decomposition of organic matter,
by organisms living or active only in the presence of oxygen, which
results in the formation of mineral and simpler organic compounds.
Aging
The change in properties (eg. increase in tensile strength and hard-
ness) that occurs in certain metals at atmospheric temperature after
heat treatment.
Air Flotation
Separation of low density contaminants from water using minute air
bubbles attached to individual particles to provide or increase the
buoyancy of the particle.
Air Pollution
The presence in the outdoor (ambient) atmosphere of one or more air
pollutants or any combination thereof in such quantities and of such
characteristics and duration as to be, or be likely to be, injurious
to public welfare, to the health of human, plant or animal life, or
to property, or as unreasonably to interfere with the enjoyment of
life and property.
Air Scrubbing
A method of removing air impurities by contact with water or an aqueou
chemical solution.
Air Pollution Control Equipment
Devices necessary to prevent air pollution by reducing the escape of
undesirable materials in stack gases.
Algicides
Chemicals for preventing the growth of algae.
Alkaline Cleaning
A process for cleaning steel where mineral and animal fats and oils
must be removed from the surface. Solutions at high temperatures con-
taining caustic soda, soda ash, alkaline silicates and alkaline phos-
phates are commonly used.
-------
Alkalinity
1. The extent to which an aqueous solution contains more hydroxyl
ions than hydrogen ions.
2. The capacity of water to neutralize acids, a property imparted
by the water's content of carbonates, bicarbonates, hydroxides,
and occasionally borates, silicates and phosphates.
Alloy Process
(Semiconductor Mfg.) A fabrication technique in which a small part
of the semiconductor material is melted together with the desired
metal and allowed to recrystallize. The alloy developed is usually
intended to form a pn junction or an ohmic contact.
Alloy Steels
Steels with carbon content between 0.1% to 1.1% and containing ele-
ments such as nickel, chromium, molybdenum and vanadium. (The total
of all such alloying elements in these type steels is usually less
than 5%.)
Aluminizing
Forming an aluminum or aluminum alloy coating on a metal by hot dip-
ping, hot spraying or diffusion.
Anaerobic Waste Treatment
(Sludge Processing) Waste stabilization brought about through the
action of microorganisms in the absence of air or elemental oxygen.
Anions
The negatively charged ions in solution, e.g., hydroxyl.
Annealing
A process for preventing brittleness in a metal part. The process
consists of raising the temperature of the metal to a pre-established
level and slowly cooling the steel at a prescribed rate.
Anode
The positively charged electrode in an electrochemical process or
battery.
14-4
-------
UHAr i
Anodizing
The production of protective oxide film on aluminum or other light
metals by passing a high voltage electric current through a bath
in which the metal is suspended.
Aquifer
Water bearing stratum of permeable rock.
Ash
The solid residue left after complete combustion.
Assembly
The fitting together of manufactured parts into a complete machine,
structure, or unit of a machine.
Atomic Absorption
An instrumental method of analysis for determining the concentration
of certain wastewater pollutants.
Automated Phenolate Method
A standard method of measuring Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration in a
solution.
Austempering
Heat treating process to obtain greater toughness and ducticity in
certain high-carbon steels. The process is characterized by inter-
rupted quenching and results in the formation of bainite grain struc-
ture.
Austenitizing
Heating a steel to a temperature at which the structure transforms to
a solution of one or more elements in face-centered cubic iron.
Usually performed as the essential preliminary of heat treatment, in
order to get the various alloying elements into solid solution.
Bag Molding
(Vacuum, Pressure, Autoclave) A method of applying pressure during
bonding or molding, in which a flexible cover usually in connection
with a rigid die or mold, exerts pressure on the material being molded
through application of air pressure or drawing of a vacuum.
14-5
-------
Barrel Finishing
Improving the surface finish of metal objects or parts by processing
them in rotating equipment along with abrasive particles which may
be suspended in a liquid.
Batch Treatment
A waste treatment method where wastewater is collected over a period
of time and then treated prior to discharge.
Bending
Turning or forcing by a brake press or other device from a straight
or even to a curved or angular condition.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
Level of technology applicable to effluent limitations to be achieved
by July 1, 1983, for industrial discharges to surface waters, as
defined by Section 301(b) (2) (A) of the Act.
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
Level of technology applicable to effluent limitations to be achieved
by July 1, 1977, for industrial discharges to surface waters, as
defined by Section 301(b) (1) (A) of the Act.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
The amount of oxygen in milligrams per liter used by microorganisms
to consume biodegradable organics in wastewater under aerobic condi-
tions.
Blanking
Cutting desired shapes out of sheet metal by means of dies.
14-6
-------
DRAFT
Slowdown
The minimum discharge of recirculating water for the purpose of dis-
charging materials contained in the water, the further buildup of
which would cause concentration in amounts exceeding limits estab-
lished by best engineering practice.
Blow Molding
A method of producing hollow objects (e.g. bottles) by injecting a
hot melt into a hollow mold, then injecting air to force the melt
against the cool mold surface, where it solidifies into shape.
BODS
The five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS) is the quantity of oxy-
gen used by bacteria in consuming organic matter in a sample of waste-
water over a five-day period. BOD from the standard five-day test
equals about two-thirds of the total BOD. See Biochemical Oxygen
Demand.
Bonding
The process of uniting using an adhesive or fusible ingredient.
Boring
Enlarging a hole by removing metal with a single or occasionally a
multiple point cutting tool moving parallel to the axis of rotation
of the work or tool.
1. Single-Point Boring - Cutting with a single-point tool
2. Precision Boring - Cutting to tolerances held within
narrow limits
3. Gun Boring - Cutting of deep holes
4. Jig Boring - Cutting of high-precision and accurate
location holes
5. Groove Boring - Cutting accurate recesses in hole walls
-------
DRAFT
Brazing
Joining metals by flowing a thin layer, capillary thickness, of non-
ferrous filler metal into the space between them. Bonding results
from the intimate contact produced by the dissolution of a small
amount of base metal in the molten filler metal, without fusion of
the base metal. Sometimes the filler metal is put in place as a
thin solid sheet or as a clad layer and the composite is heated in
furnace brazing. The term brazing is used where the temperature
exceeds some arbitrary value, such as 800 Degrees F; the term solder-
ing is used for temperatures lower than the arbitrary value.
Bright Dipping
Using acidic solutions to produce a bright surface on a metal.
Brine
An aqueous salt solution.
Broaching
Cutting with a tool which consists of a bar having a single edge or a
series of cutting edges (i.e., teeth) on its surface. The cutting
edges of multiple-tooth, or successive single-tooth, broaches increase
in size and/or change in shape. The broach cuts in a straight line or
axial direction when relative motion is produced in relation to the
workpiece, which may also be rotating. The entire cut is made in
single or multiple passes over the workpiece to shape the required
surface contour.
1. Pull Broaching - Tool pulled through or over workpiece
2. Push Broaching - Tool pushed over or through workpiece
3. Chain Broaching - A continuous high production surface
broach
4. Tunnel Broaching - Work travels through an enclosed area
containing broach inserts
14-8
-------
DRAFT
Brucine Method
Standard method of measuring concentration of nitrate in water solu-
tions.
Buffing
An operation to provide a high luster to a surface. The operation,
which is not intended to remove much material, usually follows
polishing.
Burnishing
Finish sizing and smooth finishing of surfaces (previously machined
or ground) by displacement, rather than removal, of minute surface
irregularities with smooth point or line-contact, fixed or rotating
tools.
Calcination
The roasting or burning of any substance to bring about physical or
chemical changes; e.g., the conversion of limestone to quicklime.
Calendering
Process of forming a continuous sheet by squeezing the material be-
tween two or more parallel rolls to impart the desired finish or to
insure uniform thickness.
Calibration
The determination, checking, or rectifying of the graduation of any
instrument giving quantitative measurements.
Calibration Equipment
Equipment used for calibration of instruments.
Canned Powder Forging
A process where powder is placed in a sealed mold, vibrated and
heated to a forging temperature. The mold is then forged and cooled
at room temperature. The mold is removed from the powder formed part
by either machining or pickling.
-------
Capital Recovery Costs
Allocates the initial investment and the interest to the total operat-
ing cost. The capital recovery cost is equal to the initial invest-
ment multiplied by the capital recovery factor.
Capital Recovery Factor
Capital Recovery Factor is defined as:
i + i/(a - 1)
where i = interest rate
a = (1 + i) to the power n
n = interest period in years
Captive Operation
A manufacturing operation carried out in a facility to support sub-
sequent manufacturing, fabrication or assembly operations.
Carbides
Usually refers to the general class of pressed and sintered tungsten
carbide cutting tools which contain tungsten carbide plus smaller
amounts of titanium and tantalum carbides along with cobalt which
acts as a binder. (It is also used to describe hard compounds in
steels and cast irons.)
Carbon Bed Catalytic Destruction
A non-electrolytic process for the catalytic oxidation of cyanide
wastes using trickling filters filled with low-temperature coke.
Carbon Steels
Steel which owes its properties chiefly to various percentage of carbon
without substantial amounts of other alloying elements.
Carbonate
A compound containing the acid radical of carbonic acid (C03^ group) .
Carbonitriding
Process for case or core hardening of metals. The heated metals absorb
carbon in a gaseous atmosphere.
14-10
-------
DRAFT
Carburizing
(Physical Property Modification) Increasing the carbon content of a
metal by heating with a carburizing medium (which may be solid, liquid
or gas) usually for the purpose of producing a hardened surface by
subsequent quenching.
Case Hardening
A heat treating method by which the surface layer of alloys is made
substantially harder than the interior. (Carburizing and nitriding
are common ways of case hardening steels.)
Cast
A state of the substance after solidification of the molten substance.
Cast (plastics)
1. To form a "plastic" object by pouring a fluid
monomer-polymer solution into an open mold where
it finishes polymerizing
2. Forming plastic film and sheet by pouring the
liquid resin onto a moving belt or by precipita-
tion in a chemical bath
Types - slush molding, rotational molding, centrifugal molding,
dip molding
Casthouse
The facility which melts metal, holds it in furnaces for degassing
(fluxing) and alloying and then casts the metal into pigs, ingots,
billets, rod, etc.
Casting
The operation of pouring molten metal into a mold.
14-11
-------
Casting Shrinkage
1. "Liquid shrinkage" - the reduction in volume of
liquid metal as it cools to the liquidus.
2. "Solidification shrinkage" - the reduction in
volume of metal from the beginning to ending of
solidification.
3. "Solid shrinkage" - the reduction in volume of
metal from the solidus to room temperature.
4. "Total shrinkage" - the sum of the shrinkage in
parts 1., 2. and 3.
Category
Also point source category. A segment of industry for which a set
of effluent limitations has been established.
Cathode
The negatively charged electrode in an electrochemical process or
battery.
Cations
The positively charged ions in a solution.
Caustic
Capable of destroying or eating away by chemical action. Applied to
strong bases and characterized by the presence of hydroxyl ions in
solution.
Caustic Soda
Sodium hydroxide, NaOH, whose solution in water is strongly alkaline.
Cementation
Cementation is the electrochemical reduction of metal ions by contact
with a metal of higher oxidation potential. It is usually used for
the simultaneous recovery of copper and reduction of hexavalent chrom-
ium with the aid of scrap iron.
Centerless Grinding
Grinding the outside or inside of a work piece mounted on rollers
rather than on centers. The work piece may be in the form of a
cylinder or the frustrum of a cone.
14-12
-------
UNA FT
Centrifugal Molding
A casting made by pouring liquified plastic into a rotating mold.
Centrifugation
(Sludge Dewatering) The removal of water in sludge by introducing
the water sludge slurry into a centrifuge. The sludge is driven out-
ward with the water remaining near the center. The water is with-
drawn and the dewatered sludge is usually landfilled.
Centrifuge
A device having a rotating container in which centrifugal force
separates substances of differing densities.
Ceramic Mold Casting
Ceramic mold casting employs permanent patterns and zircon and alumina
slurries to form a ceramic mold. The mold is expendible and produces
very precise castings as an investment casting. It differs from in-
vestment casting because the mold is not monolithic but has a copy and
drop or drag section alone.
Ceramic Coating
High temperature coatings based on carbides, silicides, borides,
nitrides, cermets and other inorganic materials.
Chelate Compound
A compound in which the metal is contained as an integral part of a
ring structure and is not readily ionized.
Chelating Agent
A compound capable of forming a chelate compound with a metal ion.
Chemical Brightening
Process utilizing an addition agent that leads to the formation of a
bright plate, or that improves the brightness of the deposit.
Chemical Deposition
Process used to deposit a metal oxide on a substrate. The film is
formed by hydrolysis of a mixture of chlorides at the hot surface of
the substrate. Careful control of the water mixture insures that
the oxide is formed on the substrate surface.
14-13
-------
Chemical Etching
To dissolve a part of the surface of a metal or all of the metal
laminated to a base.
Chemical Machining
Production of derived shapes and dimensions through selective or
overall removal of metal by controlled chemical attack or etching.
Chemical. Mental Coloring
The production of desired colors on metal surfaces by appropriate
chemical or electrochemical action.
Chemical Milling
Removing large amounts of stock by etching selected areas of complex
work pieces. This process entails cleaning, masking, etching and
demasking.
Chemical Oxidat_ion_
(including cyanide) The addition of chemical agents to wastewater
for the purpose of oxidizing pollutional material.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
The amount of oxygen in milligrams per liter to oxidize both organic
and oxidizable inorganic compounds.
li££i Polishing
A chemical solution is used to put a smooth finish on a metallic
surface.
Chemical Precipitation
1. A deposit separated from a solution induced by the
addition of chemicals
2. The process of softening water by the addition of
lime or lime and soda ash as the precipitants
Chemical Recovery Systems
Chemical treatment to remove metals or other materials from wastewater
for later reuse.
14-14
-------
Chemical Reduction
(including chromium conversion) The addition of chemical agents to
wastewater for the purpose of reducing pollutional material; e.g.
conversion of hexavalent chromium to trivalent chromium.
Chemical Treatment
Treating contaminated water by chemical means.
Chip Dragout
Cutting fluid or oil adhering to metal chips from a machining operation
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
Organic compounds containing chlorine such as many insecticides.
Chlorination
The application of chlorine to water generally for purposes of disin-
fection, but frequently for accomplishing other biological or chemical
results.
Chloroplatinate Units
Units of color measured by a colorimetric or spectrophotometric
method.
Chrornate Conversion Coating
Formed by immersing metal in an aqueous acidified chromate solution
consisting substantially of chromic acid or coater soluble salts of
chromic acid together with various catalysts or activators.
Chromatizing
To treat or impregnate with a chromate (salt of ester of chromic acid)
or dichromate/ especially with potassium dichromate.
Chrome-Pickle Process
Forming a corrosion-resistant oxide film on the surface of magnesium-
base metals by immersion in a bath of an alkali bichromate.
-------
Clarification
Any process or combination of processes, the primary purpose of which
is to reduce the concentration of suspended matter in a liquid.
Clarifier
A unit which provides for settling and removal of solids from waste-
water .
Cleaning
See Vapor Degreasing
Solvent Cleaning
Contaminant Factor
Acid Cleaning
Emulsion Cleaning
Alkaline Cleaning
Salt Bath Descaling
Pickling
Passivate
Abrasive Blast Cleaning
Sonic and Ultrasonic Cleaning
Closed-Loop Evaporation System
A system used for the recovery of chemicals and water from a chemical
finishing process. An evaporator concentrates flow from the rinse
water holding tank. The concentrated rinse solution is returned to
the bath, and distilled water is returned to the final rinse tank.
The system is designed for recovering 100 percent of the chemicals,
normally lost in dragout, for reuse in the process.
Coagulation
The clumping of particles to settle out impurities; often induced by
chemicals such as lime or alum.
Coating
See Aluminum Coating, Hot Dip
Ceramic Coatings, Metal Spraying
Phosphate Coating, Vacuum
Chrome Conversion Coating, Gas Plating
Painting, Siliconizing of Steel
Rust-Preventive Compounds
Porcelain Enamels, Mechanical Plating
14-16
-------
COD
See Chemical Oxygen Demand.
Coining
1. A closed-die squeezing operation, usually performed
cold, in which all surfaces of the work are confined
or restrained, resulting in a well-defined imprint
of the die upon the work.
2. A restriking operation used to sharpen or change an
existing radius or profile.
3. Pow. met. The final pressing of a sintered compact
to obtain a definite surface configuration (not to
be confused with re-pressing or sizing).
Cold Compression Molding
(plastics) A technique of thermoset molding in which the molding
compound is shaped at room temperature and cured by subsequent baking,
Cold Drawing
A process of forcing material through dies or other mandrels to pro-
duce wire, rod, tubular and some bars.
Cold Heading
A method of forcing metal to flow cold into enlarged sections by
endwise squeezing. Typical coldheaded parts are standard screws,
bolts under 1 in. diameter and a large variety of machine parts such
as small gears with stems.
Cold Rolling
A process Of forcing material through rollers to produce bars and
sheet stock.
Colorimetric
A procedure for establishing the concentration of impurities in water
by comparing its color to a set of known color impurity standards.
Compatible Pollutants
Those pollutants which can be adequately treated in publicly-owned
treatment works without upsetting the treatment process.
14-17
-------
OK At I
Composite Mold Casting
Casting using molds assembled from several components among which at
least one component varies from the others in the process by which it
was made and in the molding material. Thus the advantages of several
mold materials or techniques can be incorporated in the operation.
Compounding
(Plastic Process) "Compounding a polymer" refers to those chemical
and, especially, physical methods used to modify the polymer's proper-
ties in accordance with specific performance appearance or economic
requirements,
Conductance
See Electrical Conductivity.
Composite Wastewater Sample
A combination of individual samples of water or wastewater taken at
selected intervals, generally hourly for some specified period, to
minimize the effect of the variability of the individual sample.
Individual samples may have equal volume or may be proportioned to
the flow at time of sampling.
Compression Molding
The forming of thermosetting plastics in an open mold by heat and
pressure.
Conductivity Meter
An instrument which displays a quantitative indication of conductance.
Contact Molding
(Plastics) A process in which a thermosetting resin is blended with
a reinforcing material and applied to an open mold where, accelerated
by heating, it is allowed to cure.
Contact Water
See Process Wastewater.
Contaminate
Intrusion of undesirable elements.
14-18
-------
DRAFT
Continuous Casting
A casting technique in which in ingot, billet, tube or other shape
is continuously solidified while it is being poured, so that its
length is not determined by mold dimensions.
Continuous Treatment
Treatment of waste streams operating uninterruptedly as opposed to
batch treatment; sometimes referred to as flow-through treatment.
Contractor Removal
Disposal of oils, spent solutions, or sludge by a scavenger service.
Conversion Coating
A coating produced by chemical or electrochemical treatment of a
metallic surface that gives a superficial layer containing a compound
of the metal, for example, chromate coatings on zinc and cadmium,
oxide coatings on steel.
Cooling Water
Water which is used to absorb and transport heat generated ana pro-
cess or machinery.
Corrosion Resistant Steels
A term often used to describe the stainless steels with high nickel
and chromium alloy content.
-------
Cost of Capital
The annual cost of capital is assumed to be equal to the annual
capital recovery costs minus the annual depreciation.
Counterboring
Removal of material to enlarge a hole for part of its depth with a
rotary, pilot guided, end cutting tool having two or more cutting
lips and usually having straight or helical flutes for the passage
of chips and the admission of a cutting fluid.
Counterflow Rinsing
Rinsing of parts in such a manner that the rinse water is moved from
tank to tank counter to the flow of parts being rinsed.
Countersinking
Beveling or tapering the work material around the periphery of a hole
creating a concentric surface at an angle less than 90 degrees with
the centerline of the hole for the purpose of chamfering holes or
recessing screw and rivet heads.
Crystal Growing Processes
The crystal growing process provides a means for converting poly-
crystalline material into a single crystal. See Czochralski Crys-
tallization Solution or Evaporation Float Zone Technique.
Crystallization
1. Process used to manufacture semiconductors
in the electronics industry.
2. A means of concentrating pollutants in
wastewaters by cyrstallizing out pure water.
14-20
-------
DRAFT
Curcumine p_£ Carmine Method
A standard method of measuring the concentration of boron (B) within
a solution.
Cyaniding
A process of case hardening an iron-base alloy by the simultaneous
absorption of carbon and nitrogen by heating in a cyanide salt.
Cyaniding is usually followed by quenching to produce a hard case.
Cyclone Separator
A device which removes entrained solids from gas streams.
Czochralski Crystallization
(Crystal Growing Process) This method is used to produce single crys-
tals. This is done by dipping a seed crystal into a molten mass of
material contained in a crucible and then slowly withdrawing it. The
molten material freezes onto the seed as a single crystal in the same
crystallographic orientation as the seed.
Deburring
Removal of burrs or sharp edges from parts by filing, grinding or
rolling the work in a barrel with abrasives suspended in a suitable
medium.
Decorative Overlaying
(Plastics) A finishing process of embedding into suitable clear,
light-stabilized resin a decorative web which becomes a permanent part
of the finished laminate.
-------
Degassing
(Fluxing) The removal of hydrogen and other impurities from molten
primary aluminum in a casthouse holding furnace by injecting chlorine
gas (often with nitrogen and carbon).
Demineralization
The removal from water of mineral contaminants usually present in
ionized form. The methods used include ion-exchange techniques, flash
distillation or electrolysis.
Deoxidizing
The removal of an oxide film from a material.
Depreciation
Decline in value of a capital asset, caused either by use or by obso-
lescence.
Descaling
The removal of scale and metallic oxides from the surface of a metal
by mechanical or chemical means. The former includes the use of steam,
scale-breakers and chipping tools, the latter method includes pickling
in acid solutions.
Desmutting
The removal of smut (matter that soils or blackens) generally by
chemical action.
Dewatering
(Sludge Processing) Removing water from sludge.
Diaminobenzidene
A standard method of measuring the concentrations of selenium in a
solution.
14-22
-------
DRAFT
Diazotization
A standard method of measuring the concentration of nitrite in a solu-
tion.
Dichromate Reflux
A standard method of measuring the chemical oxygen demand of a solution
Die Casting
(hot chamber, vacuum, pressure) Castings are produced by forcing
molten metal under pressure into metal molds called dies. In hot
chamber machines, the pressure cylinder is submerged in the molten
metal resulting in a minimum of time and metal cooling during casting.
Vacuum feed machines use a vacuum to draw a measured amount of melt
from the molten bath into the feed chamber. Pressure feed systems use
a hydraulic or pneumatic cylinder to feed molten metal to the die.
Diffusion Process
(Semi-Conductor Mfg.) The method of producing junctions by disseminat-
ing acceptors or donors into a semiconductor at a high temperature.
Digestion
A standard method of measuring organic nitrogen.
Dip Molding
A male mold, usually aluminum, is heated and dipped in a tank of
vinyl plastisol. When the required buildup is achieved, the coated
mold is moved to an oven for curing. The resulting plastic part is
then cooled and separated from the mold.
Dipping
Material coating by briefly immersing parts in a molten bath, solu-
tion or suspension.
-------
Dispersed-air Flotation
Separation of low density contaminants from water using minute air
bubbles attached to individual particles to provide or increase the
buoyancy of the particle. The bubbles are generated by introducing
air through a revolving impeller or porous media.
Pissolved-air Flotation
Separation of low density contaminants from water using minute air
bubbles attached to individual particles to provide or increase the
buoyancy of the particle. The air is put into solution under ele-
vated pressure and later released under atmospheric pressure or put
into solution by aeration at atmospheric pressure and then released
under a vacuum.
Direct Labor Costs
Salaries, wages and other direct compensations earned by the employee,
Discharge of_ Pollutant (s)
1. The addition of any pollutant to navigable waters
from any point source.
2. Any addition of any pollutant to the waters of the
contiguous zone or the ocean from any point source,
other than from a vessel or other floating craft.
The term "discharge" includes either the discharge
of a single pollutant or the discharge of multiple
pollutants.
14-24
-------
DRAFT
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
The oxygen dissolved in sewage, water, or other liquid, usually
expressed in milligrams per liter or percent of saturation. It is
the test used in BOD determination.
Distillation
Vaporization of a liquid followed by condensation of the vapor.
Distillation-AgN03 Titration
A standard method of measuring the concentration of cyanides in a
solution.
Distillation-Nesslerization
A standard method of measuring ammonia concentration in a solution.
Distillation Refining
A metal with an impurity having a higher vapor pressure than the base
metal can be refined by heating the metal to the point where the
impurity vaporizes.
Distillation-SPADNS
A standard method of measuring the concentration of fluoride in a
solution.
DO Probe
An instrument for measuring dissolved oxygen concentration in
wastewater.
Dollar Base
A period in time to which all costs are related. Investment costs
are related by the Sewage Treatment Plant Construction Cost Index.
Supply costs are related by the "Industrial Commodities" Wholesale
Price Index.
Drag-^in
Water or solution carried into another solution by the work and the
associated handling equipment,
Dragout
The solution that adheres to the objects removed from a bath, more
precisely defined as that solution which is carried past the edge of
the tankc
14-25
-------
DRAFT
Dragout Reduction
Minimization of dragout through use of improved rinsing methods.
Drawing
Reduction of cross section area and increasing the length by pulling
metal through conical tapered dies.
Drilling
Hole making with a rotary, end-cutting tool having one or more cutting
lips and one or more helical or straight flutes or tubes for the
ejection of chips and the passage of a cutting fluid.
1. Center Drilling - Drilling a conical hole in the
end of a work piece
2. Core Drilling - Enlarging a hole with a chamer-
edged, multiple-flute drill
3. Spade Drilling - Drilling with a flat blade drill
tip
4. Step Drilling - Using a multiple diameter drill
5. Gun Drilling - Using special straight flute drills
with a single lip and cutting fluid at high pres-
sures for deep hole drilling
6. Oil Hole or Pressurized Coolant Drilling - Using a
drill with one or more continuous holes through its
body and shank to permit the passage of a high
pressure cutting fluid which emerges at the drill
point and ejects chips
14-26
-------
DRAFT
Dross
Metallic oxides which float to or form on the surface of molten netal.
Drying Beds
Areas for dewatering of sludge by evaporation and seepage.
EDTA Titration
EDTA - ethylenediamine tetracetic acid (or its salts) . A standard
method of measuring the hardness of a solution.
Effluent
The quantities, rates and concentrations of chemical, physical, bio-
logical and other constituents which are discharged from point sources
14-27
-------
DRAFT
Effluent Limitation
Any restriction (including schedules of compliance) established by a
State or EPA on quantities, rates, and concentrations of chemical,
physical, biological and other constituents which are discharged
from point sources into navigable waters, the waters of the contiguous
zone, or the ocean.
Electrical Conductivity
The property of a solution which allows an electric current to flow
when a potential difference is applied. It is the reciprocal of the
resistance in ohms measured between opposite faces of a centimeter
cube of an aqueous solution at a specified temperature. It is ex-
pressed as microohms per centimeter at temperature degrees Celsius.
Electrical Discharge Machining
Metal removed by a rapid spark discharge between different polarity
electrodes, one the work piece and the other the tool separated by
a gap distance of 0.0005 in. to 0.035 in. The gap is filled with
dielectric fluid and metal particles which are melted, in part
vaporized and expelled from the gap.
Electrobrightening
A process of reversed electro-deposition which results in anodic
metal taking a high polish.
Electrochemical Machining (ECM)
A machining process whereby the part to be machined is made the anode
and a shaped cathode is maintained in close proximity to the work.
Electrolyte is pumped between the electrodes and a potential applied
with the result that metal is rapidly dissolved from the work in a
selective manner and the shape produced on the work complements that
of the cathode.
Electrode
Conducting material for passing electric current out of a solution
by taking up electrons or passing electric current into it by giving
up electrons from or to ions in the solution.
14-28
-------
DRAFT
Electrodialysis
A treatment process that uses electrical current and an arrangement
of permeable membranes to separate soluble minerals from water. Ofte:
used to desalinate salt or brackish water.
Electroless Plating
Deposition of a metallic coating by a controlled chemical reduction
that is catalyzed by the metal or alloy being deposited.
Electrolysis
The chemical decomposition by an electric current of a substance in
a dissolved or molten state.
Electrolyte
1. An ionic conductor
2. A liquid, most often a solution, that will conduct
an electric current
Electrolytic Cell
A unit apparatus in which electrochemical reactions are produced by
applying electrical energy, or which supplies electrical energy as a
result of chemical reactions and which includes two or more electrode
and one or more electrolytes contained in a suitable vessel.
Electrolytic Decomposition
An electrochemical treatment used for the oxidation of cyanides. The
method is practical and economical when applied to concentrated solu-
tions such as contaminated baths, cyanide dips, stripping solutions,
and concentrated rinses. Electrolysis is carried out at a current
density of 35 amp/sq ft at the anode and 70 amp/sq ft at the cathode.
Metal is deposited at the cathode and can be reclaimed.
Electrolytic Oxidation
A reaction by an electrolyte in which there is an increase in valence
resulting from a loss of electrons.
Electrolytic Reduction
A reaction in which there is a decrease in valence resulting from a
gain in electrons.
-------
DRAFT
Electrolytic Refining
The method of producing pure metals by making the impure metal the
anode in an electrolytic cell and depositing a pure cathode. The
impurities either remain undissolved at the anode or pass into solu-
tions in the electrolyte.
Electrometallurgical Process
The application of electric current to a metallurgical process either
for electrolytic deposition or as a source of heat.
Electrometric Titration
A standard method of measuring the alkalinity of a solution.
Electron Beam Machining
Material removal accomplished by a high velocity focused stream of
electrons which melt and vaporize a work piece at the point of im-
pingement.
Electropainting
A coating process in which the coating is formed on the work piece
by making it anodic or cathodic in a bath that is generally an
aqueous emulsion of the coating material.
Electroplating
The production of a thin coating of one metal on another by electro-
deposition.
Electropolishing
A process for obtaining a smooth surface by passing an electric
current through the part and a chemical electrolyte. The process is
a method of etching away the high points of a rough surface more
rapidly than the lower portion.
Electrostatic Painting
Spray painting with electrically charged paint particles to eliminate
overspray.
14-30
-------
DRAFT
Electrostatic Precipitator
A unit for removing particulate solids from a gas stream by collect-
ing the particles on electrically charged plates or wires. The
system may operate dry or the plates may be continuously cleaned by
a falling film of water.
Embossing
Raising a design in relief against a surface.
Emulsified Oil and Grease
Consists of an oil or grease dispersed in an immiscible liquid usually
in droplets of larger than colloidal size. In general suspension of
oil or grease within another liquid.
Emulsifying Agent
A material that increases the stability of a dispersion of one liquid
in another.
Emulsion Breaking
Decreasing the stability of dispersion of one liquid in another.
Emulsion Cleaning
Organic solvents dispersed in an aqueous medium with the aid of an
emulsifying agent.
Enamel
A paintlike coating usually sprayed and then air dryed or baked avail-
able in unlimited colors and textures. Enameling is used for decora-
tive and protective purposes.
Encapsulation
A process where a coating or molding is put around the hybrid film
substate. The coatings range from wax to epoxy.
Environmental Protection Agency
The United States Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA
See Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
DRAFT
Equalization
(continuous flow) Holding tank is used to give a continuous flow for
a system that has widely varying inflow rates.
Evaporation (Crystal Growing Process)
"Hydrothermal Method" - A saturated aqueous solution containing
quartz nutrient that has been raised to an elevated temperature
and pressurized inside an autoclave to insure solubility. A temp-
erature gradient between the bottom and top of the autoclave per-
mits density gradients within the saturated solution and insures
the proper flow of nutrients to the seeds.
Evaporation Ponds
Liquid waste disposal areas that allow the liquid to vaporize to cool
discharge water temperatures or to thicken sludge.
Etching
A process where material is removed by chemical action.
Exce_s_s Capacity Factor
A multiplier on process size to account for shutdown for cleaning and
maintenance.
Extru_sion
A material that is forced through a die to form lengths of rod, tube
or special sections.
Ferrite
A solid solution^in which alpha iron is present.
Ferrous
Relating to or containing iron.
Filtrate
Liquid after passing through a filter.
14-32
-------
DRAFT
Filtration
Removal of solid particles from liquid or particles from air or gas
stream through a permeable membrane.
Types: Gravity
Pressure
Microstraining
Ultrafiltration
Reverse Osmosis (hyperfiltration)
Flame Hardened
Surface hardened by controlled torch heating followed by quenching
with water or air.
Flame Photometry
A standard method of measuring the concentration of strontium in a
solution.
Flame Spraying
Method of applying a plastic coating in which finely powdered fragments
of the plastic, together with suitable fluxes, are projected through a
cone of flame onto a surface.
Flameless Atomic Absorption
A method of measuring the concentration of a solution.
Float Zone Crystal
A crystal grown by passing a molten zone through a cylinder of mater-
ial. No other material with the possible exception of a gas, contacts
the molten zone. When the crystal is grown in a vacuum, the term
"vacuum float-zone crystal" is frequently used.
Float Zone Technique
(Crystal Growth) This is accomplished by placing a crystal seed in
contact with the end of a polycrystalline rod and lowering that end
of the rod into a furnace chamber. A molten zone is established in
the rod and the seed is welded to the poly-rod. The rod is slowly
removed and the material at the lower end will have the same crystal
structure as the seed.
14-33
-------
DRAFT
Flocculation
The process of separating suspended solids from wastewater by chemi-
cal creation of clumps or floes.
Flotation
The rising of suspended matter to the surface of the liquid in a tank
as scum by aeration, the evolution of gas, chemicals, electrolysis,
heat, or bacterial decomposition and the subsequent removal of the
scum by skimming.
See: Centrifugal
Air Flotation
Gravity
Flow Turning
A method of metal forming.
Fluid Sand Molding
Fluid sand molding employs sand, sodium silicate, watciug agents,
chemical hardeners and water to produce a brightly f lovable mixture,
£fter pouring the mold air vi'.l haider requiring heating only to force
dry a surface wash.
(Degassing) The removal of oxides and other impurities from molten
primary aluminum in a casthouse holding furnace by injecting chlorine
gas (often with nitrogen and carbon monoxide) .
Foaming
A process which consists of expanding a fluid polymer phase to create
small discontinuities or cells and causing these cells to grow to a
desired volume then stabilizing this cellular structure by physical
or chemical processes.
Forging
A cold or hot mechanical working process performed by presses or
hammers to shape metals.
Types: Hammer
Press
Hot Upset
High Energy Rate
Ring Rolling
Canned Powder
14-34
-------
DRAFT
Forming
(Plastic Process) Process of heating pieces until soft and then shap-
ing them through the use of a mold and low pressure to the desired
configuration.
4-AAP Colorimetric
A standard method of measurement for phenols in aqueous solutions.
Free Cyanide
1. True - the actual concentration of cyanide radical,
or equivalent alkali cyanide, not combined in com-
plex ions with metals in solutions.
2. Calculated - the concentration of cyanide, or alkali
cyanide, present in solution in excess of that cal-
culated as necessary to form a specified complex ion
with a metal or metals present in solution.
3. Analytical - the free cyanide content of a solution
as determined by a specified analytical method.
Freezing/Crystallization
A unit treatment process in which water is crystallized and the crys-
tals removed from the concentrated waste stream. Ice crystals norm-
ally form relatively free of impurities.
Galvanizing
The deposition of zinc on the surface of steel for corrosion protec-
tion.
Gangue
The worthless rock or other material in which valuable metals or
minerals occur.
Gas Carburizing
The introduction of carbon into the surface layers of mill steel
by heating in a current of gas high in carbon.
Ga s Chroir.otography
A complex instrumental method of determining the concentrations of
certain wastewater contaminants.
-------
^ Nit rid ing
Case hardening metal by heating and diffusing nitrogen gas into the
surface .
Gas Plating
See Vapor Plating.
Gear Forming
Process for making small gears by rolling the gear material as it ~s
pressed between hardened gear shaped dies .
Gla s s Fiber Filtration
A standard method of measuring total suspendable solids,
Good Housekeeping
(In-Plant Technology) Good and proper maintenance minimizing spills
and upsets,
GPP
Gallons per day.
Grab Sample
A single sample of wastewater taken at neither set time nor flow.
Gravimetric
A standard method of measuring total solids in aqueous solutions.
A standard method of measuring total volatile solids in aqueous
solutions .
Gravity Filtratioa
Settling of heavier and rising of lighter constituents within a
solution.
14-36
-------
DRAFT
Gravity Flotation
The separation of water and low density contaminants as oil or grease
by reduction of the wastewater flow velocity and turbulence for a
sufficient time to permit separation due to difference in specific
gravity time. The floated material is removed by some skimming tech-
nique .
Gray Cast Irons
Alloys primarily of iron, carbon and silicon along with other alloying
elements in which the grapl._'-e is in flake form. (These irons are
characterized by low ductil. _y but have many other properties such as
good castability and good damping capacity.)
Grease
In wastewater, a group of substances including fats, waxes, free fatty
acids, calcium and magnesium soaps, mineral oils, and certain other
nonfatty materials. The type of solvent and method used for extrac-
tion should be stated for quantification.
Grease Skimmer
A device for removing floating grease or scum from the surface of
wastewater in a tank.
Grinding
Material removal by use of abrasive grains held by a binder.
1. Surface Grinding - Producing a flat surface
with a rotating grinding wheel as the work
piece passes under the wheel.
2. Cylindrical Grinding - Grinding the outside
diameters of cylindrical work pieces held
between centers.
3. Internal Grinding - Grinding the inside of
a rotating work piece by use of a wheel
spindle which rotates and reciprocates through
the length of depth of the hole being ground.
Hammer Forging
Heating and pounding metal to shape it into the desired form.
1 A-
-------
DRAFT
Hardened
Designates condition produced by various heat treatments such as
quench hardening, age hardening and precipitation hardening.
Hardness
•\ eharacr e;: J s tie of water, iinpaited by salt:-- •„;£ calcium, rr\dgneoiu;f
.•nd iror such as bic.ubf • nates , certiorates, sol fates, chlorides c,nd
nitr.itt'U, that c.iuae curdling -, : 3^:;p, deposition of scale In Iviild
r-.-',, damage in sosue industrial p r c ;.•'.: ^ £, e r> cir-d DO;uOti;na!j ob jecc_iou.:bl
Ldstt, T ;.- uay he dc cc rmia-^fi ty <;; v \jr.dard laboratory proceuur;i -^^
::--jrnputed ^ro,n nhe amounts o-c ^jilciuir ^nd rrannesiurn as '.veil as irr,',
-< laia i nurr. ,. .iiungano :-o , bar.iur., strontiura and -i i nc and is exuresoed ^,-»
equivalent calcium carbonate,
'.l^^Lo.-aJL F jnair.g) Upsctti-.g w'^e, rod or bar stock la dies to fcr^n
pai' uc uavxny soir.e cf the cruSj-GoCtional area larger thac. the origi-
nal. Examples are bolts, rivets and screws.
Heaj: Resi.stant^ Steels
-i ' v- *r-» * 5 -v *~ ^ --i !- V °? "^ "«•
-3 *«- 1 ^-^ * t.**
-------
DRAFT
High Energy Forming
Processes where parts are formed at a rapid rate by using extremely
high pressures.
Examples: Explosive forming
Electrohydraulic forming
High Energy Rate Forging (HERF)
A closed die process where hot or cold deforming is accomplished by
a high velocity ram.
Hobbing
Gear cutting by use of a tool resembling a worm gear in appearance,
having helically-spaced cutting teeth. In a single-thread hob, the
rows of teeth advance exactly one pitch as the hob makes one revolu-
tion. With only one hob, it is possible to cut interchangeable gears
of a given pitch of any number of teeth within the range of the
hobbing machine.
Honing
A finishing operation using fine grit abrasive stones to produce
accurate dimensions and excellent finish.
Hot Compression Molding
(Plastic Processing) A technique of thermoset molding in which pre-
heated molding compound is placed in the open mold cavity, mold is
closed and heat and pressure (in the form of a downward moving ram)
are applied until the material has cured.
Hot Dip Coating
A method of coating one metal with another by immersing in a molten
bath to provide a protective film.
Hot Rolled
A term used to describe alloys which are rolled at temperatures above
the recrystallization temperature. (Many alloys are hot rolled, and
machinability of such alloys may vary because of differences in cool-
ing conditions from lot to lot.)
-------
DRAFT
Hot Stamping
Engraving operation for marking plastics in which roll leaf is stamped
with heated metal dies onto the face of the plastics. Ink compounds
can also be used.
Hot Upset Forging
The diameter is locally increased i.e. to upset the head of a bolt,
the end of the barstock is heated and then deformed by an axial blow
often into a suitably shaped die.
Hydrometallurgical Process
The treatment of ores by wet processes such as leaching.
Immersion Plate
(cementation) A metallic deposit produced by a displacement reaction
in which one metal displaces another from solution, for example:
Fe + Cu( + 2) = Cu + Fe (+2)
Incineration
(Sludge Disposal) The combustion (by burning) or organic matter in
wastewater sludge solids after water evaporation from the solids.
Incineration/Combustion
(Oil Disposal) Burning oil and other wastes in an incinerator at higt
temperatures.
Incompatible Pollutants
Those pollutants which would cause harm to, adversely affect the per-
formance of, or be inadequately treated in publicly-owned treatment
works.
Indirect Labor Costs
Labor-related costs paid by the employer other than salaries, wages
and other direct compensation such as social security and insurance.
Induction Hardened
Surface or through hardened using induction heating followed by
quenching with water or air.
14-40
-------
DRAFT
Industrial User
Any industry that introduces pollutants into public sewer systems and
whose wastes are treated by a publicly-owned treatment facility.
Industrial Wastes
The liquid wastes from industrial processes, as distinct from domestic
or sanitary wastes.
Injection Molding
A melding procedure whereby a heat-softened plastic material is forced
from a cylinder into a relatively cool cavity which gives the article
the desired shape.
In-mold Decoration
^Plastics) Process where a piece of printed melamine-impregnated paper
called a foil is introduced into the mold after a part is partially
cured.
7nspection
A checking or testing of something against standards or specification.
Intake Water
Gross water nir.us reused water.
Integrated Chemical Treatment
A waste treatment method in which a chemical rinse tank is inserted in
the pickling line between the process tank and the water rinse tank.
The chemical rinse solution is continuously circulated through the tank
and removes the dragout while reacting chemicals with it.
Integrated Circuit (1C)
1. A combination of interconnected circuit elements
inseparably associated on or within a continuous
substrate.
2. Any electronic device in which both active and
passive elements are contained in a single
package. Methods of making an integrated
circuit are by masking process, screening
and chemical deposition.
-------
DRAFT
Intraforming
A method of forming by means of squeezing.
Investment Casting
1. Casting metal into a mold produced by surrounding
(investing) an expendable pattern with a refractory
slurry that sets at room temperature after
which the wax, plastic or frozen mercury pattern
is removed through the use of heat. Also called
precision casting, or lost-wax process.
2. A casting made by the process.
Investment Costs
The capital expenditures required to bring the treatment or control
technology into operation.
Ion Exchange
A reversible chemical reaction between a solid and a fluid by means
of which ions may be interchanged from one substance to another. The
customary procedure is to pass the fluid through a bed of the solid,
which is granular and porous and has a limited capacity for exchange.
The process is essentially a batch type in which the ion exchanger,
upon nearing depletion, is regenerated by inexpensive sales or acid.
Ion-Flotation Technique
Treatment for electroplating rinse waters (containing chromium and
cyanide) in which ions are separated from solutions by flotation.
Iridite Dip Process
Dipping process for zinc or zinc-coated objects that deposits an
adherent protective film that is a chrome gel, chrome oxide or
hydrated chrome oxide compound.
14-42
-------
DRAFT
Isolation
Segregation of a waste for separate treatment and/or disposal
Jackson Units
The standard unit for measuring turbidity.
Joining
To put or bring together so as to form a unit.
See: Welding
Brazing
Soldering
Laminating
Riveting
Adhesive Bonding
14-43
-------
DRAFT
Kiln
(Rotary) A large cylindrical mechanized type of furnace.
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
A method of determining the ammonia and organically bound nitrogen in
the -3 valance state but does not determine nitrite, azides, nitro,
nitroso, oximes or nitrate nitrogen.
Knurling
Impressing a design into a metallic surface, usually by means of small,
hard rollers that carry the corresponding design on their surfaces.
Lagoon
A man-made pond or lake for holding wastewater for the removal of sus-
pended solids. Lagoons are also used as retention ponds, after chemi-
cal clarification to polish the effluent and to safeguard against up-
sets in the clarifier; for stabilization of organic matter by bio-
logical oxidation; for storage of sludge; and for cooling of water.
Laminate
1. A composite metal, usually in form of sheet, or bar,
composed of two or more metal layers so bonded that
the composite metal forms a structural member.
2. To form a metallic product of two or more bonded
layers.
Laminating
Forming of plastic or wood parts by adhesive bonding of layers.
Land Fill
Disposal of inert, insoluble waste solids by dumping at an approved
site and covering with earth.
Lapping
An abrading process to improve surface quality by reducing roughness,
waviness and defects to produce accurate as well as smooth surfaces.
Laser Beam Machining
Use of a highly focused mono-frequency collimated beam of light to
melt or sublime material at the point of impingement on a work piece.
14-44
-------
DRAFT
Leach Field
An area of ground to which wastewater is discharged. Not considered
an acceptable treatment method for industrial wastes.
Leaching
Dissolving out by the action of a percolating liquid, such as water,
seeping through a sanitary landfill.
Level !_
BPT technology or effluent limitations.
Level II_
BAT technology or effluent limitations
Level III
New Source Performance Standards
Liquid Carburizing
A method used for case hardening steel or iron. It is accomplished
by immersing the work piece in cyanide bath.
Liquid-Liquid Extraction with Trichlorotrifluroethane
A method of extracting oil or grease by distillation with Dupont
Freon precision cleaning agent or equivalent.
Liquid Nitriding
Process of case hardening a metal in a molten cyanide bath.
Liquid Phase Pefining
A metal with an impurity possessing a lower melting point is refined
by heating the metal to the point of melting of the low temperature
metal. It is separated by sweating out.
Low Pressure Molding
A method of molding reinforced plastics.
14-45
-------
DRAFT
Maintenance
The upkeep of property of equipment.
Malleablizing
Process of annealing brittle white cast iron in such a way that the
combined carbon is wholly or partly transformed to graphitic or
temper carbon nodules in a ferritic or pearlitic microstructure,
thus providing a ductile and machinable material.
Maraged
Describes a series of heat treatments used to treat high strength
steels of complex composition (maraging steels) by aging of marten-
site.
14-46
-------
DRAFT
Martensite
An acicular or needlelike microstructure that is formed in quenched
steels. (It is very hard and brittle in the as quenched form and,
therefore, is usually tempered before being placed into service. The
harder forms of tempered martensite have poorer machinability.)
Martempering
Quenching an austentized ferrous alloy is a medium at a temperature
in the upper part of the martensite range, or slightly above that
range, and holding it in the medium until the temperature throughout
the alloy is substantially uniform. The alloy is then allowed to
cool in air through the martensite range.
Material Modification
(In-Plant Technology) Altering the substance from which a part is
made.
Mechanical Finish
Final operations on a product performed by a machine or tool.
See: Polishing, Buffing
Barrel Finishing
Shot Peening
Power Brush Finishing
Mechanical Plating
Providing a coating wherein fine metal powders are peened onto the
part by tumbling or other means.
Melting
When a material is changed from a solid to a liquid by the application
of heat.
Membrane
*
A thin sheet of synthetic polymer, through the apertures of which
small molecules can pass, while larger ones are retained.
Mercuric Nitrate Titration
A standard method of measuring chloride.
14-47
-------
DRAFT
Metal Masks
They are used to protect the metal that is not plated or otherwise
surface treated.
Metal Oxidation Refining
A refining technique that removes impurities from the base metal
because the impurity oxidizes more readily than the base. The metal
is heated and oxygen supplied. The impurity upon oxidizing separates
by gravity or volatilizes.
Metal Paste Production
Manufacture of metal pastes for use as pigments by mixing metal
powders with mineral spirits, fatty acids and solvents. Grinding
and filtration are steps in the process.
Metal Powder Production
Production of metal particles for such uses as pigments either by
milling and grinding of scrap or by atomization of molten metal.
Metal Spraying
Coating metal objects by spraying molten metal upon the surface with
gas pressure.
Methylene Blue Method
A standard method of measuring surfactants in aqueous solutions.
Microstraining
A tertiary effluent treatment consisting of a revolving drum which
has micropore stainless steel panels attached to it.
14-48
-------
DRAFT
Milling
Using a rotary tool with one or more teeth which engage the work
piece and remove material as the work piece moves past the
rotating cutter.
1. Face Milling - Milling a surface perpendicular
to the axis of the cutter. Peripheral cutting
edges remove the bulk of the material while the
face cutting edges provide the finish of the
surface being generated.
2. End Milling - Milling accomplished with a tool
having cutting edges on its cylindrical surfaces
as well as on its end. In end milling - peripheral,
the peripheral cutting edges on the cylindrical
surface are used; while in end milling-slotting,
both end and peripheral cutting edges remove
metal.
3. Side and Slot Milling - Milling of the side or
slot of a work piece using a peripheral cutter.
4. Sla.b Milling - Milling of a surface parallel to
t'r.e axis of a helical, multiple-toothed cutter
mounted on an arbor.
5. Straddle Milling - Peripheral milling a work
piece on both sides at once using two cutters
spaced as required.
-------
DRAFT
Modified Winkier or D_-_0_._ Probe
A standard method of measuring dissolved oxygen in aqueous solution.
Mold
1. A form made of sand, metal or other material
which contains the cavity into which molten
metal is poured to produce a casting of definite
shape and outline.
2„ Powder metallurgy - sane as die.
Monitoring
The measurement, sometimes continuous, of water quality.
Mother Liquor
The solution from which crystals are formed.
Multiple Operation Machinery
Two or more tools are used to perform simultaneous or consecutive
operations.
Multi-Effect Evaporator
In chemical processing installations, requiring a series of evapora-
tions and condensations, the individual units are set up in series
and the latent heat of vaporization from one unit is used to supply
energy for the next. Such units are called "effects" in engineering
parlance as, e.g., a triple effect evaporator.
Multiple Subcategory Plant
A plant discharging process wastewater from more than one manufactur-
ing process subcategory.
14-50
-------
DRAFT
}6^. Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
The federal mechanism for regulating point source discharge by means
of pernts.
Navigable Waters
All navigable waters of the United States; tributaries of navigable
watars of the United States; interstate waters; intrastate lakes,
rivers and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers 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 for indus-
trial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Neutralization
Reaction of acid or alkali with the opposite reagent until the con-
centrations of hydrogen and hydroxyl ions in the solution ars approxi-
mately equal,
New Source
Any building, structure, facility or installation from which there is
or may be the 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 which will be
applicable to such source if such standard is thereafter promulgated
in accordance with section 306 of the Act.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
Performance standards for the industry and applicable new sources
as defined by Section 306 of the Act.
-------
DRAFT
Nitriding
A heat treating method in which nitrogen is diffused into the surface
of iron-base alloys. (This is done by heating the metal at a temper-
ature of about 950 degrees F in contact with ammonia gas or other
suitable nitrogenous materials. The surface, because of formation of
nitrides becomes much harder than the interior. Depth of the nitrided
surface is a function of the length of time of exposure and can vary
from .0005" to .032" thick. Hardness is generally in the 65 to 70 Rc_
range, and, thereforef these structures are almost always ground.)
Nitriding Steels
Steels which are selected because they form good case hardened struc-
tures in the nitriding process. (In these steels, elements such as
aluminum and chromium are important for producing a good case.)
Non-contact Cooling Watejr
Means water used for cooling which does not come into direct contact
with any raw material, intermediate product, waste product or finished
product.
Non-contact Cooling Water_ Pollutants
Pollutants present in ncn-contact cooling waters.
Non-emulsified Oil and^ Grease
An oil or grease that is uniform throughout. (Does not have one liquid
suspended in another liquid.)
Non-ferrous
No iron content.
Normalized
Heat treatment of iron-base alloys above the critical temperature,
followed by cooling in still air. (This is often done to refine or
homogenize the grain structure of castings, forgings and wrought steel
products.)
Notching
Cutting out various shapes from the edge or side of a sheet, strip,
blank or part.
-------
DRAFT
NPDES
See National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
Ocean Disposal
The dumping of pollutants in the ocean.
Operation and Maintenance Costs
The annual cost of running the wastewater treatment equipment. This
includes labor costs, material and supply costs, and energy and power
costs.
ORP Recorders
Oxidation-reduction potential recorders.
Overlaying
A form of laminating in which a highly resinous surface sheet is pressed
over a pattern. This overlay sheet reproduces the press plate texture
and protects the pattern on the adjacent print sheet.
Oxidizable Cyanide
Cyanide amenable to oxidation by chlorine according to standard analy-
tical methods.
Oxidising
Combining the material concerned with oxygen.
Pack Carburizing
Case hardening by completely surrounding the work piece with a carbona-
ceous material in a closed container. The CO gas for carburizing is
obtained by heating the packing material. Economical for small lots
and for large pieces, particularly because it can be done in almost any
furnace.
Painting, Lacquering, etc.
Generic terms for the application of coatings to the surface of a
material for decorative and protective purposes.
Types: Solvent
Water Base
Electrostatic
14-53
-------
DRAFT
Parameter
A characteristic element or constant factor.
Parameter (Lattice)
In a crystal, the length, usually in Angstrom units, or the unit cell
along one of its aces or edges, also called "lattice constant".
Passivation
The changing of the chemically active surface of a metal to a much
less reactive state by means of an acid dip.
Pearlite
A microstituent found in iron-base alloys consisting of a lamellar
(Platelike) composite of ferrite and iron carbide. (This structure
results from the decomposition of austenite and is very common in
cast irons and annealed steels.)
Peening
Mechanical working of metal by hammer blows or shot impingement.
Permanent Mold
-t.
A metal mold (other than an ingot mold) of two or more parts tha't is
used repeatedly for the;production of many castings of the same form.
Liquid metal is poured in by gravity. .,- •„ .
PH
A unit for measuring acidity_ or. alkalinity.-'of . water, -bashed on hydrogen
ion concentrations. a pH of 7 indicates a "neutral" water or solution.
At pH lower than 7, a solution is acidic. At pH higher than 7, a solu-
tion is alkaline.
Phenols
A group of aromatic compounds having the hydroxyl group directly
attached to the benzene nucleous. Phenols can be a contaminant in a
waste stream from a manufacturing process.
Phosphate Coating
Process of forming rust-resistant layers on iron or steel by immersing
in a hot solution of acid manganese, iron or zinc phosphate.
14-54
-------
DRAFT
Phosphates
Salts or esters of phosphoric acid. Often used in phosphatizing
metal part prior to painting or porcelair.izing.
Phospha tiz ing
Procc"': of farming rust~resist?.r.t coating en ircr. or stscl by iir,
in a hot solution of acid manganese, iron or zinc phosphates.
Photolithography
The process of printing from a photographic plate on which the i
to be printed is ink-receptive and the blank area ink repellent.
Photosensitive Coating
A chemical layer that is receptive to the action of radiant ener
Pickle
An acid solution used to remove oxides or other compounds relate
the basis metal from its surface of a metal by chemical or elect
chemical action.
Pickling
The process of removing scale: oxide or foreign matter from the
agent irhich v:ill attack the oxide or scale, but will not appreci
act upon the metal during the period of pickling. Frequently it
necessary to immerse the motals in a detergent solution or to de
in a vapor degreaser before pickling.
Planing
Producing flat surfaces by linear reciprocal motion of the work
the table to which it is attached relative to a stationary singl«
point cutting tool.
Plant F_f fluent or Discharge After Treatment
The wastewater discharged from the industrial plant. In this de
tion, any waste treatment device (pond, trickling filter, etc.) .
sidered part of the industrial plant.
-------
DRAFT
Plasma Arc Machini no
Material removed or formed with a high velocity jet of hiqh temperature
ionized gas.
Plaster Melding
Molding wherein a gypsum-bonded aggregate flour in the form of a water
slurry is poured over a pattern, permitted to harden, and, after removal
of the pattern, thoroughly dried. The technique is used to make smooth
nonferrous castings of accurate size.
Plastic
(Metals) Provide corrosion resistant, attractive surfaces, mask surface
scratches, dampening to reduce noise. The coatings include P, V, C.
(polyvinyl chloride, nylon, PTFE, polythene, polypropylene, epoxy
resins, chlorinated polyethers and c.a.b. (cellulose acetate butyrate).
Plastic Compounding
The process of blending, with a raw polymer, additive ingredient(s) in
order to alter its physical or chemical properties.
Plastic Drying
The process of reducing the volatiles contained in unprocessed plastics
material in order to reduce or eliminate gaseous inclusions in the
molded product.
Plastic Molding
1. To shape plastic parts or finished articles by
heat and pressure.
2. The cavity or matrix into which the plastic
composition is placed and from which it takes
form.
3. The assembly of all the parts that function
collectively in the molding process.
4. Sometimes used to demote finished piece.
14-56
-------
DRAFT
Plastics Preheating
The process of heating a plastic material immediately prior to mold-
ing in order to improve its flow characteristics and, therefore, its
ultimate strength and appearance.
Plasticizers
High-boiling liquids used as ingredients in synthetic materials.
They do not evaporate but preserve the flexibility and adhesive
power of the synthetic material.
Plating
(Surface Treatment and Cleaning) Forming an adherent layer of metal
upon an object.
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.
Point Source Category
See Category.
Polishing
Removal of metal by the action of abrasive grains carried to the
work by a flexible support, generally either a wheel or a coated
abrasive belt,
Pollutant.
Dredjed spoil; solid waste, incinerator residue, sewage, garbage,
sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials,
radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock,
sand, cellar dirt and industrial, municipal and agricultural waste
discharged into water. It does not mean (1) sewage from vessels
or (2) water, gas or other material which is injected into a well
to facilitate production of oil or gas, or water derived in associa-
tion v-ith oil or gas production and disposed of in a well, if the
well, used either to facilitate production or for disposal purposes,
is approved by authority of the State in which the well is located,
and if such State determines that such injection or disposal will
not result in degradation of ground or surface water resources.
-------
Pollutant Parameters
Those constituents of wastewater determined to be detrimental and,
therefore, requiring control.
Pollution
The man-made or man-induced alteration of the chemical, physical,
biological and radiological integrity of water.
Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB)
A family of chlorinated biphenyls with unique thermal properties and
chemical inertness which have a wide variety of uses as plasticizers,
flame retardants and insulating fluids. They represent a persistent
contaminant in waste streams and receiving waters.
Porcelain Enameling
Glass coatings applied primarily to products made of sheet steel, cast
iron or aluminum or improve appearance and protect the metal surface.
Porcelainizing
To fire a vitreous coating on material such as steel.
Post Curing
Treatment after changing the physical properties of a material by chemi-
cal reaction.
Pouring
(Casting and Molding) Transferring molten metal from a furnace or a
ladle to a mold.
Powder Molding
Sintering.
Power Brush Finishing
This is accomplished (wet or dry) using a wire or nonmetallic-fiber-
filled brush used for deburring, edge blending and surface finishing of
metals.
14-58
-------
DRAFT
Precipitation
The discrete particles of material rejected from a solid or liquid
solution.
Precipitation Hardening Metals
Certain metal compositions which respond to precipitation hardening
hardening or aging treatment.
Press Forging
Heating and hydraulically or mechanically squeezing a piece of metal
into a desired shape.
Pressure Filtration
(Sludge Dewatering) Any separation (by filtering) of impurities from
a fluid where pressure is used.
Pjr e tre a tme n t
Any process used to reduce the pollutant load before the waste is in-
troduced into a sewer system sanitary drain or delivered to a treatment
plant.
Primary Aluminum
Aluminum raetal prepared from an ore, as distinguished from processed
scrap metal.
Primary Settling
The first settling for the removal of settleable solids through which
wastewater is passed in a treatment works.
Primary Treatment
The first stage in wastewater treatment in which floating or settle-
able solids are mechanically removed by screening and sedimentation.
Printed Circuit Boards
A circuit in which the interconnecting wires have been replaced by con-
ductive strips printed, etched, etc. onto an insulating board. Methods
of making include etched circuit, electroplating and stamping.
-------
Printing
A process whereby a design or pattern in ink or types of pigments are
impressed onto the surface of a part.
Process Modification
(In-Plant Technology) Reduction of water pollution by basic changes
in a manufacturing process.
Process Wastewater
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, byproduct or waste product.
Punching
A method of cold extruding, cold heading, hot forging or stamping in
a machine whereby the mating die sections control the shape or contour
of the part.
(Sludge Removal) Decomposition of materials by the application of
heat in an oxygen-deficient atmosphere.
Pyre-metallurgical Process
(Smelting) Metallurgy involved in winning and refirming metals
where heat is used, as in roasting and smelting.
Purzolone-Colorimetrie
A standard method of measuring cyanides in aqueous solutions.
Quantity GPP
Gallons per day.
Quenched
Rapid cooling of alloys by immersion in liquids or gases after heating.
Radiation Processing
Process of using gamma radiation sources or electron accelerator sourc-
es for initiating free radical chemical reactors within the plastic
materials without the use of heat or catalyst.
14-60
-------
DRAFT
Radiography
A nondestructive method of internal examination in which metal or
other objects are exposed to a beam of x-ray or gamma radiation.
Differences in thickness, density or absorption, caused by int-arn^l
discontinuities, are apparent in the shadow image either on a
fluorescent screen or on photographic film placed behind the object.
Reaming
An operation in which a previously formed hole is sized and contoured
accurately by using a rotary cutting tool (reamer) with one or more
cutting elements (teeth). The principal support for the reamer dur-
ing the cutting action is obtained from the work piece.
1. Form Reaming - Reaming to a contour shape.
2. Taper Reaming - Using a special reamer for
taper pins.
3. Hand Reaming - Using a long lead reamer which
permits reaming by hand.
4. Pressure Coolant Reaming (or Gun Reaming) -
Using a multiple-lip, end cutting tool through
which coolant is forced at high pressure to
flush chips ahead of the tool or back through
the flutes for finishing of deep holes.
-------
Receiving Waters
Rivers, lakes, oceans or other water courses that receive treated or
untreated wastewaters.
Recycle Lagoon
A pond that collects treated wastewater, most of which is recycled as
process water.
Reduction
In cupping and deep drawing, a measure of the
percentage decrease from blank diameter to cup
diameter, or of diameter reduction in redraws.
In forging, rolling and drawing, either the
ratio of the original to final cross-sectional
area.
A reaction in which there is a decrease in
valance resulting from a gain in electrons.
Contrast with oxidation.
14-62
-------
DRAFT
Refining
Purifying crude or impure metals.
See: Liquid Phase Refining
Distillation Refining
Electrolytic Refining
Melt Oxidation Refining
Residual Chlorine
The amount of chlorine left in the treated water is available to oxi-
dize contaminants.
Reverse Osmosis
(Hyperfiltration) A recovery process in which the more concentrated
solution is put under a pressure greater than the osmotic pressure to
drive water across the membrane to the dilute stream while leaving
behind the dissolved salts.
Ring Rolling
A metals process in which a doughnut shaped piece of stock is flattened
to the desired ring shape by rolling between variably spaced rollers.
This process produces a seamless ring,
Rinse
Water for removal of dragout by dipping, spraying, fogging, etc.
Pave ting;
Joining of two or more members of a structure by means of metal rivets,
the unheaded end being upset after the rivet is in place.
Roasting
Heating an ore to effect some chemical change that will facilitate
smelting.
-------
Rod Mill
(or Shop) A facility at some primary aluminum plants for casting
alur.ir.um and forming rod usually about one-half inch in diameter.
Rolling;
Reducing the cross-sectional area of metal stock, or otherwise shaping
metal products, through the use of rotating rolls.
Rotational Molding
A process where the mold is rotated about two perpendicular axes
simultaneously. This process is intended primarily for the manufac-
ture of hollow objects from thermoplastics and, to a limited extent,
it is also used to process thermosetting materials.
Routing
Cutting out and contouring edges of various shapes in a relatively
thin material using a small diameter rotating cutter which is operated
at fairly high speeds.
Running Rinse
A rinse tank in which water continually flows in and out.
Rust Prevention Compounds
These are coatings used to protect iron and steel surfaces against
corrosive environments during fabrication, storage or use.
Salt Bath Descaling
9
Removing the layer of oxides formed on some metals at elevated tempera-
tures in a salt solution.
See: Reducing
Oxidizing
Electrolytic
14-64
-------
DRAFT
Sand Castinc
1. The principal ingredient used to form molds.
2. A physical part made from this process.
Sand Filtration
A process of filtering wastewater through sand. The wastewater is
trickled over the bed of sand when air and bacteria decompose the
wastes. The clean water flows out through drains in the bottom of
the bed. The sludge accumulating at the surface must be removed from
the bed periodically.
Sand Molding
Sand forms the cavity (or cavities) of the shape to be cast.
Sanitary Water
The supply of water used for sewage transport and the continuation of
such effluents to disposal.
5anit_arv §ewe_£
Pipes and conveyances that principally carry wastewater to a treatment
plant.
Sawing
Using a toothed blade or disc to sever parts or cut contours.
1. Circular Sawing - Using a circular saw fed
into the work by motion of either the work
piece or the blade.
2. Power Band Sawing - Using a long, multiple-
tooth continuous band resulting in a uniform
cutting action as the work piece is fed into
the saw.
3. Power Hack Sawing - Sawing in which a recipro-
cating saw blade is fed into the workpiece.
-------
DRAFT
Screening
1. A process of using a device with openings,
generally of uniform size, to retain or re-
move suspended or floating solids in flowing
water or wastewater and to prevent them from
entering an intake or passing a given point
in a conduit. The screening element may con-
sist of parallel bars, rods wires, grating,
wire mesh or perforated plate, and the open-
ings may be of any shape, although they are
usually circular or rectangular.
2. A device used to segregate granular material
such as sand, crushed rock and soil into
various sizes.
Scrubber Liquor
The liquid in which dust and fumes are captured in a wet scrubber.
Seaming
Joining sheet metal parts by interlocking bends.
Secondary Settling
Effluent from some prior treatment process flows for the purpose of
removing settleable solids.
Secondary Treatment
The treatment of wastewater by biological methods after primary treat-
ment by sedimentation.
Sedimentation
The process of subsidence and deposition of suspended matter carried
by water, wastewater or other liquids, by gravity. It is usually
accomplished by reducing the velocity of the liquid below the point
at which it can transport the suspended material. Also called settling,
Semi-Conductor Manufacturing Processes
See: Alloy Process
Diffusion Process
Sintering
14-66
-------
DRAFT
§ettleabl£ Solids
That matter in wastewater which will not stay in suspension during a
preselected settling period, such as one hour, but either settles to
the bottom or floats to the top.
Settling Ponds
A large shallow body of water into which industrial wastewaters are
discharged. Suspended solids settle from the wastewaters due to the
large retention time of water in the pond.
Shaping^
Using single point tools fixed to a ram r - ',-pTOcated in a linear motion
past the work.
1, Form Shaping - Shaping with a tool ground to
provide a specified shape.
2. Contour Shaping - Shaping of an irregular
surface, usually with the aid of a tracing
Shaving
Internal Shaping - Shaping of internal forms
such as keyways and guides.
As a finishing operation, the accurate removal
of a thin layer by drawing a cutter in
straight line motion across the work surfaces.
Trimming parts IiKe stampings, forcings and
tubes to remove uneven sheared edges or tc
improve accuracy.
Shearing
Process of placing metal between adjacent sharp edges and stressing to
make it shear at the point where the blades meet in the center of the
metal.
1 A C1
-------
DRAFT
Shell Molding
Forming a mold from thermosetting resin-bonded sand mixtures brought
in contact with preheated (300 to 500 degrees F) metal patterns, re-
sulting in a firm shell with a cavity corresponding to the outline
of the pattern. Also called "Croning process".
Shipping
Transporting.
Shot Peening
Dry abrasive cleaning of metal surfaces by impacting the surfaces with
high velocity steel shot.
Shotting
The production of small spherical particles of metal by pouring molten
metal in finely divided streams. Solidified spherical particles are
formed during the descent and are cooled in a tank of water.
Shredding
(Cutting or Stock Removal) Material cut, torn or broken up into small
parts.
SIC - Standard Industrial Classification
Defines industries in accordance with the con>positiou -*riu s-4 ruc^ui e of
the economy and covers the entire field of economic activity.
Silica
-'3102_) Dioxide c-f ^ilicor. which occurs in ci^:; t:tllin« forr-. as y.-^rtr ,-
cristohalite, tridymite. Used in its pure form for high-grade re-
fractories and high temperature insulators and in impure form (i.e.
sand) in silica bricks.
Siliconizing
Diffusing silicon into solid metal, usually steel, at an elevated temp-
erature for the purposes of case hardening thereby providing a corro-
sion and wear-resistant surface.
14-68
-------
DRAFT
Sintered
(Metallurgical) The sintered condition results from a heating of
pressed powdered materials for specified times at elevated tempera-
ture. Improved strength and other benefits result, but generally
machinability is decreased.
Sintering
(Seni-conductor Manufacturing Process) A process where powdered metal
is pulverized, molded and heated to a point before melting to form a
consistent nonvaporous vacuum-tight piece. Photo conductive cells are
made by this process.
Sizing
1. Secondary forming or squeezing ope "tions, required
to square up, set down, flatten or ^ .herwise correct
surfaces, to produce specified dimensions and
tolerances. See restriking.
2. Sorae burnishing, broaching, drawing and shaving
operations ai"e also called sizing,
3. A finishing operation for correcting ovality in
tubing.
4. Fovd net. Final pr~rr~-ing of a sintered compact.
Skimming
Removal of flea tine matter,
§la_g_
Tht material formed by fusion of constituents of a ch;..1:70 or by t
-------
DRAFT
Slurry
A watery suspension of solid materials.
Slush Molding
Similar to rotational molding of plastics, except the shells are
not fitted with closures.
Smelting
Thermal processing wherein chemical reactions take place to produce
liquid metal from a beneficiated ore.
Snagging
Heavy stock removal of superfluous material from a work piace by using
a portable or swing grinder mounted with a coarse grain abrasive wheel.
Soldering
Similar to brazing with the filler metal having a melting temperature
range below an arbitrary value, generally 800 degrees F. Soft sol-
ders are usually lead-tin alloys.
Solids
(Plant Waste) Residue material that has been completely dewatered,
Solute
A dissolved substance.
Solution
Homogeneous mixture of two or more components such as a liquid or a
solid in a liquid.
Solution
(Crystal Growing Process) The solution technique is accomplished by
introducing a seed into a saturated solution and by slowly lowering
the temperature to allow the nutrients to grow onto a seed of the same
solution.
14-70
-------
DRAFT
Solution Treated
(Metallurgical) A process by which it is possible to dissolve micro-
constituents by taking certain alloys to an elevated temperature and
then keeping them in solution after quenching. (Often a solution
treatment is followed by a precipitation or aging treatment to improve
the mechanical properties. Most high temperature alloys which are
solution treated and aged machine better in the solution treated state
just before they are aged.)
Solvent
A liquid used to dissolve materials. In dilute solutions the com-
ponent present in large excess is called the solvent and the dissolved
substance is called the solute.
Solvent Cleaning
Removal of oxides, soils, oils, fats, waxes, greases, etc. by sol-
vents .
Specific Conductance
The property of a solution which allows an electric current to flow
when a potential difference is applied. See electrical conductivity.
Spectrophotometry
A method of analyzing a wastewater sample by means of the spectra
emitted by its constituents under exposure to light.
14-71
-------
DRAFT
Spinning
Shaping of seamless hollow cylindrical sheet metal parts by the com-
bined forces of rotation and pressure.
Spotfacing
Using a rotary, hole piloted end facing tool to produce a flat sur-
face normal to the axis of rotation of the tool on or slightly below
the work piece surface.
Sputtering
A method of obtaining thin films of metal on metallic and non-metallic
surfaces. The surface to be coated is bombarded with positive ions in
a gas discharge tube, which is evacuated to a low pressure.
Squeezing
The process of reducing the size of a piece of heated material so
that it is smaller but more compressed than it was before.
14-72
-------
DRAFT
Stainless Steels
Steels which have good or excellent corrosion resistance. (One of the
common grades contains 18% chromium and 8% nickel. There are three
broad classes of stainless steels - ferritic, austenitic, and marten-
sitic. These various classes are produced through the use of various
alloying elements in differing quantities.
Staking
Fastening two parts together permanently by recessing one part within
the other and then causing plastic flow at the joint.
Stamping
A general term covering almost all press operations. It includes
blanking, shearing, hot or cold forming, drawing, bending and coining.
Standard of Performance
The term means any restriction established by the Administrator pur-
suant to section 306 of the Act on quantities, rates and concentra-
tions of chemical, physical, biological and other constituents which
are or may be discharged from new sources into navigable waters, the
waters of the contiguous zone or the ocean.
Storm Water Lake
Reservoir for storage of storm water runoff collected from plant site;
also, auxiliary source of process water.
Stress Relieved
The heat treatment used to relieve the internal stresses induced by
forming or heat treating operations. (It consists of heating a part
uniformly, followed by cooling slow enough so as not to reintroduce
stresses. To obtain low stress levels in steels and cast irons,
temperatures as high as 1250 degrees F may be required.)
A_T1
-------
DRAFT
Strike
1. noun - a thin coating of metal (usually less than
0.0001 inch in thickness) to be followed by other
coatings.
2. noun - a solution used to deposit a strike.
3. verb - a plate for a short time, usually at a high
initial current density.
Stripping
The term used to describe the removal of an ingot from the mold. It
also refers to the removal of coatings from metal.
Structural Steels
Steels covering a wide range of strengths and used for structural pur-
poses. These steels are sometimes called high strength steels or con-
structional steels.
Subcategory
A segment of a point source category for which specific effluent
limitations have been established.
Substrates
Thin coatings (as of hardened gelatin) on the support of a photographic
film or plate to facilitate the adhesion of the sensitive emulsion.
Surface Waters
Any visible stream or body of water.
Surfactants
Surface active chemicals which tend to lower the surface tension
between liquids, such as between acid and water.
A sudden rise to an excessive value, such as flow, pressure, tempera-
ture.
Swaging
Forming a taper or a reduction on metal products such as rod and tub-
ing by forging, squeezing or hammering.
14-74
-------
DRAFT
Tank
A receptacle for holding transporting or storing liquids.
Tapping
Producing internal threads with a cylindrical cutting tool having two
or more peripheral cutting elements shaped to cut threads of the
desired size and form. By a combination of rotary and axial motion,
the leading end of the tap cuts the thread while the tap is supported
mainly by the thread it produces.
Tempering
Reheating a quench-hardened or normalized ferrous alloy to a tempera-
ture below the transformation range and then cooling at any rate
desired.
Testing
An examination observation or evaluation to determine that article
under inspection is in accordance with required specifications.
Thermoforming
(Vacuum, Pressure, Drape, Plug Assist, Matched Mold) Thermoforming
is a technique in which thermoplastic sheet is heated until it is soft
and then formed or shaped into a mold by means of low pressure pro-
cesses.
Thermoplastic
A classification of plastics that become soft and pliable when heated.
Thermosetting
A classification of plastics that become permanently hard and rigid
when heated or cured.
Thickener
A device or system wherein the solid contents of slurries or suspen-
sions are increased by gravity settling and mechanical separation of
the phases, or by flotation and mechanical separation of the phases.
Thickening
(Sludge Dewatering) Thickening or concentration is the process of
removing water from sludge after its initial separation from waste-
water. The basic objective of thickening is to reduce the volume of
liquid sludge to be handled in subsequent sludge disposal processes.
-------
DRAFT
Threading
Producing external threads on a cylindrical surface.
1. Die Threading - A process for cutting external
threads on cylindrical or tapered surfaces by
the use of solid or self-opening dies.
2. Single-Point Threading - Turning threads on a
lathe.
3. Thread Grinding - See definition under grinding.
4. Thread Milling - A method of cutting screw
threads with a milling cutter.
Titration
1. A method of measuring acidity or alkalinity.
2. The determination of a constituent in a known
volume of solution by the measured addition of
a solution of known strength to completion of
the reaction as signaled by observation of an
end point.
Titrimetric; Iodine-lodate
A method of measuring sulfide by measuring the amount of iodine that
will react with sulfide under acidic conditions.
Total Organic Carbon _(TOC_)_
TOG is a measure of the amount of carbon in a sample originating from
organic matter only. The test is run by burning the sample and measur-
ing the C02_ produced.
Tool Steels
Steels used to make cutting tools and dies. (Many of these steels
have considerable quantities of alloying elements such as chromium,
carbon, tungsten, molybdenum and other elements. These form hard
carbides which provide good wearing qualities but at the same time
decrease machinability. Tool steels in the trade are classified for
the most part by their applications, such as hot work die, cold work
die, high speed, shock resisting, mold and special purpose steels.)
14-76
-------
DRAFT
Total Chromium
Total chromium (CrT) is the sum of chromium in all valences.
Total Cyanide
The total content of cyanide expressed as the radical CN-, or alkali
cyanide whether present as simple or complex ions. The sum of both
the combined and free cyanide content of a plating solution. In
analytical terminology, total cyanide is the sum of cyanide amenable
to oxidation by chlorine and that which is not according to standard
analytical methods.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
The total amount of dissolved solid materials present in an aqueous
solution.
Total Metal
Sum of the metal content in both soluble and insoluble form.
Total Solids
The sum of dissolved and undissolved constituents in water or waste-
water, usually stated in milligrams per liter.
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Solids found in wastewater or in the stream, which in most cases can
be removed by filtration. The origin of suspended matter may be
man-made or of natural sources, such as silt from erosion.
Total Volatile Solids
Volatile residue present in wastewater.
Toxic Pollutants
A pollutant or combination of pollutants including disease causing
agents, which after discharge and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation
or assimilation into any organism either directly or indirectly cause
death, disease, cancer, genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions
(including malfunctions in reproduction), and physical deformations in
such organisms and their offspring.
-------
Transfer Molding
A method of molding thermosetting materials, in which the plastic is
first softened by heat and pressure in a transfer chamber, then forced
through high pressure through suitable sprues, runners and gates into
closed mold for final curing.
Trepanning
Cutting with a boring tool so designed as to leave an unmachined core
when the operation is completed.
Trickling Filters
A filter consisting of an artificial bed of coarse material, such as
broken stone, clinkers, slate, slats, or brush, over which an effluent
is distributed and applied in drops, films, or spray, from troughs,
drippers, moving distributors, or fixed nozzles, and through which it
trickles to the underdrains giving opportunity for the formation of
zoogleal slimes which clarify and oxidize the effluent.
Tumbling
An operation where the work, usually castings or forgings, is rotated
in a barrel with metal slugs or abrasives to remove sand, scale or
fins. It may be done dry or with aqueous solution.
Turbidimeter
An instrument for measurement of turbidity in which a standard suspen-
sion is usually used for reference.
Turbidity
1. A condition in water or wastewater caused by the
presence of suspended matter, resulting in the
scattering and absorption of light rays.
2. A measure of fine suspended matter in liquids.
3. An analytical quantity usually reported in arbi-
trary turbidity units determined by measurements
of light diffraction.
14-78
-------
DRAFT
Turning
Generating cylindrical forms by removing metal with a single-point
cutting tool moving parallel to the axis of rotation of the work.
1. Single-Point Turning - Using a tool with one
cutting edge.
2. Face Turning - Turning a surface perpendicular
to the axis of the workpiece.
3. Form Turning - Using a tool with a special shape.
4. Turning Cutoff - Severing the work piece with a
special lathe tool.
5. Box Tool Turning - Turning the end of work piece
with one or more cutters mounted in a boxlike
frame, primarily for finish cuts.
Ultrafiltration
Filtration of colloids by a semipermeable membrane.
Ultrasonic Cleaning
iTTinersion cleaning aided by ultrasonic waves which cause microagitatio,
Ultrasonic Machining
Material removal by means of an ultrasonic-vibrating tool usually work
ing in an abrasive slurry in close contact with a work piece or having
diamond or carbide cutting particles on its end.
Unit Operation
A single, discrete process as part of an overall sequence, e.g., preci
pitation, settling and filtration.
Vacuum Deposition
Condensation of thin metal coatings on the cool surface of work in a
vacuum.
-------
Vacuum Evaporization
A method of coating articles by melting and vaporizing the coating
material on an electrically heated conductor in a chamber from
which air has been exhausted. The process is only used to produce
a decorative effect. Gold, silver, copper and aluminum have been
used.
Vacuum Filtration
(Sludge Dewatering) Sludge passes over drum with filter medium and
vacuum is applied to the inside of the drum compartments. As the
drum rotates sludge accumulates on the filter surface and the vacuum
removes water.
Vacuum Metalizing
This is a vapor-deposited coating. Metal vapor is flash heated in
a high-vacuum chamber containing the parts to be coated and the vapor
condenses on all exposed surfaces.
Vapor Degreasing
Degreasing work in vapor over a boiling liquid solvent, the vapor
being considerably heavier than air. At least one constituent of the
soil must be soluble in the solvent.
Vapor Plating
Deposition of a metal or compound upon a heated surface by reduction
or decomposition of a volatile compound at a temperature below the
melting points of the deposit and the basis material. The reduction
is usually accomplished by a gaseous reducing agent such as hydrogen.
The decomposition process may involve thermal dissociation or reaction
with the basis material. Occasionally used to designate deposition on
cold surfaces by vacuum evaporation — see vacuum deposition.
Volume Method
A standard method of measuring settleable solids in an aqueous solution,
Waste Discharged
The amount (usually expressed as weight) of some residual substance
which is suspended or dissolved in the plant effluent.
14-80
-------
Wastewater Constituents
Those materials which are carried by or dissolved in a water stream
for disposal.
Wastewater
Any water that has been released from the purpose for which it was in-
tended to be used,
Water Reci r c u 1 ation o_£ Recycling
The volume of water already used for some purpose in the plant which
is returned with or without treatment to be used again in the same or
another process *
Water Use
The total volume of water applied to various uses in the plant. It
is the sum of water recirculation and water withdrawal.
Water Withdrawal o_£ Intake
The volume of fresh water removed from a surface or underground water
source by plant facilities or obtained from some source external to
the plant.
Web_ I mp r eg nation
(Fluster Process) Process of penetrating gaps or holes in a piece
with coating compounds. This is done by impregnation of fibrous webs
with film forming material. This can be done to things like woven
fabrics, glass and paper.
Joining two or more pieces of material by applying
heat, pressure or both, with or without filler
material, to produce a localised union through
fusion or recrystallization across the interface.
The thickness of the filler material is much
greater than the capillary dimensions encountered
in brazing.
May also be extended to include brazing.
14-81
-------
DRAFT
Wet Air Oxidation
(Sludge Disposal) This process oxidizes the sludge in the liquid
phase without mechanical dewatering. High-pressure high-temperature
air is brought into contact with the waste material in a pressurized
reactor. Oxidation occurs at 300 to 500 degrees F and from several
hundred to 3,000 psig.
Wet Scrubbing
A unit in which dust and fumes are removed from a gas stream to a
liquid. Gas-liquid contact is promoted by jets, sprays, bubble cham-
bers, etc.
Wheatstone Bridge
(Resistance Bridge) A method of measuring resistance. A null-type
resistance-measuring circuit in which resistance is measured by direct
comparison with a standard resistance.
Work Piece
The item to be processed.
Wrought
Condition of a material which has been worked mechanically as in forg-
ing, rolling, drawing, etc.
14-82
-------
DRAFT
METRIC UNITS
CONVERSION TABLE
MULTIPLY (ENGLISH UNITS)
ENGLISH UNIT
acre
acre-feet
British Thermal Unit
British Thermal Unit/
cubic foot
British Thermal Unit/
pound
cubic feet/ninute
cubic feet/second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Fahrenheit
feet
gallon
gallcr./nir.ute
gallon,'ten
horsepower
inches
inches of ~ercury
rr.illicr. : aliens/day
mile
pounds
pound/square inch (gauge)
pounds/tor.
square feet
square inches
tens (short)
yard
ABBREVIATION
ac
ac ft
BTU
BTU/cu ft
BTU/lb
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
F
ft
gal
gpm
gal/t
hp
in
in Hg
mgd
mi
Ib
psig
Ib/t
sq ft
»q in
t
y
CONVERSION
0.405
1233.5
0.252
9.00
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555 ( F-32) *
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
4.17
0.7457
2.54
0.0334?
3,785
1.609
0.454
(0.06085 psiq+1}*
0.501
0.0929
6.452
0.907
0.9144
ABBREVIATION
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg cal/
cu in
kg cal/kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
C
m
1
I/sec
1/kkg
kw
cm
a tin
cu in/day
km
kg
a tin
kg/kkg
sq m
sq cm
kkg
m
TO OBTAIN (METRIC UN]
METRIC UNIT
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram - calories
kilogram calorie/
cubic meter
kilogram calories/
kilogram
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
liters/second
liter/metric ton
kilowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
cubic meters/day
kilometer
ki]ograms
atmospheres(absolute)
kilograms/metric ton
square meters
square centimeters
metric tons (1000 kiloc
meters
*Actual conversion, not a multiplier
U-?3
-------
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCV (A-107)
WASHINGTON, D.C. 204*6
POSTAGt AND FEfS FAIL'.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCv
EPA-33L
------- |