DRAFT
Development Document for
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards
for the
AUTO
AND
OTHER LAUNDRIES
Point Source Category
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
APRIL 1974
-------
DRAFT
Publication Notice 2
This is a development document for proposed effluent _limitations 7
guidelines and new source performance standards. As such, this 8
report is subject to changes resulting from comments ^received during 9
the period of public comments on the proposed regulations. This 10
document in its final form will be published at the time the
regulations jfpr this industry are promulgated. 11
This report has been entered into a computer to facilitate 13
processing, print outs, arid revisions. The various "machine 15
commands" necessary to accomplish these steps are, therefore, present 16
in this draft version. For example, line numbers are shown in the 17
right margin, percent and dollar symbols represent underlining 18
instructions, and a dash under individual letters ^s a reference 19
point for making corrections. The commands will not appear in the 20
final report.
R.eaders who desire clarification or amplification of the material 22
presented while making J^heir reviews are invited to contact: 23
(1) Walter L. Muller; (2) Donald E. Banning 27
Mail: National Field Investigations Center 28
5555 Ridge Avenue 29
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 30
Phone: (1) 513-684-4208; (2) 513-684-4371 31
of commercial products does not constitute endorsement by 35
the U.S. Government. 36
-------
DRAFT
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
FOR
PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
AND
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FOR
AUTO AND OTHER LAUNDRIES
A. D. Sidio
Director
!."" f' ••-•:-: Amenta! Protection
April 1974
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL
National Field Investigations Center - Cincinnati
5555 Ridge Avenue
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
DRAFT
Abstract 3
This document presents the findings of an in-house study of auto 7
and other laundries point sources by the National Field Investi-
gations Center-Cincinnati, Environmental Protection Agency for _the 9
purpose of developing effluent limitations guidelines and Federal 10
standards of performance for the industry, to implement Sections _3_04 11
and 306 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended _(33 12
U.S.C. 1251, 1314 and 1316, 86 Stat. 816 et. seq.) (the "ACT").
Effluent limitations guidelines contained herein set forth the 14
djegree of effluent reduction attainable through the application of 15
_the best practicable control technology currently available and the 16
d_egree of effluent reduction attainable through the application of 17
the best available technology economically achievable which must be 18
achieved by existing point sources by July 1, 1977, and July 1, 1983, 19
respectively. The standards of performance for new sources contained 21
herein set forth _the degree of effluent reduction which is achievable 22
through the application of the best available demonstrated control 23
technology, processes, operating methods, or other alternatives. 24
^upportive data and rationale for development of the proposed 26
Affluent limitations guidelines and standards of performance are 27
Contained in this report. 28
-------
DRAFT
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I Conclusions 1-1
II Recommendations II-l
III Introduction III-l
Purpose and Authority III-l
Summary of Methods Used for Guideline
Development and Standards of Performance III-2
General Description of Industries III-5
General Background III-5
IV Industry Categorization IV-1
Rationale for Subcategorization IV-1
Industrial Laundries IV-2
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and
Commercial), and Diaper Services IV-3
Auto Wash Establishments IV-6
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning IV-7
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning
Facilities and Laundry and Garment Services
Not Elsewhere Classified IV-8
iii
-------
DRAFT
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning IV-9
V Waste Characterization V-l
Industrial Laundries V-l
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and
Commercial) and Diaper Services V-6
Auto Washes V-9
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning V-15
Coin-operated Laundries and Laundry and
Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified V-15
Dry Cleaning Other Than Rugs V-18
VI Pollutant Parameters VI-1
Suspended Solids VI-1
Dissolved Solids VI-3
Turbidity VI-4
BOD(5) VI-4
COD VI-5
TOC VI-5
pH VI-6
Alkalinity VI-6
Oil and Grease VI-7
MBAS VI-7
Heavy Metals VI-7
VII Control and Treatment Technology VII-1
Historical Treatment VII-1
Industrial Laundries VII-2
iv
-------
DRAFT
Flotation-Diatomaceous Earth Filter System VII-3
Dual System VII-7
Linen Laundries, Power Laundries (Family
and Commercial) and Diaper Services VII-7
Modified Linen Systems VII-7
Flotation-Diatomaceous Earth Filter System VII-7
Flotation-Sand Filter System VII-9
Oxidation-Charcoal Filter System VII-9
Centrifugal Filter-Aerobic Digestion System VII-10
Car Washes VII-10
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning VII-13
Coin-operated Laundries Facilities and Dry
Cleaning Facilities, and Laundry and Garment
Services, Not Elsewhere Classified VII-14
Coagulation with Alum-Sand Filtration-
Carbon Adsorption VII-14
Precoating and Filtration Through
Diatomaceous Earth VII-16
Precoating With Diatomaceous Earth and
Cationic Surfactant Flocculation VII-21
Vacuum Diatomite Filter VII-22
Activated Carbon-Polyelectrolitic System VII-22
Flotation Clarification VII-25
General VII-26
Micro-straining VII-26
Lint Screens VII-26
Reverse Osmosis VII-28
-------
DRAFT
Ozonization VII-28
Ultrasonic Cleaning VII-28
Dry Cleaners VII-30
VIII Cost, Energy, and Non-Water Quality Aspect VIII-1
IX Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
Effluent Guidelines and Limitations IX-1
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources IX-2
Identification of BPCTCA IX-3
Industrial Laundries IX-3
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family
and Commercial) and Diaper Services IX-5
Auto Wash Establishments IX-5
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning IX-5
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning
Facilities and Laundry and Garment Services
Not Elsewhere Classified IX-6
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning IX-6
Loadings Summary IX-6
X Best Available Technology Economically Achievable X-l
Introduction X-l
Industrial Laundries X-l
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family
and Commercial) and Diaper Services X-2
Auto Wash Establishments X-2
Carpet and Upholstering Cleaning X-2
Coin-operated Laundries a.nd Dry Cleaning
vi
-------
DRAFT
Facilities and Laundry and Garment Services
Not Elsewhere Classified X-3
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning X-3
XI New Source Performance Standards and
Pretreatment Standards XI-1
Introduction XI-1
Industrial Laundries XI-2
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and
Commerical), and Diaper Service XI-2
Auto Wash Establishments XI-3
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning XI-3
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning
Facilities and Laundry and Garment Services,
Not Elsewhere Classified XI-4
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning XI-A
XII Acknowledgments and Contacts XII-1
XIII References XIII-1
XIV Glossary XIV-1
Abbreviations XIV-7
Conversion Table XIV-8
vii
-------
DRAFT
Tables
Table Section Page
1 Best Practicable Control Technology II 4
2 Economic Survey of Laundry Industry III 8
3 Typical Laundering Schedule for Shop Towels IV 4
4 Typical Laundering Schedule for Kitchen
Towels IV 5
5 General Industry Waste Characterization V 2
6 Typical Industrial Laundry Waste V 4
7 Industrial Laundry Wastewater Loadings V 7
8 Pollutant Concentration in Wastewater from
a Typical Linen Supply Laundry V 8
9 Typical Loadings in Wastewater From Tunnel-
type Auto Washes V 11
10 Typical Pollutant Concentrations in Waste-
water From Self-service Auto Wash V 12
11 Pollutant Concentration in Wastewater
from a Typical Tunnel Type Auto Wash V 13
12 Pollutant Concentration in Wastewater
from a Typical Laundromat V 17
13 Control Parameters VI 2
14 Waste Treatment Efficiences For Various
Parameters in Industrial Laundry Waste
Treatment VII 4
15 Average Contaminant Concentration
Reductions Achieved by Industrial Laundry
Treatment for Flotation-DE-System VII 5
16 Wastewater Quality Ranges For Industrial
Laundry Treatment Systems for Flotation-
DE-System VII 6
viii
-------
DRAFT
17 Linen Laundry Wastewater Treatment Effluent
Quality Data VII 8
18 Reduction of Pollutants by the Oxidation -
Charcoal Filter System VII 11
19 Reduction of Pollutants by the Centrifugal-
Filter-Aerobic Digestion System VII 12
20 Performance of CAAAC System in the Treat-
ing of Laundromat Wastewater VII 15
21 Efficiency of CASFAAC System in Reducing
BOD and COD Content of Laundromat WastewaterVII 17
22 Summary of pH values Achieved by
CASFAAC System in Treating Laundromat
Wastewater VII 18
23 Summary of Values for Total Dissolved
Solids Achieved by CASFAAC System in
Treating Laundromat Wastewater VII 19
24 Pollutant Reduction by Diatomaceous Earth
Filter System in Treating Laundromat
Wastewater VII 20
25 Coin-operated Laundry Pollutant Reduction
Efficiency of DEFCSF System in Treating
Laundromat Wastewater. VII 23
26 Operating Results for Vacuum Diatomite
Filter to Treat Laundromat Wastewater VII 24
27 Laundromat Wastewater Reductions By
Flotation-Clarification VII 27
28 Typical Rejection Levels by Reverse Osmosis
Treatment of Domestic Sewage VII 29
29 Summary of Various Wastewater Treatment
Systems VII 31
30 BPCT Treatment Costs (Sept. 73)
Self-Service Auto Wash (1,500 autos/month) VIII 4
31 BPCT Treatment Costs (Sept. 73)
Automatic Car Wash (7,000 autos/month) VIII 5
ix
-------
DRAFT
32 Cost of BPCTCA, Industrial Laundries,
90,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 8
33. Cost of BPCTCA, Industrial Laundries,
25,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 9
34 Cost of BPCTCA, Linen Supply, Power
Laundries and Diaper Services
90,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 13
35 Cost of BPCTCA, Linen Supply, Power
Laundries, and Diaper Services
25,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 14
36 Incremental Costs of BATEA, Linen
Supply, Power Laundries and Diaper Services
90,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 15
37 Incremental Costs of BATEA, Linen Supply
Power Laundries and Diaper Services
25,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 16
38 Consultants' Estimate of Residual Value
in Laundry Wastewater. VIII 17
39 Cost of NSPS, Linen Supply, Power
Laundries and Diaper Services
90,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 18
40 Cost of NSPS, Linen Supply, Power and
Diaper Services
25,000 Ib/Week Plant VIII 19
41 Cost of BPCTCA, Coin-Operated Laundry
25 Machine Installation VIII 22
42
43
Incremental Cost of BATEA, Coin-Operated
Laundry, 25 Machine Installation
VIII
Total Cost of NSPS, Coin-Operated Laundry
25 Machine Installation VIII
24
25
44 Estimated Costs of BPCTCA, Carpet and
Upholstery Cleaning Facility
45 Best Practical Control Technology
Currently Available (BPCTCA)
Concentrations
VIII
28
-------
DRAFT
46 Best Practical Control Technology
Currently Available (BPCTCA), Loadings IX
Figures
Figure Section Page
1 Laundry Wastewater Distribution System V 3
2 Typical Carwash Wastewater Reclamation V 10
System
3 Laundromat Wastewater Treatment System V 16
xi
-------
-------
DRAFT
2
SECTION I 8
Conclusions 10
The auto and other laundries point ^ource category has been 14
subcategorized, for the purposes of establishing effluent limitations 15
guidelines and standard of performance as follows:
Subcategory 1 18
Industrial Laundries (SIC No. 7218) 20
Subcategory 2 22
Linen Supply (SIC No. 7213) 25
Power Laundries, Family and Commercial (SIC No. 7211) 27
Diaper Service (SIC No. 7214) 29
Subcategory 3 32
Auto Wash Establishments (SIC No. 7542) 34
Subcategory 4 36
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning (SIC no. 7217) 38
Subcategory 5 40
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning (SIC No. 7215) 43
Laundry and Garment Service Not Elsewhere Classified 44
(SIC No. 7219) 45
Subcategory 6 48
Dry Cleaning Plants, except Rug Cleaning (SIC No. 7216) 50
Factors such as age, size of laundry, process employed, wastewater 53
constituents and wastewater control technologies do not justify 54
further Categorization. 55
1-1
-------
DRAFT
The laundries are listed in descending order of the strength of 57
the wastewater they discharge. Presently 90.1% of all laundries are 58
connected to municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and do not 59
treat their effluent before discharge.
Approximately 30% of existing car washes r_ecycle their 62
wastewater. The rest discharge it untreated _into a municipal sewer 64
system.
Dry cleaning plants, except those that clean rugs, discharge 66
little or no process wastewater. 67
1-2
-------
DRAFT
SECTION II
Recommendations 7
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPCTCA) 10
Recommended limitations on pollutants in any process wastewater 14
discharged into navigable waters are presented in Table 1 for: 15
Subcategory 1 - industrial laundries; Subcategory 2 - power Laundries 16
(family and commercial), linen supply, and diaper service; and 17
Subcategory 5 - coin-operated laundries, dry cleaning ^facilities, and 18
laundry and garment services not elsewhere classified. The three 20
remaining subcategories either do not discharge into navigable waters 21
or can, but using BPCTCA, remove all of the japllutants before so 22
discharging their effluent. These subcategories are: 3 - auto wash 23
establishments; 4 - carpet and upholstery cleaning facilities; and 6 24
- dry cleaning plants (except rug cleaners). 25
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BATEA) 27
The recommended limitations on pollutants in any process waste- 29
water discharged into navigable waters by plants in Subcategory 1 ^re 31
the same as those presented in Table 1. By using BATEA, 32
Subcategories 2 and 5 shall remove all the pollutants from any 33
effluent so discharged, subcategories 3, 4, and 6 are no discharge of
process wastewaters.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
bformation in this report and are subject to char-°
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
II-l
-------
DRAFT
New Source Performance Standards and Pretreatment Standards 35
Performance Standards 37
New sources in the industry laundry subcategory should meet the 39
limitations outlined as best practicable control technology currently 40
available as presented in Table 1. New sources in the other five 4]
subcategories shall remove all pollutants listed in Table 1 from 42
their process wastewater before discharging it into navigable waters. 43
Pretreatment Standards 45
New sources that will discharge their process wastewater into a 48
municipal sewer system shall treat it in the following manner before 49
doing so:
^ubcategories 1 and 2; reduce all incompatible pollutants to or 5]
below the levels shown in Table 1. 52
jjubcategory 3; pass the wastewater through a detention jsump or 55
holding basin to settle out heavy solids.
j5ubcategories 4 and 5; filter the wastewater through a lint 57
jscreen. 58
jsubcategory 6; since little or no wastewater is generated, no 6]
pretreatment is required.
Pretreatment by Existing Sources 63
The wastewater from plants in Subcategories 1 and 2 that contains 66
incompatible pollutants referred to in 40 CFR, Part 128 jshall be 67
given BPCTCA treatment before being discharged into J^he treatment 68
works. No materials prohibited in 40 CFR, Part 128.13 shall be 69
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based
n~2 information in this report and aire subject to c
upon comments received and further internal
jeview by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
introduced into such a system, ^ubcategories 3, 4, and 6 are no 70
discharge of process wastewaters.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
information in this report and are subject to chancrv
bated upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
II-3
-------
DRAFT
H
^
H
^1
OC
o
o
p
JS
o
CU
H
*
rH CO
O 0)
JH 00
4-1 Cfl
a M
O CU
,
& CO
CO P
0 1
•H O
4-1 CO
Cfl
M
PH
) i
CO
0)
P3
00
r^ C
t 1 t. J
O C
00 cfl
cu cu
4-1 rH
cfl U
0
,0 >%
3 K
CO P
X)
m co
* o
V) * --.
o * oo
00 pi, A!
CU O
4-1 1 XI
cfl p cfl
O -H O
r& O rH
3 a\
U3 ,O
rH
•vT
^
^
O 4J
60 CU
CU Ci<
4-1 JH
cfl cfl
0 U
J3
CO
CO
£*"»
^J
O
00
cu o
4J 4J
cfl 3
o
3
CO
CN
l_i At W
M TS QA.
0 * ,P Ai
00* rH ^-
CU {3 ~*^ 00
4J CU «P Ai
CO P rH
a -H M
rP I-J O
CO
rH
•JC
Ml fc.f
1 — i OJ.
O cfl ,0 Ai
00 -H rH \
CU V-i ^^ 0£
4-1 4-1 ,0 Ai
Cfl CO rH
O3 1-1
^Q XI O
3 (3
C/D H
^
cu
4-1
CU
nj
^
cfl
PH
PH
Q
£3
^~
ro
O
O
•
o
m
p —
o
0
•
o
PH
P
PH
P
rH
O
0
0
rH
O
o
0
^— ^
in
N — '
p
O
03
PH
P
M
CU CO
pipipipipipipipi O-H rH
^3 ^3 f^ fC^I '^4 f-* ^3 ^3 PJ r-C^
• CU 4-1 CU
^^^ ^j rH
CN CU * J2
CT* UH r^ CO
CU 1 H
a) pi >
a ^
G u X
CU • 00 H
(H rH CO
pHPHpHPMpHPHpHpM CUCflP, &
PPPPPPPP MHOO O
25!3!z;S3S323S3S3 CU •• -H
Pi in • 4-1
'^/ CN rH O
O cfl CU
rH •. 00 C/3
Cfl CO
00 O C
«CO -rl
O X)
r^ cu co xi
sj- to -H CU
"3 C*
• -«CUM 4J
23irfS3S3S3S3S3S3 -HXI4J3 P
E QJ CO O
•H CO J3 l-i U
rH 3 CU
t^^ ^ 1 ^J
01 >H O cfl M
,£ CU ^ CO
4-1 4-1 CU
cfl g UIH co
Cfl ^ 3 O C3
oo g 4-1
mOOOOOOO CUCUrH rH
OtHrHrHrHrHrHrH OgOOO 3
OXXXXXIXX! g3cfl> a
OmC^JrHCNCNONCSJ 4JrH(H rH
O X3 > > 00 U
CU cfl cfl
cu cu M co •
O 00 ••- CU 00 CO
X Cfl J3 > P 4J
, CU VJ rH CO vH C
oovTin- o ••> c04->
iiiiiil ocflm^ O3
inooooooo ." rH
OrHrHt-HrHrHrHrH Xl^3 « m PO
OXXXXXXX rHrHT3 • -HP.
OincNr-HCNCNCTiCN 3 COO
O ,J3 O rH X) CU O
CO OO « CU CO
0 XI 4J 3 0)
6 » 0) CO CO OO
3 XI (3 O rH CO (H
6 cfl vH rH 3 P fC
•rH O rH 00 O 03
K rH 01 CU -rl O
to a> oo >H 4-i to
B CU 00 cfl cfl -H
00 Cfl >H 4-1 V-l X)
XI >-, Cfl (-1 0) O 4J
PCU rHJ-iCU>23PO
COCO -HCU> •< •% || O II
rHO) p
-------
DRAFT
SECTION III 6
Introduction 8
Purpose and Authority 11
Section 301(b) of Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended 13
(The Act) requires the achievement by not later ^han July 1, 1977, of 14
effluent limitations for point sources, other ^han publicly owned 15
treatment works, which require application of jthe best practicable 16
control technology currently available as defined b_y the 17
administrator pursuant to Section 304(b) of the Act. Section 301(b)
also requires the achievement by not later than July 1, 1983, of 18
effluent limitations for point sources, other than publicly owned 19
treatment works, which are based on the application of the best 20
available technology economically Achievable which will result in 21
reasonable further progress toward the national jjpal of eliminating 22
the discharge of all pollutants, as determined in accordance with 23
regulations issued by the Administrator pursuant to ^Section 304(b) to 24
the Act. jSection 306 of the Act requires the achievement by new 25
sources of a Federal standard of performance providing for the 26
control of the discharge of pollutants which reflects the greatest 27
degree of effluent reduction which the Administrator determines to be 28
achievable through the application of the best available demonstrated 29
control technology processes. Operating methods, or other 30
III-l
-------
DRAF1
alternatives, including, where practicable, a standard permitting no 31
discharge of pollutants. 32
jsection 304(b) of the Act requires the Administrator to publish 34
within one year of enactment of the Act, regulations providing 35
guidelines for effluent limitations setting forth the degree of 36
effluent Deduction attainable through the application of the best 37
practicable Control technology currently available and the degree of 38
effluent reduction attainable through the application of the best 39
available control measures and practices achievable including 40
treatment techniques, processes and procedure innovations, operation 41
methods, and other alternatives. The regulations proposed herein set 42
forth effluent limitations guidelines pursuant to Section 304(b) of 43
the Act for auto and other laundries.
Summary of Methods Used for Development of Effluent 46
Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance 49
The effluent limitations guidelines and standards of performance 51
proposed herein were developed in the following manner. 52
_!_. The point source category was first studied for the purpose 55
of determining whether separate limitations and ^tandards are 56
appropriate for different subcategories within the Category. This 58
included a determination of differences in materials used, product 59
produced, process employed, age, size, wastewater constituents and 60
other factors that would require development of separate limitations
and standards for different segments of the point source category. 61
III-2
-------
DRAFT
2_. The raw waste characteristics for each subcategory were then 63
Identified. This included an analysis of: 65
_(a) the ^source £Low ^nd volume of water used in the process 70
employed and the sources of waste and wastewaters in the plant; 71
_(b) The Constituents _(_including thermal) of all wastewaters, 75
including toxic constituents and other Constituents which result 76
in taste, odor, and color in the water or Aquatic organisms; 77
_(c) The constituents of the waste waters which should be 78
^ubject to effluent limitations guidelines and standards of 81
performance were identified;
_(d) the full range of control and treatment technology. 83
This included: 84
_(1) identification of each distinct wastewater control 86
and _treatment technology, J-ncluding both in-plant and end of 88
process technologies, which are existent or capable of being 89
designed for each subcategory;
(2) the amount of constituents (including thermal) and 91
the chemical, physical and b_iological characteristics of 93
pollutants;
_O) the effluent level resulting from the application 94
of each £f the treatment jind control technologies; 97
_(4) the problems, limitations and reliability of each 100
treatment and control technology and the required implementation 102
time;
III-3
-------
PRAFi
_(5) the non-water quality ^environmental impact, such 107
as the effects of the application of such technologies upon other
_p_ollution problems, including air, solid wastes, noise and 108
radiation;
_(6) the energy requirements of each control and 111
_t_reatment technology; 112
J7) the cost of the application of treatment 116
technologies.
The information, as outlined above, was then evaluated in order 118
to determine what levels of technology constituted the best 119
practicable Control technology currently available, the best 120
available technology economically achievable, and the new source 121
performance standards and pretreatment guidelines, ^n identifying 122
such technologies various factors were considered. These included 123
the total cost of application of technology in relation to jthe 124
effluent reduction benefits to be a.chieved from such application, the 125
age of equipment and facilities involved, the process employed, the
engineering aspects of the application of various types of control 126
_techniques process changes, non-water quality environmental impact 127
(including energy requirements) and other factors. 128
The data on which the above analysis was performed were derived 130
^rom EPA permit applications, EPA sampling and inspections, 131
consultant and industry reports. 132
III-4
-------
DRAFT
General Description of the Industries 134
The industries discussed by this document are the auto and other 136
laundries. It encompasses the following nine Standard Industrial 138
Code Classifications listed with their SIC numbers: 139
SIC 7211 - Power Laundries, Family and Commercial 142
SIC 7213 - Linen Supply 143
SIC 7214 - Diaper Service 144
SIC 7215 - Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning 145
SIC 7216 - Dry Cleaning Plants, Except Rug Cleaning 146
SIC 7217 - Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 147
SIC 7218 - Industrial Laundries 148
SIC 7219 - Laundry and Garment Services, Not Elsewhere 149
Classified 150
SIC 7542 - Auto Wash Establishments 151
The definitions of the plants ^ncluded are contained in the 155
Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972 (the definitions as 156
stated jLn the SIC Manual are included in Section XIV Glossary.) 157
General Background 159
The product of the auto wash establishments, is s_elf-explanatory. 162
The product of the eight remaining categories is a clean fabric. The 163
methods, of obtaining this end, differ greatly depending on what is 164
being cleaned in any given operation or process.
With the exception of dry cleaning plants, the remaining five 167
categories use substantial quantities of process waters. The 168
III-5
-------
DRAFT
effluent from the process varies greatly from _load to load depending 169
on laundering schedule used and the items l^eing washed. 170
The various phases of _the laundry industry can be separated into 173
each of the SIC classifications. E_ut most laundries actually do work 174
in several of the SIC classifications; even _though the company name 175
might tend to indicate only one phase.
I_n general, laundry wastewater in the major cities of America 177
makes up 5 to 10% of the average daily flow of sewage. _It is one of 179
the most objectionable of all wastes, £ontributing anywhere from 10 180
to 20 times as much contamination as the average domestic waste. _It 182
is usually strongly alkaline, highly colored, and contains large
quantities of soap or synthetic detergents, soda ash, grease, dirt 183
and dyes. Laundry wastewater has a biological oxygen demand of two 184
to five times ^hat of domestic sewage. Laundry wastewater can be a 186
severe wastewater treatment problem for a community of any size.
The laundry industry is an essential service industry classified 189
according to Table 2, based on _the 1967 Census of Business Report on 190
Laundries, Cleaning Plants and Related Services, ^ssued by the U. S. 192
Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, Released August 1970. 193
Considerable information has been collected, see References, 195
Section XIII. Additional information has been obtained by visiting 196
and sampling the wastewater from plants that were referred to as 197
being explanatory as to: strength and volume of wastewater; type of 198
III-6
-------
DRAFT
laundry and the pretreatment or the recycling of wastewater. The 199
following laundries were visited: Cintas, Cincinnati, Ohio; Mission
Linen Supply, Santa Barbara, California; the Roscoe Company, Chicago, 200
Illinois; Medical Arts Linen Supply Company, New York, New York; 201
Sterling Laundry, j>_ilver Spring, Maryland. Security Amirkahanian, a 202
rug, drapery and furniture upholstery plant and the Parkway Auto 203
Wash, Inc., both of Cincinnati, Ohio, were also visited.
J5amples were collected but they were not, in all cases, 205
representative of the _p_retreatment and recycle wastewater, because of 206
the failure and/or breakdown of the treatment systems.
III-7
-------
CN
m
>4-l (A
o a)
OJ
^
QJ O
DRAFT
co
00
O
CM
CM
CO
CTi
r-l
0")
OO
r-l
m
o
rH
CM
^
0
m
r--
VD
cn
CM
m
m
rH
vO
-o-
i/i r^ co o
CM CM CM cn
co r- vo
•
m
-a-
•i
iH
VD
in
r-^
•
•vt-
rH
O
0
o
A
&
VD
•t
iH
•
CO
^
TJ
G
H
<4H
O
4-1
ci
cu
0
60
CU
Alteration and
60
c
•H
CO
CO
cu
rl
4J
rj
cu
M
C[}
o
^4
•H
cd
a
cu
fyj
*o
r^
cd
CO
OJ
•H
i-l 60
T3 C
Pi -rl
3 Pi
cd co
t-I 01
rH
o> c_>
o
•H >~,
$> M
^4 P
Ol
CO 13
1 C
14H Cd
rH
01
CO
erers
13
C
3
cd
i— i
i— j
CO
-H
4-1
CO
3
13
Pi
M
^
rH
P,
P4
3
CO
pi
0)
pi
•rl
|J
CO
0)
•H
t-l
'O
f^
3
cfl
i-I
^j
CU
Jj
o
Pn
CO
Pi
CO
rH
60
c
•H
CU
K*-|
Q
T3
c
cfl
60
C
•H
C
cd
0)
rH
C_)
rl
0)
|
4-1
a
at
o
X
CU
*i
CQ
01
•H
rl
T3
Pi
3
cd
•X3
0)
4_J
cd
rl
a)
p-
0
i
C
•H
O
CJ
01
a
•H
^>
V4
Ol
CO
^_l
cu
PX
cd
•rl
P
Repairing Plan
ID
Pi
cd
60
C
•rl
a
cd
cu
rH
u
60
3
III-8
-------
DRAFT
SECTION IV 6
Industry Categorization 8
Rationale For Subcategorization 11
Inhere is a well-established order in the strength of laundry 13
wastewater, with industrial laundry wastewater being the strongest 15
and most varied. Linen supply laundries discharge the next most 16
difficult wastewater to treat followed by that from power laundries, 17
(family and commercial), diaper service activities, auto wash
establishments, Carpet and upholstery cleaning operations, and coin- 18
operated laundries and dry cleaning facilities. Establishments 19
primarily engaged in repairing, altering, or storing clothes for 21
individuals, and those that function as other hand laundries have the 22
least difficult wastewater to treat. !Dry cleaning plants, except rug 23
cleaning, have little or no discharge of process wastewaters. 24
Auto washes are classified by themselves because: (1) 26
Technologically, jLt is easier for them to clean up their effluent 27
than it is for the laundries; _£2) they have an economic incentive to 28
reclaim washwater; _£3) the equipment they need to reclaim and reuse 29
water is available, off the ^helf, from many manufacturers. 30
Carpet and upholstery cleaning is classified separately because, 33
its wastewater is different from other laundries and although Jrhe 34
wastewater generated is similar to that from auto washes, it is much
IV-1
-------
DRAFT
more Dilute and the equipment needed to treat it for reuse is not 36
available.
I)ry cleaning plants (other than rug cleaning) were classed 38
individually because their greatest use of water is for non-contact 39
pooling purposes in solvent recovery stills. 40
Industrial Laundries 42
Industrial laundries are located in highly populated areas and 44
discharge their wastewater Into municipal treatment facilities. They 46
are among the largest laundries covered in these guidelines. for 47
example, a medium size industrial laundry will process between 80,000
- 100,000 pounds of dry wash £er week. Typical industrial laundry 49
waste characteristics and chemical formulas are covered in Section V.
Tables 3 and 4 present typical laundering schedules for shop 51
Bowels and kitchen towels, respectively. ^Schedules for other items 53
would vary slightly.
The first operation or flush on the schedule for Table 3 is 55
merely an initial rinse to remove readily loosened soil. The suds 57
operation of Table 3 emulsifies the oils and greases and loosens all 58
the soil. T_he carryover is merely an extension of the suds operation 59
as _a high percentage of the supplies initially added are still 60
present. Tliis operation takes advantage of that fact by utilizing 61
the remaining cleaning ability of the suds chemicals. The carryover 63
IV-2
-------
DRAFT
is followed by as many as 10 rinses to remove _the used detergent and 64
loosened soil. The shop towels are then dyed and rinsed. On the 66
next break salt is added to set the dye. A, final cold rinse aids in 67
setting the dye and also removing excess dye. The laundered items 68
are then loaded into ^tainless steel tubs, which are rolled into an 70
extractor where excess water is squeezed out. The water drains into 71
the heat reclaimer pit and is used to warm the incoming water. The 72
clean articles are then taken to gas-fired driers where the rest _of 73
the water is evaporated. After this operation, the laundered items 74
are folded and packaged into standard bundles and ^redistributed to 75
the customers.
The many different types of soil, laundry formulations, _and 78
operations (including _the batch type operation of each washing 79
machine) all contribute to Altering contaminant concentrations and 80
wastewater flows. JSach operation presented in Tables 3 and 4 81
discharges such that with ^nly one machine operating, a series of 82
wastewater surges occurs, ^ach unlike the one preceding it in 83
quality. I_t is not practical to subcategorize industrial laundries 84
because individual plants are so variable. 85
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and Commercial), and Diaper 87
Services 88
T?his subcategory is recognized within the _industry as having the 91
second strongest average waste. Operations are similar to those 92
IV-3
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 3*
Typical Laundering Schedule
Washing Operations
Flush
Suds
Carryover
Rinse 1
Rinse 2
Rinse 3
Rinse 4
Rinse 5
Rinse 6
Rinse 7
Rinse 8
Rinse 9
Rinse 10
Dye
Salt
Cold Rinse
For
Water Level
(Gals)
354
110
110
354
354
354
354
354
354
354
354
354
354
354
-
354
Shop Towels
Temperature
OF
Line
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
185
175
165
155
145
-
100
Operation
Length
(Min)
2
15
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
2
Supplies
NaOH, silicate
and base oil
Dye
Sodium chloride
*From Reference 92, Table C-l.
IV-4
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 4*
Typical Laundering Schedule
For Kitchen Towels
Washing Operations
Flush
Flush
Break
Suds
Rinse 1
High Suds
Bleach
Rinse 2
Rinse 3
Rinse 4
Rinse 5
Sour
Water Level
(Gals)
354
354
111
111
354
177
150
354
354
354
354
66
Temperature
OF
175
190
190
190
190
150
190
175
175
175
Line
Operation
Length
(min)
4
2
5
4
2
4
7
2
2
2
2
4
Supplies
Base oil alkali
Alkali, soap
Soap, alkali
Bleach
Sour, mildicide
*From Reference 92, Table C-3
IV-5
-------
DRAFF
outlined in Table 4, jxcept that two sudsing stages a.nd a bleach-and- 94
sour step are utilized. A sour is an acid chemical added in the last 95
washing operation to negate the swelling effect of the alkali. TThe 96
initial break operation is similar to a suds operation except jthat no 97
soap is added. j[tarch, as well as other compounds, is also 98
frequently added to linen wash loads.
Auto Wash Establishments 100
^n general an auto wash has a tunnel or bay configuration, amd 103
there are variations of each type.
Tunnel Type Carwash • 105
In a tunnel-type plant the vehicle is washed as is is pulled from 107
station to station by a continuous chain. E,ven if the washing 108
operation itself is Completely automated, wiping, drying and interior 109
cleaning are usually done manually by employees or the customer. _If 111
the carwash is a drive-through type where the customer remains in his
car, Vie usually has to do the Detailing. The trend in the auto wash 114
industry is to do away with as much labor as possible to reduce costs 115
and to eliminate £roblems associated with an unskilled or semi- 116
skilled JLabor force. 117
The tunnel type wash is the most expensive to build — up to 119
£200,000 — but it can also produce the most income; the largest 120
plants liandle more than 1,000 cars a day. 121
IV-6
-------
DRAFF
Bay-type Carwash 123
There are many variations of the bay-type carwash. 125
At a "wand-type" coin-operated facility _the customer parks his 128
car in a bay and Deposits coins in a meter, he then has five minutes 129
to wash his car with water from a pressurized wand (300 - 500 psi).
lie can spend the entire period spraying on a soapy wash or elect to 130
use some clear rinse water. Most operators find that their customers 131
pay for two five-minute operations.
In some instances, the wand is activated by a pump in a roll- 133
around cabinet. VJastewater characteristics are discussed in detail 134
in Section V.
_In a "roll-over" carwash the customer parks his car ^n a bay and 137
the washing equipment, including brushes, move over the car. A 138
variation of this is a system in which a_ coin-operated robot machine 140
circles _the car, and cleans it with pressurized soapy water and rinse 141
water.
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 144
At present, about 30% of all rug cleaning operations are done in 148
the home and this percentage will undoubtedly increase. 149
In a typical in-plant cleaning operation, the rug is first beaten 151
_to remove dust and dry solids and is then wetted with water and a 153
mild, dilute detergent. _It then passes through a system of either 154
IV-7
-------
DRAFF
rollers or brushes which work the detergent into the J[iber, to 156
suspend the dirt, a clean water rinse follows, finally excess water 157
is squeezed out and the rug is air dried. The industry is trying to 158
reduce the amount of water vised in the rinse cycle by using new 159
detergent formulations, jind about 25% is already dicing so. 162
The amount of water from upholstery cleaning, which is basically 164
a dry process, is in the order of 0.1% of the total effluent from 165
carpet and upholstery Cleaning operations and will, therefore not be 166
described.
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities, and Laundry and 169
Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 170
^lost coin-operated laundries contain between 25 and 35 machines, 175
each of which uses 25 - 30 gallons of water per washing cycle. An 177
average weekly wastewater volume of 50,000 gallons can be expected. 178
Approximately 100 pounds of commercial detergent are used per week. 179
Fifteen cycles per day is about standard for a washer, but many 180
JLaundromats use machines that do 25 cycles or more per day. 181
Many coin-operated laundries are located in areas without ji 184
municipal sewer system to discharge into, but _p_ackage treatment 185
facilities are available from several manufacturers which can reduce
_the contaminants from the process wastewaters to acceptable limits. 186
Coin-operated dry cleaning is a solvent cleaning process with no 188
process wastewater discharge.
IV-8
-------
DRAFT
l^aundry and garment services not elsewhere classified include 190
Chinese ^nd French hand laundries, facilities where clothes are 192
altered and repaired, and pillow-cleaning operations. £ince their 194
effluent is small in both volume and contaminant JLevel, this 195
operation will not be described.
A^s a group, the effluent of industries in this subcategory ±s 198
weaker than domestic sewage and can, therefore, be handled easily by 199
municipal treatment plants. Wastewater characteristics are discussed 200
in detail in Section V.
Dry Cleaning Plants, Except Rug Cleaning 202
The advent of wash and wear fabrics has reduced the business of 205
the conventional-type dry cleaning plants. B^oth the number of plants 206
operating and amounts processed have dropped sharply. The industrial 207
dry cleaner, however, is enjoying unprecedented growth because of two 209
factors. One is the increasing use of "65/35" dacron polyester 210
fabrics which lend themselves to easy dry cleaning, The other is 211
stricter local ordinances on industrial _laundries which 212
conventionally wash with water.
There are basically three filter systems used in conventional- 215
type dry cleaning operations; _(1) single charge filters; (2) 216
multicharge filters; and (3) regenerative filters. All are designed 218
to separate solids from the solvent jind contain two essential parts, 219
a septum and a filter medium. The filter medium, usually diatomite 220
IV-9
-------
DRAFT
powder, is contained in the septum, a_ porous but rigid structure, 221
Most septums are made of wire screen fabrics and paper. The filtered 223
solvent ^s then introduced into either an atmospheric or a vacuum 225
still. The first type is used to distill perchlorethylene, and the 227
second to distill petroleum _solvent. After garments have been dry 229
cleaned, j.ny solvent remaining in them is removed by centrifugation 230
and drying. Charcoal filters may be used to remove dyes from the 231
solvent.
^Industrial type dry cleaners employ basically the same 233
technologies, but they have to contend with removing large amounts c>f 236
heavy oils and grease.
IV-10
-------
DRAFT
SECTION V 3
Waste Characterization 5
The normal constituents of raw effluent from auto and other 8
laundries are listed in Table 5. 9
Industrial Laundries 11
The industrial laundry wastewater distribution system presented 13
_in Figure 1 has a recycle ratio of from 46 to 100%. _It uses city- 16
softened water, and any of it that is not recycled is discharged into
the municipal treatment system (92). 17
Wastewater Constituents 19
The primary contaminates in industrial laundry wastewater are 21
suspended solids, BOD, alkalies, oil and grease, and heavy metals. 22
^Typical concentrations are summarized in Table 6. 23
The wastewater has the general appearance of thin oily mud and 25
contains material from towels used by printers, tool and die makers, 26
filling station attendants, etc. The soil may be in the form of 28
paints, varnishes, lacquer, Latex rubber, ketone solvents, inks 29
utilized in catalog and candy wrapper manufacturing, or carbon black 30
and other material utilized at newspaper printing plants. Organic 32
pollutants could be any or all of 30 hydrocarbon solvents, over 300 33
dyes, pigments, and _inks from rags used to clean presses used in the 34
printing of fliers, catalogs, and the like. Thus, the laundry ends 35
up with what ever product its customers may be using plus any of the 36
V-l
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 5
General Characterization
of Wastewater from Laundries and Auto Washes
Parameter
BOD (5)
TSS
IDS
pH
Oil and Grease
Hg
Ni
Fe
Cd
Zn
Cr
Cu
Pb
Minimum
15
15
104
5.1
38
- / 0.0005
0.3*
3.2
0
0.40
0.4
0.1*
0.6*
Maximum
ppm
2,482
4,350
6,454
13
2,229
0
2
8
0
8
3
9
35
.0
.007
.5
.3
.6
.9
.6
.3
.8
5
6
Average
1,073
869
2,267
10
723
-
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
13
15
17
.4
22
24
.4*
.0
.02*
.40
.5*
.1*
.6*
9
10
11
19
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
Less Than
41
V-2
-------
DRAFT
l-l :» r-4
c:^< c. z w
o o r c.
i
i
I
C.
R
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 6
Typical Industrial Laundry Waste(92)
Parameter
Total Solids
TOC
Total Volatile Solids
Suspended Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Oil and Grease
pH - units
Total Alkalinity
BOD
Total Dissolved Solids
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Cadmium
Iron
Nickel
Mercury
Minimum
4,856
950
3,250
649
1,458
403
11.0
1,825
647
1,550
1.0
0.2
3.0
0.55
< .05
3.5
1.0
0.001
Maximum
mg/1
8,649
6,300
5,284
4,950
2,225
3,756
13.0
3,190
1,314
6,545
3.6
9.3
35.8
8.9
0.6
126
2.5
0.007
Average 10
12
6,748 15
2,482 16
3,866 17
2,809 18
1,889 19
1,538 20
12.0 21
2,066 22
830 23
4,697 24
2.4 25
3.7 26
13.2 27
4.1 28
.2 29
42 30
1.4 31
0.003 32
V-4
-------
DRAF1
pollutants it may add during the cleaning process which could _include 37
any or all of the following: (1) alkalies — caustic soda, jspda ash, 38
soda metasilicate, sodium sesqui silicate, tri sodium phosphate, 39
tetra sodium pyrophosphate, and sodium tri polyphosphate; (2) ^paps 40
— of vegetable or animal oils; (3) detergents — anionic jjynthetic 41
and non-ionic synthetic; (4) bleaches — sodium hypochlorite, calcium 42
hypochlorite, lithium hypochlorite, dimethyl d^ichlorohydantoin (DDE) 43
and chlorocyanuric acid; and trichlorojisocyanuric acid; _(5) sours — 45
acid fluorides, sodium jrLlico fluoride, ammonium silico fluoride, 46
zinc silico fluoride, sodium acid fluoride, ammonium acid fluoride 47
and ^luoro oxalate; (6) starches of both corn and wheat derivatives; 48
(7) blueing compounds — water solubles of aniline dye stuffs; (8) 49
fabric softeners —( cationic synthetics); (9) bacterial static 50
agents — quaternary ammonium compounds, and two phenol compounds; 51
_GLO) dust control compounds consisting of petroleum derivatives; (11) 52
^lame retardants — boric acid - borax and phosphates; (12) dyes: 54
(13) petroleum ^solvents — including perchloroethylene; (14) 55
fungicides — quaternary ammonium salts used mostly in linen 56
laundries and tributyl tin most used in industrial laundries; (15) 57
spotting agents — dichloroljenzene, carbitols and emulsifying agents; 58
(16) jstripers — sodium hydro^ulfite, titanium sulfate and titanium 60
chloride; (17) neutralizers or antichlors such as sodium sulfite and 62
sodium thiosulfate (18) enzymes of the protease type used primarily 63
V-5
-------
DRAFT
in hospital work to reduce water consumption by removing the blood, 63
etc., _from operating room gowns. 64
The loadings from a typical industrial laundry operation are 66
tabulated jLn Table 7. 67
Flow Rate Analysis 69
The flow rate depends upon the size and activity of the 71
particular plant, both of which vary widely. The plant shown in 73
Figure 1 has a flow rate that varies from 341 to 814 liters per
minute; _however, its recycling system has a capacity of only 200 74
liters per minute.
Linen Supply -- Power Laundries and Diaper Services 76
_The wastes from linen supply laundries are typically lower in 78
concentration than those from industrial laundries (92). Values are 80
presented in Table 8.
T_he typical loading of suspended solids in the wastewater of 82
linen laundries is 0.03 Ib/lb material washed, the TDS is 0.08 Ib/lb 84
garment and 0.03 Ibs/lb garment oil and grease.
Members of the industry claim that there are no bacteriological 87
or viral contaminates present in the wastewaters from diaper services 88
and hospitals. No definitive data are available to substantiate this 89
assertion.
V-6
-------
TABLE 7*
Wastewater Loadings
Industrial Laundry
Parameter
BOD (5)
TSS
IDS
Oil and Grease
Hg
Ni
Fe
Cd
Zn
Cr
Cu
Pb
lb/1,000 gallons
Minimum Maximum
13
8
13
2
0.000008
0.04
0.03
0.0004
0.004
0.01
0.002
0.02
20
36
55
19
0.00006
0.09
1.05
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.08
0.29
Unit Output
Average Ib/lb
17
18
39
10
0.00002
0.01
0.35
0.002
0.033
0.020
0.031
0.110
0.098
0.025
0.220
0.056
0.0000001
0.00006
0.0020
0.00001
0.00018
0.0001
0.00017
0.00062
4
6
9
10
11
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Calculated from Table 6
27
V-7
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 8
Pollutant Concentration in Wastewater
From a Typical
PH
Alk., mg/1 CaCO(3)
TS, mg/1
TVS, mg/1
SS, mg/1
COD, mg/1
BOD, mg/1
Soluble Solids, mg/1
Vol. Sol. Solids, mg/1
Oil and Grease, mg/1
Sol. COD, mg/1
Cr
Cu
Pb
Zn
Cd
Ni
Linen Supply
Minimum
1.0.3
500
1,973
1,468
500
2,125
97
1,725
964
203
1,173
-
-
-
-
-
Laundry (92)
Maximum
11.2
925
3,663
1,630
1,474
5,113
797
2,038
991
1,220
2,590
-
-
-
-
-
_
5
6
9
Average 10
13
679 14
2,675 15
1,549 16
736 17
3,057 18
314 19
1,837 20
978 21
628 22
1,649 23
.06 24
.27 25
.70 26
.47 27
.04 28
2.10 29
No data available
V-8
31
-------
Auto Washes
DRAFT
A_ flow diagram showing a typical wastewater reclamation system 94
used at some car washes is presented in Figure 2. The designers of 95
this particular system claims that 85% of the water used can be
recycled. Although many other reclamation systems are available l^ess 97
than 30% of car washes resort to recycle. The rest use municipal 99
water and are connected to a municipal ^reatment plant. 100
Wastewater Constituents 102
The constituents found in wastewater from car washes vary widely 104
and are affected by such factors as number of cars cleaned, 105
geographic location, and weather conditions. The water contains 106
exceedingly high amounts of total solids, total volatile jsplids, 107
suspended solids, and grease, and its BOD content exceeds that
present in the effluent of js_econdary treatment plant (39) . 108
^ypical waste loadings in wastewater from a tunnel-type car wash 110
are presented in Table 9. The minimum, maximum, and average 112
concentrations of pollutants for a typical self-service car wash 113
during a _t_en-month period are shown in Table 10. Table 11 gives the 115
maximum, minimum, and average concentrations for eight j»rab samples 116
collected at a tunnel-type car wash during a seven and one-half hour 117
period in October 1973. Tiiese data are based on an average computed 118
from the eight samples .
V-9
-------
DRAFT
5'
I
SOAP RETURN
TO PIT
RINSE HATER
SOAPY
WASH WATER
I CUSTOMER'S CARWASH ,
I EQUIPMENT & BOOSTER
KE ....UP
FROM
CITY WATER
i L p T— ,—, -
j 4ViWM^
15% loss with car
— CARWASH PIT-
1
2
3
5
6
FILTER PUMP WITH BASKET STRAINER
WASH WATER FILTER REMOVES DIRT FROM WATER
PUMP
DETERGENT FILTER REMOVES SOAP FROM WATER
RECYCLE TANK
BOOSTER PUMP
Figure 2
Typical Wastewater Reclamation
System for Carwash(104)
V-10
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 9**
Typical Loadings in Wastewater
From Tunnel-Type Auto Washes
Parameter
BOD (5)
TSS
TDS
Detergents
Oil and Grease
Ni
Fe
Cd
Zn
Cr
Cu
Pb
* = Less Than
** Calculated From
lb/1
Maximum
0.95
4.5
17.6
27.4
1.6
0.006*
0.03
0.0003*
0.003
0.008*
0.003*
0.001*
,000 gallons
Minimum
0.17
0.95
5.0
1.9
0.31
0.003*
0.03
0.0002*
0.003
0.003*
0.001*
0.001*
Average
0.48
2.3
10.2
12.6
0.70
0.003*
0.03
0.0002*
0.003
0.004*
0.001*
0.001*
Unit Output
Ib/car
0.020
0.011
0.46
0.56
0.032
0.0001*
0.001
0.0001*
0.0001
0.0002*
0.00001*
0.00001*
Tables 10 and 11
5
6
c
10
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
38
v-ii
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 10
Typical Pollutant Concentrations in Wastewater 5
From Self-Service Auto Washes (40) 6
(10 month period) 8
11
Minimum Maximum Average 12
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 13
Total Solids 729 3,334 2,006 15
Total Volatile Solids 207 871 456 17
Suspended Solids 95 840 386 19
Volatile Suspended Solids 25 116 72 21
BOD(5) 15 166 ' 57 23
Oil and Grease 38 200 86 25
V-12
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 11
Pollutant Concentrations
Tunnel-Type
(Based on eight
in Wastewater
Auto Wash
grab samples)
From A
Minimum Maximum
Freon extractable oil-grease mg/1
BOD(2), mg/1
BOD(5), mg/1
BOD (7), mg/1
Suspended solids tng/1
Volatile suspended solids mg/1
Total solids mg/1
Alkalinity -Phenolphthalein mg/1
Alkalinity - Total mg/1
Turbidity JTU
TOC mg/1
COD mg/1
Total P mg/1
TKN u._ '1
Surfactants (LAS) mg/1
Ni mg/1
Ca mg/1
Cr mg/1
Ba mg/1
Sn mg/1
Mg mg/1
V mg/1
Mo mg/1
Ti mg/1
As mg/1
Pd mg/1
Tl mg/1
Ga mg/1
Al mg/1
Sr mg/1
Sm mg/1
Zn mg/1
Cd mg/1
Mn mg/1
Fe mg/1
Pb mg/1
0.1*
4
28
39.3
160
55
728 1
6
146
68
25
156
27
1.8
105
.3*
10
.4*
.2*
1.*
10
1.*
.2*
.2*
10.*
.5*
.4*
.1*
.6
.1
.9*
.3
.02*
.1
J.
.5
0.3
32.8
78.7
99.0
234
88
,964
25
199
179
56
274
37
6.6
185
.7*
60
1.*
.4*
1.
20
3.*
.4*
.6*
30.*
1.*
1.*
.3*
1.
.3
2.*
.4
.04*
.1
4.
1.*
5
6
8
11
Average 12
.2 13
18.6 14
52.2 15
64.8 16
189 17
74 18
921 19
11 20
160 21
124 22
45 23
222 24
34 25
3.1 26
147 27
.4* 28
30 29
.5* 30
.2* 31
1.* 32
15 33
1.* 34
.2* 35
.3* 36
20.* 37
.6* 38
.5* 39
.1* 40
.8 41
.2 42
1.* 43
.4 44
.02* 45
.1 46
4. 47
.6* 48
(Continued on next page)
V-13
-------
DRAFT
Be mg/1
Sb mg/1
Cu mg/1
pH units
Temp. C
4 uhos/cm(3) Conductivity
* = Less Than
.01*
.5*
.1*
8.7
25.0
710
.03*
1.*
.3*
9.1
28.0
3,000
.01* 49
.7* 50
.1* 51
8.9 53
26.0 54
1,020 55
57
Analyses by EPA, Office of Enforcement & General Counsel,
NFIC-Cincinnati, October 1973.
59
60
V-14
-------
DRAFT
Flow Rate Analysis 121
A_ self-service facility uses approximately 20 gallons per car, 124
and at a typical 6-bay facility about 38,000 gallons are used per
inonth(39). Tlie tunnel type car wash for which data are presented in 126
Table 10 used 4^200 gallons of water for 94 cars in a seven and one- 127
half hour period. For an average of approximately 45 gallons. 128
The removal of protective coatings from newly imported autos 131
using organic solvents is considered an jjidustrial process and is, 132
therefore, _treated under transportation guidelines. 133
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 135
TChe constituents in wastewater generated by this operation are 137
similar to those found in the Affluent from car washes excepting that 138
less oil and grease are present. No definitive data are available to 139
substantiate this assertion.
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities and 142
Laundries and Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 144
The normal daily flow through the waste filtration system of the 148
typical laundromat shown in Figure 3 is 6,300 to 8,500 gallons.
Wastewater Constituents 150
typical wastes are presented in Table 12. 152
Typical waste loadings re 0.04 Ib of suspended solids/load, 0.20 155
Ib of of TDS and .01 1^ detergents.
V-15
-------
DRAFT
TO
AND C13CHAKGE
"RAKSFEX
PUMP
CHEMICALS
MIXING
TAf.X
N. I
FILTER
FILTER
PUMP
FLOAT
CCNTRCx.
SLUOGT,
PU.V?
RAW
"FnO.M WASHER
TANK
V
(
H. 2
FILTER
TO SLUDGE
K)LD!?c3 TANK
HOLOi.N'G TAN'K
Precoat is diatomaceous earth.
VAl.VF SETTINGS
PRECOAT C?i S7RcA.M DESLLOOE
OPEN UA6.7.8 L2,3.G,7
CLOSED 4,5 4,5.0
Figure 3
Laundromat Wastewate:: Treatment Sysemt (110)
V-16
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 12
Pollutant Concentrations in Waste-waters
From Typical Laundromats (110)
Minimum Maximum
mg/1 mg/1
ABS
Suspended Solids
Dissolved Solids
COD
Alkalinity
Chlorides
Phosphates
PH
Nitrates
Free Ammonia
Sulfates
BOD (5)
3.0
15.0
104.0 2,
65.0 1,
61.0
52.0
1.0
5.1
-
-
-
119
126.0
784.0
064.0
405.0
398.0
185.0
430.0
10.0
-
-
-
243
5
6
Average
44.0
173.0
812.0
447.0
182.0
57.0
148.0
- 21
1.0*
3.0
200.0
170 25
9
10
11
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
23
24
Less Than 27
All units in mg/1 except pH which is expressed in units. 29
V-17
-------
DRAFT
H.OW Rates Analysis 157
Most installations contain between 25 and 35 machines, each of 159
which uses 25-3Q gallons of water per washing cycle for a total 161
weekly average of 50,000 gallons. Approximately 100 pounds of 163
commercial detergent are used per week (69).
Dry Cleaning Other Than Rugs 165
The only pollutants in the dry cleaning process are those which 167
are extracted from the cleaned materials. These are collected at the 169
time of solvent recovery and should be disposed of by a scavanger. 170
jJection VI describes the pollutant parameters and sets forth the 172
rationale for selection or rejection of waste constitutents and their 173
relation to the control parameters. 174
V-18
-------
DRAFT
SECTION VI
Pollutant Parameters 8
Based on this study, the selected control parameters for each 11
^ubcategory are listed in Table 13. The rationale for selection or 13
rejection of waste constituents _is as follows. 14
Upon review of the EPA regional permit applications for the 16
discharge of wastewaters from auto and other laundries, industrial 17
data, and observations made during EPA plant inspections, it was 18
determined that the following chemical, physical, and biological 19
pioperties or constituents jire found within the process wastewater 20
effluent. The values will differ by type of laundry, _p_lant size, and 22
production: ^uspended solids, dissolved solids, BOD(5) COD, TOC, pH, 24
alkalinity, oil and grease, _turbidity and heavy metals. The degree 26
of control exercised over these various parameters depends on whether 27
the wastewater is discharged into a stream or a municipal sewer 28
system.
Suspended Solids 30
j>oil and grit from the products laundered will show up in the 32
Affluent as suspended solids. 33
^Suspended solids can kill fish and shellfish by causing Abrasive 36
injuries and can clog the gills and respirating passages of various 37
aquatic fauna. They can also blanket jstream bottoms, thereby killing 38
VI-1
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 13
Control Parameter
Subcategory pH SS BOD (5)
1.
2.
3.
Industrial
Laundries XXX
Linen, Power and
Diaper Laundries XXX
Auto Wash X X
Oil and
Grease
X
X
X
Heavy
Metals
X
X
4. Carpet Upholstery
Cleaning
5. Coin-operated and
Laundries Not Classi-
fied Elsewhere
6. Dry Cleaning Except
Rug Cleaning
X X
X
X
VI--2
-------
DRAFT
eggs and food organisms and destroying spawning beds. ^Indirectly, 40
suspended solids are inimical to aquatic life because they ^creen out 41
light and carry down and trap bacteria a.nd decomposing organic w?^tes 42
on the bottom. This promotes and maintains the development of 43
noxious conditions and depletes oxygen, k^ills fish, shellfish, and 44
fish food organisms, and reduces the ^recreational value of the water. 45
T_he suspended solids and BOD(5) in a laundry effluent can cause 47
an oxygen sag to occur if it is discharged directly to a small 48
stream, but they can be handled without difficulty in a sanitary 49
waste treatment facility. The municipality may, however, levy a 50
surcharge for having to process them.
Dissolved Solids 52
J5pil removed from laundered items can raise the concentration ^f 55
dissolved soUds in the wash water by 500 to 6,000 mg/1. Dissolved 56
solids concentrations as low as 50 mg/1 are harmful to some 57
industrial operations. T_he United States Public Health Service 58
(USPHS) has set a limit of 500 mg/1 for drinking water. Lethal 59
concentrations for fresh water fish range from jj,000 to 10,000 mg/1, 61
and concentrations exceeding 2,100 mg/1 in irrigation waters liavc 63
harmed crops.
VI-3
-------
DRAFT
Turbidity 65
^Turbidity is a measure of the light absorbing properties _of 68
constituents in water. For a commercial laundry these result from 69
colloidal susions. For an auto wash these result from colloidal 70
suspensions. Values range from 100 to 700 turbidity units. 71
Excessive turbidity in water interferes with the penetration of 74
light and inhibits photosynthesis; this, in turn, decreases the 75
production of organisms on which fish d_epends for food. 76
S^ettleable solids and turbidity were not selected as controlling 78
parameters because they are functions of suspended solids. _Suspended 80
solids are a more precise measurement of the concentration which is 81
controllable through treatment.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 83
Because of the nature of the organic compounds present in the 85
detergents used and in various types; of soil, oxygen-consuming 86
materials are Jound in laundry-generated wastewater. J50D refers to 88
the amount of oxygen required to destroy Biodegradable organic matter 89
under aerobic conditions. Biological treatment facilities have 90
little trouble treating this Constituent, but industrial wastes 93
having high BOD(5) concentrations have caused serious oxygen
Depletion problems in streams whose assimilative capacity is 95
relatively low.
VI-4
-------
DRAFT
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 97
A. sizeable chemical oxygen demand will exist in the raw waste 101
stream for the same reasons as given under BOD. Values range from 102
2,125 mg/1 to 5,311 mg/1, and higher values are found in recycled 103
waters. ()ne activated sludge plant effected 94% reduction but 105
concentration was jstill high (300 mg/1). IJnder certain conditions, 107
wastewaters with a high COD can deplete oxygen in receiving waters. 109
Total Organic Carbon (TOG) 111
^n general TOC is equal to or greater than BOD(5). TOC is a 114
measure of total carbon, while BOD(5) measures about two-thirds of 115
the total in a five-day period. When an empirical relationship can 117
be established between the total organic jcarbon and biochemical 119
oxygen demand, the total organic carbon provjLdes a speedy and 120
convenient way to estimate the other parameters that express the 121
degree of organic contamination.
The mg/1 ranges for this parameter are: linen laundries 530-2,150 123
and industrial laundries ^..200-4,400 mg/1. j>_ince most loading and 126
removal data are given in terms of BOD, and an interrelation between 127
BOD, TOC, and COD exists, the parameters of TOC and COD have been 128
excluded in favor of BOD control.
VI-5
-------
DRAFT
pH 130
Unless neutralization is practiced, wastewater from Jjidustrial, 133
linen and coin-operated laundries will have a high _p_H value because 134
of the alkalinity of the detergents used. T_he range will be 9.5 - 135
13.3.
IJot only is the hydrogen ion a potential pollutant in J^tself, it 138
can also increase the toxicity of other substances, such as ammonia. 139
The permissible range of pH for fish is 6.0 to 9.0 under normal 140
conditions jis is influenced by such factors as temperature, dissolved 142
oxygen, prior acclimatization, and the content of various anions and 143
cations.
Alkalinity 145
The alkalinity of water, a measure of its capacity to Accept 148
protons, jis usually imparted by the bicarbonate, Carbonate, and 150
hydroxide components of a natural or treated water ^upply. These 152
constituents can have a direct or indirect effect on ^oil, plant 153
growth, water fowl, and public water supply processing control. 154
The use of caustic solutions to swell the fiber in a commercial 156
_laundry produces an alkaline wastewater. The concentrations of 159
alkalinity, expressed in terms of mg/1 total alkalinity _(CaCO(3)), 160
vary from 250-3,200 depending on the type of fabric to be ^aundered 161
VI-6
-------
DRAFT
and its soil content. j[ince regulation of pH indirectly controls 162
alkalinity, _there is no need to control alkalinity directly. 163
Oil and Grease 165
Oil and grease are found in laundry effluents in varying degrees, 167
Depending on the use to which the laundry was put. The range can be 169
as broad as 245 - 2,300 mg/1. The concentration in the effluent from 170
a carwash ranges from 38 to 200 mg/1. Oil and grease can have 171
deleterious effects on domestic water supplies and can be toxic to 172
fish. Oil and grease can form unsightly scum in streams, clog 173
sewers, and cause Derating problems in treatment plants. 174
Detergents (Methylene Blue Active Substances) 176
The use of synthetic detergents that contain _surface active 180
agents ("surfactants") for general cleaning purposes sometimes _caused 181
natural waters to foam when alkyl benzene sulfonate (ABS) was 182
popular. The number of such incidents has dropped, however, since 183
mid-1965 when the detergent industry switched _to the production of 185
the more biodegradable linear ^Ikylate sulfonate (LAS). 186
Heavy Metals 188
The presence of metals in industrial laundry effluents ±s a 191
matter of serious concern because they may be toxic _to the biological 192
jsystem of a receiving stream. They can also affect operation of 194
public biological treatment facilities. If they are discharged to a 196
VI-7
-------
DRAFT
sewer system, they either pass through £ treatment system untreated 197
or, if present in high concentrations, create a_ toxic condition in 198
the facility. For these reasons it is imperative that heavy metals 199
be controlled jlf they are discharged to either surface water or a 200
municipal waste facility. 201
Some of the more common metals and their ranges of concentration 206
in mg/1 for industrial laundries are: chromium 1.0 - 3.6; copper 0.2
- 9.3; lead 3.0 - 35.8; zinc 0.55 - 8.9; cadmium 0.01 - 0.6; _iron 3.5 208
- 12.6; nickel 1.0 - 2.5; and mercury 0.05 - 0.70 (92).
The metals of concern are Hg, Ni, Cd, Zn, Cr, Cu, and Pb. 210
VI-8
-------
DRAFT
SECTION VII 6
Control and Treatment Technology 8
Historical Treatment 11
At present, very few laundries discharge directly into a stream 13
or have any type of waste treatment system. Historically, about nine 15
out of 10 plant owners have preferred to discharge their wastewater
jlirectly to publicly owned treatment facilities rather than to _treat 17
it. j>ome constituents of the discharges, such as heavy metals and 19
oil and grease, a.re incompatible with sanitary treatment, but the 20
owners generally ignored this on the grounds that the concentrations 21
are extremely small.
Wastewater recycling is practiced at approximately 30% of 23
existing car washes. Almost all the rest discharge their effluent 24
directly into municipal sewer jsystems after removing some grease and 25
oil and solids; _a few direct it into leaching fields. 26
(loin-operated laundries almost invariably discharge into 28
municipal systems.
The dry cleaning industry uses expensive solvents and reuses them 31
as many times as possible. The only water discharged is cooling 33
water from the condenser.
VII-1
-------
DRAFT
State-of-the-Art Treatment Technology 35
T_he discussion of a particular technology under one jnibcategory 38
does not limit its possible application _in others. A wastewater 40
treatment system will probably have: to be designed ^hat is applicable 41
to the individual plant, using various existing subsystems of 42
technologies.
The following assumptions are made for all recycle systems 44
mentioned in this report; (1) That all systems have appreciable 45
losses of water primarily through carryoff on product, evaporation 46
and consequently will jrequire the addition of make-up water to 47
compensate for the negative water balance. Examples of this would be 48
(a) 15% losses for car washes by carryout, (b) 20 - 30% losses in 49
fabric laundry operations by drying. _£2) The removal of solid wastes 50
generated by these recycle systems are beyond the scope _of these 51
guidelines. Proper disposal of these wastes is the responsibility of 52
the individual operation concerned jand is regulated by appropriate 53
governmental agencies.
Industrial Laundries 55
Ito technology currently exists that can treat the exceedingly 57
high concentrations of pollutants in industrial laundry wastewater in 58
a completely satisfactory manner. One unproven _system has been 60
constructed specifically to pretreat industrial laundry wastewater,
jind it might be possible to modify several linen laundry systems for 61
VII-2
-------
DRAFT
such use. There is also an alternative operating procedure that 62
could be applied to industrial laundries. 63
Flotation Diatomaceous Earth (DE) Filter System 65
In this system, the wastewater is first treated with Calcium 68
chloride during a high pH. This aids in breaking any emulsions. Air 70
flotation and skimming then removes the bulk of the oil and grease.
The flotation effluent is passed through a diatomaceous jarth filter 72
and the scum collected is compacted by vacuum filtration. The final 74
effluent is neutralized with sulfuric acid _p_rior to discharge, and 75
the sludge cake is stored until periodically removed ^or disposal. 76
T_he average percent and range of removal achieved by both 78
flotation and the overall system is presented in Table 14, jind Table 80
15 gives the average concentrations in the influent and the Affluent 81
from the flotation system and the diatomaceous earth filter. Table 82
16 presents the ranges of the water quality.
One of the problems with this type of system is that it does riot 85
reduce the concentration of many of the pollutants to the point that 86
they can be discharging into a public system or navigable waters.
jn.udge removal and space requirements are also problems. 88
VII-3
-------
DRAFT
CO
Cfl
•^
j*-^
CM
ON
X^>
4-1
C
CU
e
cO
01
J_4
H
01
CO
cfl
r*"i
}-l
13
C
3
cfl
,-J
i-l
CO
•H
^
4J
CO
^3
^3
C
M
n
M
B
QJ
4-)
e^: co
B co
3
pj P"~i
•H ,0
^ QJ
o
Q)
ptS
B
4->
B-<; co
QJ CO
M
M 42
(1)
K* ^
M
Cfl ""U
IS QJ
J>
O
B
QJ
PS
a
0
•H
4-1
CO
&^s o
I—J
QJ fi^
00
CO r*n
S-( rd
QJ
K" 'O
<; o)
o
B
QJ
^
QJ
4-1
QJ
B
cfl
l-i
cfl
ro to I r^ ON co
r- ON in ON r-
rH c r^ r~- -<}• CM
r^- ^t co co co oo
m r^ oo co oo vo
f~» co i ^j- in co
^O ON LO ON ON
vD O CN ON
VD r-- CO ON CM ON CM
ON rH IT) ON CO ON O
ON ON ON ON P"^ ON ^^
LO in r^- co i — i co "-3"
ON VD VO CO i — 1 CO ON
m m CM oo CM oo CN
0)
rH
CO
rH
cfl
cO
CO
B 4-1
>> B 3 co
M 3 -H rH -u
3 iH B Q)
TJaBooa^i o
cOt-iTJCMOO IZ
QJ a) cfl -H ,C )-i -iH
i-J S U Nl CJ M 2 I
VII-4
-------
w
oo
01
cd
. a
oC
cd
}-l
cu
erf,
4JH-H
§i
cd
•H:
CO
rH CO
CO
o c
o o
C O rH
CO
cd
c
£ 01
4J 3
^1 rH
W '4^
w
~^ CO
to O C
13 O O
C C rH
td
o
o c
•H 0)
4-J Z3
Cd rH
I i n j
o m
rH W
CO O
13 O
C O
3 •
O rH
PL,
CO
c
o
cd
o
HI
4-1
CO
£
DRAFT
|-^ OO O rH CO-*CNVOCNCNCNOCO -* VO
rHrHCNCNCNCNCN
co co o I-H CN
x~s x-v X-N x-s x-srHOCNOOCNrHr-l f~» VO
rHvO Oi rH r^OOOOOrHOO CN -tf
utmioootiKfooooooooi rH CN
CO
rH-d-CNI^COinOOiHOCNOOrHi-HrHrH CN in
rHr^OOvOCT\CN\O IT) CT»
v£> v£> O VD in rH CN
rH ^Cf"
x"s
x-s x-v x-v X-N x-xCNCOrHCOOCOi-HCO x-v x^
CT»^d" r^co OOOOrHOOcOOO f^ ^f
• • •• ••••••••• • •
vOCOIOvCICNOOOOOOOOl CN <•
'^'CN CNin rH'--'v-'>~'v_'V_'v-'x_/v_> v_x rH
• • ••*••••••
^^ O^ C^j CM OO ^H CO C1^ *^* CM CO C~^ C^ ^H CO C^J \O IO
COOvOOO>3-COCO rH CO CNCN
oo oo ^f r-~ m co i—
CN
CN vO
-~- CO
0013
*2
• o
CO CO
13
o
0)
CO
3
CO
"° ,
•H rH
i-H ~-^
rH O £0
•^ to B
B rH •
Cd 0) rH
« 4J CO --«,
CO O td OOrH
13 H 0) B --•
00
rH 13 >4H
-v. 0) O
0013
B C «*>
CU rH
M CL, M «» cd
Q CO in O 4->
O 3 c/3 O O
PP C/) > H H
00
00
CO
oo
PC X~N
P. CO
o o
4J U
cd
o o
w
00
rH
„ a)
o o
CU co
p, *^x
o
o u
4-1 Cd
U
4-1 CO
•H cd
M O
3 «
0)
rH
cd
cd
«d
•o
_,
-HJ3 O OJ-iH cd M -H 0>OrH BrH
VII-5
-------
DRAFT
g
0)
4J
cn
Crt
C
0)
£
4-1
ttf
>J Q)
*H E— i
rH
to n
3 0) £
O 4-1 01
cO -f-*
rH 5 M
0) QJ >,
•O 4-J 4J CO
»-t to co
3 co w
W 01 ^ O
CQ oj >, (3
H
*~1 °I
rH CN
1 1
CO 00
rH 0
CO rH
X-V S-^
m co
CTi CM
O rH
i— 1 -J
1 1
x~v x-s
0 0
m m
-
^-^
CM
C7\
CO
1
"^
cO
O
rH
O
r-.
1
CO
CM
rH
-
cO
r^
rH
1
0
ro
v— '
O
CO
o
CM
1
O
co
'^
m
CM
1
CM
cn
^
o
o
CO
1
0
m
cr-
00
B
CJ
o
H
^
CO
r^
5
1
'~v
Q-,
CTs
ro
CM
in
O CM
m
1 1
m
vO CM
CC
CN
-
CO
ve-
in
m
t
r~-
CO
CM
> — '
C r^
^
1 1
r^
CM -*
m rH
,-^
CM
CM
CN
1
rO
•H t-J
O O
^
CO
CO
O
O
t
O
O
0
ON
CO
ro
O
-
r-
CN
O
O
1
CO
o
o
0
••— '
CN
CO
1
cr.
o
o
o
1
rH
0
o
vO
cO
O
rH
rH
00
£3
£
5
•H
e
o
rj
CJ
^-^
vO
O
O
o
1
CN
O
O
o
r-
0
CM
O
-
rO
rH
0
o
t
CO
O
0
0
•*— '
m
rH
1
CO
o
CO
r^-
o
o
1
CM
0
O
O
ro
1
CM
O
rH
tiO
f,
a
o
u
X-N ,-X
oo CN
rH 0
O O
0 0
I 1
CO CM
O 0
O O
0 0
0 0
CM i-H
CM O
1 1
CM
rH O
O 0
^ ^
oo m
CM O
O 0
o o
1 1
CM
CO 0
O 0
o o
0 CD
* — ' ^x
CO vO
ro c
1 1
m CM
co o
0 0
ON ^r
CM 0
O 0
1 1
in m
CM O
O 0
0 0
OO ON
m oo
CO
1 1
m
o m
CO O
rH rH
00 00
£ B
TJ 4
O r-
0 0
CD 0
O O
- — r S_^
CD
-j1 in
CD CM
1 1
CN
CD CO
0 0
in
o m
0 0
0 rH
i t
C^J
O ON
O CM
0 0
0 0
O vO
CN
rH
1 1
CN
o . m
CD CO
rH
00
E r-t
- OC
6 B
£ C
""O O
tO )-<
O M
^ X-N
m o
rH rH
o o
O O
i 1
CM
CM -J
O O
O O
0 0
CO CM
rH rH
t 1
CN m
o o
- -
r~~ O
H rH
0 0
O O
! I
co -d-
0 0
0 0
o o
s_- • — f
O CN
CM rH
I 1
co m
o o
«H CO
CM m
0 0
0 0
* i
GO 0
0 rH
0 0
0 0
CM r~-
O CM
rH — 1
rH
"- 00
00 3
r. $*-,
rH J-t
^ U
O M
•H 0)
& &
I
00
VII-6
-------
DRAFT
Dual System 90
_In essence, this is an alternative operating procedure that calls 92
for jjretreatment by dry cleaning before washing, ^reducing the amount 94
of oil and grease present by 80 to J35%. jCpsts and space requirements 97
can be problems.
Modified Linen Systems 99
It might be possible to modify the flotation-sand Jrilter system 102
and the oxidation-charcoal filter system for use at industrial 103
laundries.
Linen Laundries, Power Laundries (Family and Commercial), and 105
Diaper Services 107
Wastewater from this subcategory contains a much smaller 110
Concentration of pollutants than industrial laundry wastewater. Four 113
pilot treatment systems are presently in operation.
Flotation DE Filter System 116
This system has been described _under industrial laundries. 119
The concentrations and percent reductions of pollutants for both 122
the flotation and DE filter effluents are presented in Table 17.
jTLudge removal and space requirements are two problems posed by this 123
system.
VII-7
-------
DRAFi*
-p
c
£3 td
-P -P
nJ eS
CU O
-P
rl *H
•B h
E cu
3 w
£5 ,0
o
^
CU
-p
- LA O VO
04 rH t^ rH
ro
O O O O C
OJ Oj OJ OJ OJ
rH
be
H rH
•*• ^ »!-*
bf W 60
•P E T, B
C -H
CU - rH -
•3 w o cu
rH -D CO CO
« 0) Pi
CM Cl O -P W rH
CM O O 0 3 -H
W ft| EH EH CO o
[T~]
Q
C LAOO OJ
VC O H H
C CD O O
1 1 1 1
rH co ro
LTV-* H OJ
o. ro LA j-
C CD O O
O. IA i-H J-
LA o vo ro
LTvVO CO C—
1 1 1 1
l>- ONH t>-
O\ O OJ O
O. -^ VO LTN
LP. OJ OJ OJ
fY") J" VO LA
o' o' o o
LA l>- H H
OJ O -* OJ
_-f LA C^- VD
0000
OJ OJ OJ CVJ
H H
£• hp
1 ^rH
K to ~Jo
•o B
-P -H
C rH .
CU O OJ
0 W CO
rl tfl
-
LA-* rH H
LAVD CO t-
ON ON ON ON
rH
SP
rt rH
r* *^ '••^
0 to oo
E ta c
CU -H G
K H „
0 oJ
-p w H)
c n)
CU rH rH T3 rt)
CJ ^--- ^^ CU ^,
j-i g) hp'g o
^ ^ „ p, ^
E Q O to ,_,
cu 0 o 3 3
.p m EH co 5
to w
J>J
co
VI I-8
-------
DRAFT
Flotation-Sand Filter System 125
Jin this system, the wash wheels dump the process water into an 127
equalization and storage tank, f^rom there it passes through an air 128
flotation unit to a holding tank. Then it is pumped rapidly through 130
a sand filter a_nd into a final storage tank. After that, it goes 132
through a heat exchanger and is returned to the plant for reuse. 133
This system reduces suspended solids from 800 mg/1 to 320. 134
Oxidation Charcoal Filter System 136
This system was designed to treat the wastewater partially by 138
altering the laundry chemicals and partially by a recycling 140
technology. The hardware of this system consists of a modular 141
arrangement of ^several components. 142
The first of these is a spillway from the wash wheel with a 144
jsloped flume that causes heavy particles to fall into a sludge pit. 145
There are three screens of graduated sizes in the spillway. The 147
water is pumped into a tank which contains ^n oxidation chamber and a 148
settling chamber.
The chemical and jthe oil and grease are destroyed in the 151
oxidation chamber. Jji the settling chamber the remaining heavy 152
particles jind the insoluble salts settle out. The water is then 154
pumped through a filter tank which screens out ^he lint and into an 8 155
inch diameter 30 inch high charcoal column where final filtration 156
VII-9
-------
DRAFT
takes place. The reduction of pollutants achieved by this system are 157
presented in Table 18. 158
Centrifugal Filter Aerobic Digestion System 160
^n this system a polymer coagulent is added ^p the wastewater, 164
the pH is adjusted, and the effluent is passed _through a centrifugal 165
separator. It then goes through a mixed-media jgplishing filter into 167
an atmospheric aerobic digester and soap separation chamber. 168
Finally, the effluent passes through a pressure adsorption filter. 169
The pollutant reduction efficiency of this system is presented ±ri 171
Table 19.
Auto Washes 173
Because of the relatively low concentrations of pollutants ^n 176
their wastewater, many owners of these establishments have found it 177
both economical and practical to recycle wash and/or their rinse 178
water.
The simplest of these technologies calls for recirculating 180
untreated washwater. The washwater flows to a sump where the solids 182
settle out. Depending on the size of the sump and settling time 183
allowed, riorinally only suspended solids larger than 100 microns will 185
settle out. Although simple in operation, this system had two major 186
economic drawbacks: j[l) effective results call for the use of large, 187
expensive sumps; _£2) the sumps must be cleaned frequently. 188
VII-10
-------
DRAFT
00
a
*
a> a)
fi -p
-p ca
>> CO
^ ^
en cu
-p -P
ai
i — t
03 -H
1 "> pr i
r3
i — 1 uj
O 0
n c \
I-H ^J
"VH 03
O fi
O
a i
o a
•H 0
-P -H
0 -P
3 a3
T^ T^
i
M -H 0) -P
jj 0) O CO -P CO -H
•rj T^ "^ CU n3 w fil
3 -H -P ,3 CU -H
3 ^ S o3 ft rt H
>^ O -P ^H CO rD CO
H CQ -p H O ^i 4^
[xj <~j fZ) 03 cd jii c~{ cd r — |
PnOEHCOliiCQPHti|
OJ 3 cd
w "O
vi C
cd
^\ j J
!-j CO
0
4-J _£^
cd w
tj .^
o &
,0
cd en
oo
•X)
C 03
cd ex
CO O
tl W
0 (3
cx o
CU -H
CO pe3 W
cu cd
-P — 'O M
Oi LT\ rH 4J
o -— - cu 1-1
•H -rl E-l
H Q PL<
•HO *
CO PP * *
VII-11
-------
01
£l
-P
>a
£>
en
-p
o3
-p
2
H
H
O
pi
t-M
e. ,
SH
o
(—1
^<
o
•H
-P
O
3
nd
CU
K
*
a
cu
-p
CO
>a
CO
fl
O
•H
-P
cn
0)
W
•H
Q
O
•H
£>
O
SH
0)
e-T*
"^
(
M
0)
-P
1
1 1
•H
P-H
1
H
03
§
«H
•H
fc
-P
a
cu
o
a
-P O
a -H
0 -p
a a
Jn 2
CU T3
PL, cu a
0) -p -P
-P CH cS
w «a; CU
05 fH
t2 EH
H
fn o3
CU O
PL,
O
• O
W O
f '
I-H H
fn
CU -p
-P O) fl
cti !H (U
i» o a
CU iH W
cn o n)
fd CO w
•H |rf
H T3 H O
O D ^
Ul Tj bD 'rt
sac
rH CU 0)
03 f^i «•
-p cn U H
w o n o Tt
ft EH CO EH O
CO
CD
CO
•H
M
n)
PC
cu
o
g
o
a
CO
CU
o
c_>
•K
VII-I2
-------
DRAFT
Often there is an economic advantage to treating and recycling 191
the washwater. This is done by having an automatic system Jjiject a 193
prepared solution of germicide aind clarifier into the used washwater 194
to preserve detergents, prevent the formation of slime and odors, and 195
improve water quality. The water then passes through centrifugal 196
separators which can remove solids smaller than five microns. There 198
are savings on the "tap in" charge to a sewer, sewage charges, and
the cost of water and soap.
Systems used to recycle rinse water are much more elaborate than 201
washwater recycling methods because greater purity must be obtained. 202
The used rinse water is collected in gravity drains that run to an 204
inground collection sump or storage tank where ±t is chemically 205
treated with a prepared solution of germicide, de-emulsifier, and 206
clarifier. Then it passes through a basket strainer, a washwater 207
filter to jremove dirt from the water and a detergent removal filter 208
to remove soap. A^ washwater recycling system combined with a rinse 209
water recycling system ^prms a total recycling system. 210
Carpet and Upholstering Cleaning 212
Much the same as auto wash, see Section V. 214
VII-13
-------
DRAFT
Coin-Operated Laundries and Dry Gleaming Facilities, and Laundry and 218
Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 219
TChere are a large number of wastewater treatment jtechnologies 223
available for use at coin-operated laundries _and some are adaptable 224
for the complete recycling of wastewater.
Coagulation with Alum and Adsorption Through Activated Carbon 226
T?his system coagulates the effluent with alum and lime, then 228
passes _it through a carbon filter element. The values of pollutants 230
in the raw waste, in the effluent after coagulation, and in the 231
effluent from the carbon filter are presented in Table 20.
Coagulation With Alum, Sand Filtration and Adsorption 234
Through Activated Carbon 236
^En this system, the wastewaters are screened and temporarily 239
^tored in a holding tank, _then pumped through an alum coagulation 241
system. Alum is added to lower the pH to 4.2 - 4.5 and then the 242
wastewater enters an upflow _tank to be flocculated (three minute 243
contact time). The wastewater from this tank is treated with lye so 244
that the pH ^ifter settling is about 7.0. The wastewater flows 246
through copper tubing to the mid-depth of a. large settling tank. The 248
sludge that forms is disposed of periodically and the clear super-
riatant is pumped through one of five pressure sand filters ^n 250
parallel. The effluent passes up through a bed containing Duolite 251
exhange resin A 102D for detergent removal. _It then flows up 253
VII-14
-------
DRAFT
o
c>
o
UN
o
s,
C
n
o
m
VII-15
-------
DRAFT
through a bed of granular activated carbon to remove objectionable 254
odors and colors. From there, one-third of the flow passes through a 255
cation and sui anion exchange resin for complete deionization, jind is 257
combined with the other two-thirds of the wastewater. The wastewater 258
is then chlorinated and the pH adjusted before it enters the clean 259
water tank for reuse. The pollutant reduction values achieved by 260
various subsystems jire presented in Table 21, 22, and 23. 261
Precoating and Filtration Through Diatomaceous Earth (DE) 264
lr\ this system, a 45-pound charge of DE is added to water in the 266
mixing tank and the liquid is then passed through the filter elements 267
which become coated with the suspended DE. This operation usually 269
takes 3-6 minutes, and the waste jmrifica_tion cycle is then 271
initiated. Wastewater is pumped from the holding tank Jro the mixing 272
tank, through the filters, and finally to the treated water tank.
This cycle normally lasts 15 minutes during which time 375 gallons of 274
wastewater are processed. A timer switch then shuts off the filter 276
pumps and activates a mechanical shaker which "bumps" _the coating off 277
of the filter elements. Another coating is then applied as described 278
above.
The pollutant reduction data for this system are presented in 281
Table 24.
VII-16
-------
DRAFi
iH
Os!
W
! i
PQ
^j
H
4-1
c
cu
J_J
j2
o
CJ
o
0
o
*"O
C!
cd
o
0
w
00
c
•rl
CJ
3
•o
0)
ptj
c
•H
£3
cu
4-1
CO
^i
CO
*
u
1
co
0
14-1
O
K^
o
c
cu
, J
•PI
CJ
•H
4H
W
^-^
o
vO
M
CU
4_|
cd
cu
4-1
CO
£2
4-1
cQ
PJ
O
'O
c
cd
M-l
o
c
o
CU 4-J -H
00 C 4J
cd cu o
t-i O 3
OJ V^ 'O
> cu
oo <
o •
o c
O iH
~&
"*^^ •
^Q ^
rH Cd
^r|
4-1
C
cu
3
rH 00
4-1 >
4-1
cd •<
00
•
o c
0 -rl
^^ S
r-T
4-» ^^ X
PJ ,*"* cd
3
*-W
(3
M 00
^
^J
*>» C
00 -H
e s
ri
b
2
CO
(-1 CU
CU rH
r\ I4_{ o
303
3 cd
!Z co
CU
4-J
cu
3
cd
cd
PM
«^"
•
vO
LO
CO
•
CN
10
o
Csl
00
rH
1— 1
ON
o
•
CM
*^-
•
m
•
rH
CJN
i-H
rH
0
m
oo
i
nn
rH
0
rH
O
O
rH
•
CN
vO
m
ON
•
0
CN
CO
•
O
01
0
•
CM
*J~
rH
rH
CO
CO
*3~
*^-
CN
*3"
CM
rH
•
rH
r^
•
ro
CO
ON
CM
vO
CO
rH
oo
CO
"*
o
Q
O
0
•
c
o
_r\
rl
cd
CJ
td
CU
4-1
cd
^>
•H
4-1
O
cd
X
00
3
o
rl
£1
4-1
c
o
•H
4-1
p.
rl
O
CO
'1CJ
cd
'O
c
cd
p<
o
•H
4-1
cd
rl
4-1
rH
•H
14H
c
cd
CO
g"
i
l~~1
cd
^
4-1
•H
&
fj
0
•H
4J
cd
rH
00
cd
o
o
*
VII-17
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 22
Summary of pH Values Achieved by CASFAAC* System
in Treating Laundromat Wastewater
Units
Raw Waste
Flocculation Tank
Settling Tank
Sand Filter
Detergent Removal
Activated CArbon
Demineralizer
Number of
Samples
134
136
117
117
117
117
134
Minimum
5.0
3.9
4.2
4.5
5.0
5.2
5.1
(60)
Maximum
7.6
6.0
6.7
6.7
7.0
6.9
6.8
Average
7.13
4.45
5.58
5.76
5.95
5.99
6.07
*Coagulation with alum, sand filtration, and
adsorption through activated carbon.
Vn-18
-------
DRAM
CO
CN
J3
cu
p>
cu
•H
O
CO
-d
•H
rH
O
CO
"O
cu
rH
O
CO
CO
•H
o
rH
CO
4J
O
H
M
O
MH
CO
cu
rH
CO
^
UH
0
&
1
CO
0
^o
£_|
cu
4-
stewa
fO
£5
4-1
o,
T3
§
CO
a
•H
4-1
to
cu
M
H
C!
e
CU
4J
CO
CO
*
u
CO
u
cu a:
PL, C5
• O
ro O
rO O
El
^>
H
O
cu
-p
a
cu
ho
cu
-p
0)
Pi
^ ^
C—
0
•
CO
~
CO
vo
ON
^
_^f-
CO
.
LA
O
O
t—
vo
H
H
O
H
H
ON
t-
-p
G
(L)
H
CM
W
fl
O
^
03
O
r^
CU
-p
ctiva
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 2L
Pollutant Reduction Efficiency of
Diatomaceous Earth F
ilter System
in Treating Laundromat Wastewater (110)
Parameter
BOD mg/1
COD mg/1
TDS mg/1
Influent.
133
285
488
Turbidity Percent Trans.
P0(4) mg/1
pH (Units)
Acidity mg/1
Alkalinity mg/1
Hardness mg/1
Coliform/100 ml
169
7.2
91
368
208
"72,000
Effluent
34
45
715
97
6
8.5
89
372
266
•^10
Percent
Reduction
73
85
-44
94
2
- 1
- 8
VII-20
-------
DRAFT
Precoating with Diatomaceous Earth and Cationic 284
^Surfactant Flocculation 286
This treatment system is designed to treat up to 10,000 £als/day 290
of wastewater which _is pumped to the mixing tank at a constant rate 291
from a 6,000 jjallon holding tank. _The holding tank operates on level 293
control and time cycle so that one jlay's flow can be treated prior to 294
low-level cutoff. Chemicals, such as cationic surfactant and calcium 295
salt, are metered to the mixing tank. ^At alkaline pH operation, 296
caustic is also added at this point. The retention period in the 297
mixing tank is 10 minutes.
At the start of a day's operation, diatomaceous earth is adde'd to 300
the mixing tank and pumped through the filter to coat it.
Flocculated waste is then filtered through the diatomite at a 301
constant flaw rate for a period of 15-30 minutes. The filter 303
elements are then mechanically bumped to remove the decoating. The 304
precoat floe mixture is reprecoated on the filter elements and Cycled 305
until the filtrate runs clear. The waste is again filtered for the 306
15-30 minute period, filtration and bumping are repeated until all 308
waste is treated. 309
During each filtration cycle, the flow rate tends to fall off as 311
flocculated solids build upon the outside of the filter cake. When 313
the cake is bumped and reprecoated, the flocculated solids are 314
redistributed through the diatomite. j>ince this increases the 315
resistance to filtra_tion, the flow rate and total volume filtered per 316
VII-21
-------
DRAFT
cycle ^gradually decreases. A_ practical maximum of 25 bumps can be 318
attained before reprecoating with j[resh diatomite. At the end of a 320
treatment run, the spent diatomite mixture is jDumped to a disposal 321
point. The total volume of sludge per treatment run is 70 gallons. 322
This can be periodically hauled to a disposal site or dried on a 324
small sand bed. The pollutant parameter reductions for this system 325
are given in Table 25.
Vacuum Diatomite Filter 327
The basic unit consists of a vacuum diatomite filter preceded by 330
a reaction and recycling tank. The unit for a 30-machine laundromat 331
is contained in a prefabricated metal tank 8 ft long, 3 ft wide, and 332
6 ft high (3.4 m by 0.9 m by 3.6 m) . T_he reaction chamber is 333
approximately 2.5 ft (0.8 m) long and the jfliter chamber is 5.5 ft 334
(1.7 m) long. T_he basic treatment equipment consists of 8 filter 335
elements, each of which has a surface area of _15 sq ft (1.4 sq m), a 336
120 gpm (0.44 cu m/min) recirculating pump, a d.ry feeder, slurry 337
feeder and controls, and a pump to transfer _the wastewater from the 338
storage tank to the treatment unit. Typical operating results are 339
detailed in Table 26.
Activated Charcoal PolyelectrolLte System 341
TJiis process calls for adding of activated charcoal to a jDoly- 344
^lectrolite to form a floe. The effluent is then clarified and 346
passed through a diatomite filter. The BOD of the effluent is 347
VII-22
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 25
Laundry Waste Treatment
Coin-Operated Laundry
Pollutant Reduction Efficiency of DEFCSF*
System in Treating Laundromat Wastewater(85)
Influent Effluent
mg/1 lb/1,000 gal mg/1 lb/1,000 gal
BOD
COD
Total Solids
Volatile Solids
Phosphate
243
572
1,270
379
267
2.03
4.77
10.59
3.16
2.23
90
171
1,050
110
150
0.75
1.43
8.76
0.92
1.25
Percent
Reduction
67
70
17
71
44
*Diatomaceous earth filtration and cationic surfactant flocculation.
Salt added 480 4.00
Cationic added 88 0.73
VII-23
-------
DRAFT
VD O CO O
H CV
^TrO
H H
-------
DRAFT
reduced by 95% and the pH is about 10 or 11; _the system does not 349
remove oil and grease.
Flotation Clarification 351
^n this process, laundry wastewater is pumped into a 1,000-gallon 353
_tank to produce a mixture of acid and alkaline wastes. Bentonite is 355
injected into the waste line to the ballast tank. ^Treatment is begun 356
when the tank is nearly full. 357
The blended wastewater has a temperature of about 120 degrees F 359
as it leaves the ballast tank, where a 1.44% solution of sulfuric 360
acid is injected ^nto the waste line. An automatic recorder- 363
controller is used to maintain the pH at 5.0. A_s the wastewater 364
flows from the ballast tank ^p the clarifier, it passes through a 365
lint trap, a. hydraulic flow regulator, and a heat exchanger where it 366
is warmed to ^40 degrees F. Downstream from the heat exchanger, a 368
10.8% solution of alum ±s injected by a metering pump at the rate of 369
25.0 gpg. A_ 1.94% solution of caustic soda (sodium hydroxide) jLs 371
injected, and the pH level is maintained at ^.0 by another automatic 372
pH recorder-controller. .A chemical floe is formed by the addition of 373
alum and caustic. This floe is then lifted by bubbling air through 374
the liquid.
The floe formed in the main flow line contains or is attached to 376
adr bubbles which cause it to rise through the flocculation chamber 378
when it reaches the clarifier. The floe and its entrapped air and 379
VII-25
-------
DRAFF
waste collect on the surface as a foamy sludge, which is removed by 380
skimmer blades. The liquid, separating from the floe as it emerges 381
from the ^locculation chamber, flows first downward, then upward 382
_through an annular space, and over a weir into the laundry. There it 384
is tapped off and pumped into a 1,000 gallon storage tank. 385
Laundromat wastewater reductions by flotation clarification are 387
presented in Table 27.
General 389
The following technologies can be applied by all the 391
subcategories discussed thus far in this Section. 392
Micro-Straining 39A
This process involves the use cf high-speed, continuously back- 397
washed, rotating drum filters, that work in open, gravity-flow 398
conditions. ^Et could be employed directly after rapid-and^slow-sand 400
filtration for the r_ecovery of wash water. Micro-straining has not 402
been studied in relation to industrial laundry wastewater.
Lint Screen 404
T_his is a simple screen that filters the lint out of wastewater. 406
It must be removed and cleaned periodically. 407
VII-26
-------
3 o
0) >
o o
^ S
DRAFT
V3
H
etf
M
0)
a
ro
O
CO
O
CM
-P
CS
60
fn
3
oi
H
O
i d
I rH
•P
s
tf c
VII-27
-------
DRAFT
Reverse Osmosis 409
_In this process, wastewater is cleaned by passing it through a 412
semipermeable membrane. Only one facility is known to be using it — 413
a 2:inen laundry in Denmark. Equipment is expensive and energy 415
requirements are high. Typical percent rejections ^or various 417
constituents found in domestic sewage are summarized _in Table 28; 418
feed water recovery level of approximately 92%.
Ozonization 420
This process consists of adding ozone to wastewater _to oxidize 423
the pollutants. _Its principal applications are the sterilization of 424
Conventionally-purified water, taste; and odor control, the 425
elimination of iron and manganese, and the removal of color. This 427
process has not been used in a laundry wastewater system.
The reduction of foaming by ozonizing raw sewage and the effluent 429
from ^ewage treatment plants is closely related to the Deduction of 431
anionic surfactants (as measured by the methylene blue _test). The 433
ozonized effluent is crystal clear and nearly odorless. 434
Ultrasonic Cleaning 436
Verbal information has been obtained from researchers _that the 439
laundering of fabrics by the use of ultrasonics has b^een successfully 440
demonstrated on a joint laboratory-Industrial ^.aundry study. No 442
definitive data is available at this time.
VII-28
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 28
Typical Rejection Levels
by
Reverse Osmosis Treatment of Domestic Sewage*(27)
Constituent Percent
Total Dissolved Solids 93
Total Volatile Solids 92
Total Hardness 93
Soluble TOC 40 - 50
Soluble TIC 68
Organic Nitrogen 100
Ammonia Nitrogen 88
Phosphates 98
Chlorides 89
Sulfates 97
Alkalinity 81
Total Coliforms 100
*Type 510 membrane utilized.
VII-29
-------
DRAFT
Dry Cleaners 445
T_he only process wastewater generated _comes from using a water 448
injection method to remove water-soluble soil. Th±s wastewater is 450
removed from the recycled solvent by means of a Reparation and 451
filtering system. The volume is small and disposal should be no 452
problem. The only control required of the dry cleaning industry is ji 454
program of good housekeeping such as proper maintenance and operation
of equipment. 455
Summary 457
The effluent reductions obtainable by the application _of the 460
various technologies are summarized in Table 29.
VII-30
-------
TABUi 29
SUMMARY OF VARIOUS WASTEWATEE TREATMENT
SYSTEMS
Lorla. I PnmptL»tt
VII-31
-------
DRAFi
SECTION VIII
$%Cost, Energy and Non-Water Quality Aspect$% 8
_$%Auto Wash Establishments$% 13
_$%Best Practicable Control Technology (BPCT)$% 16
_$%Best Available Treatment (BAT), and$% 18
_$_%New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)$% 20
Rase level of practice in the auto wash industry is passage 23
through a sump and direct discharge to a sewer, ji leaching field, or 24
surface waters. For those plants discharging to surface waters, BPCT 25
is total recycle. Total recycle systems are commercially available 26
and are already in operation in auto washes that previously
Discharged to municipal systems. The systems have typically been 28
installed as cost-saving devices to avoid paying effluent Charges. 29
Recycle systems are characterized by scale economies that result 31
in a differential impact depending on the size of an auto wash. _In 33
view of this impact costs have been developed for two sizes of
facilities: _(1) an average self-service car wash; and (2) an average 35
automatic car wash.
£%Self-Service Auto Washes$% 37
T_he average self-service car wash is assumed to have 6 bays and 39
to service 1500 cars per month or ^8,000 cars per year. 40
Manufacturers of recycle systems indicate that the lowest cost to 41
equip and install a recycle system for a self-service auto wash would 42
VIII-1
-------
DRAFT
be about $7820 (1973 costs). Maintenance costs are assumed to be 4% 43
of capital costs or $312/year. Operating costs are based upon 4 man 44
days per year of service, and are equal to $320/year. j^ludge would 45
accumulate at a rate of about 200 Ibs. per year (0.011 Ibs. per car
washed) and disposal costs would be negligible. The system would 47
consume about 1600 kilowatt hours of energy per year.
Manufacturers of recycle equipment claim that without recycling 49
about $0.06 of detergents a_re used to wash each car; with recycling 50
these costs for detergents are cut to $0.03 per car. These claims 51
may be subject to question so the costs for BPCT in Table 30 are
presented for two conditions. First the costs assume no savings on 52
detergents. The second set of costs assumes a $0.03 per car savings 53
on detergent costs. In addition, a savings of per gallon is 54
assumed for water saved by recycling in the second set of costs. 55
T_he costs of BAT and NSPS would be essentially the same as BPCT 57
because the technology is the same. The cost of NSPS would be 58
somewhat lower because installation costs would be reduced. The 59
difference, however, is not great enough to be economically
significant.
Pretreatment costs for small self-service auto washes are zero. 61
Base level of practice in the industry is passage through a sump 62
prior to discharge to the sewer. j>ince the pretreatment guideline 63
specifies this technology, no costs are involved.
VIII-2
-------
DRAFT
^Automatic Autc Washes$% 65
The typical automatic auto wash is assumed to service 7,000 autos 67
per month. The capital cost for purchase and installation of a 68
recycle system for this facility would be about $14,400 (Sept. 1973
dollars). At 4% of capital costs, maintenance costs would be $575 69
per year. Operations would demand about 8 man days per year or $640 70
per year. T_he system would use about 5000 kilowatt-hours of energy 71
per year. _S_ludge would accumulate at a rate of 77 pounds per month 72
and disposal costs would be negligible.
Again, as was the case for the self-service auto wash, two sets 74
of costs for BPCT are presented in Table 31. T_he first set assumes 75
no savings for detergents or water and the second set does.
VIII-3
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 30
79
BPCT Treatment Costs (Sept. 73)
Self-Service Auto Wash (1500 autos/month)
Investment:
Annual Costs:
Capital Costs
Depreciation
0 & M (excluding energy
and power costs)
Energy and Power Costs
Detergent Savings
Water Savings
Total
Costs per Auto Washed
No Savings
$7.,820
Savings Included
$7,820
782
782
632
50
$2,240
$0.124
782
782
632
50
-450
-108
$1,682
$0.093
82
84
87
89
91
93
95
97
98
100
102
104
105
107
VIII-4
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 31 113
BPCT Treatment Costs (Sept. 1973) 115
Automatic Car Wash (7,000 autos/month) 116
No Savings Savings Included 120
Investment: $14,400 $14,400 121
Annual Costs: 123
Capital Costs 1,440 1,440 124
Depreciation 1,440 1,440 125
O&M (excluding energy 127
and power costs) 1,215 1,215 128
Energy & Power Costs 125 125 130
Detergent Savings -2,520 132
Water savings -504 134
Total $4,220 $1,196 . 135
Costs per Auto Washed $0.050 $0.014 137
The costs of BAT and NSPS for the automatic auto wash would again 142
be essentially the same as BPCT. At most, the installation cost for 143
a new auto wash would be reduced by $1,000. This would amount to a 144
total reduction of only $0.001 per auto washed.
As for the self-service auto wash, the costs of pretreatment are 146
zero.
£%Assumptions$% 148
P_ower Costs - $0.025 per kwhr 150
Depreciation - 10% per year 152
Capital Costs - 10% per year 154
VIII-5
-------
DRAFT
Credit for Water - $0.30 per 100D gallons 156
Use Reduction 158
industrial Laundries 160
Best Practicable Control Technology Available (BPCTCA) 163
The task of estimating the costs of achieving BPCTCA by 167
industrial laundries is complicated because laundries come in a 168
variety of sizes, _and their inputs and processes differ markedly. 169
These variations are reflected in differences in wastewater flows and 170
characteristics. The task of cost estimation is further complicated 171
by the absence of operating treatment systems.
The cost estimates developed here rely heavily on the costs of 173
installing and operating the oxidation charcoal filter system which 174
has been used as the model on which the proposed treatment is based.
Ease level of practice in the industry is assumed to be a heat 176
reclaimer unit and a lint screen. £osts have been developed for two 177
laundry sizes — a 90,000 Ib/weelc laundry and a 25,000 Ib/week 178
laundry. The unit processes and overall treatment system for the two 179
sizes are exactly the same. Only the scales of the treatment systems 180
are different.
The first step in the treatment process is flow equalization. 182
For the 90,000 Ib/week laundry, this requires a tank with a capacity 183
VIII-6
-------
DRAFT
of 1,500 gallons while a 900-gallon tank is needed for the 25,000 184
Ib/week laundry.
The second step in the treatment process is a dissolved air 186
flotation and skimming unit. The third step in the process is a 188
chemical-physical separator system employing aeration. This stage of 189
the process has also been referred to as aerated storage. R>r the 190
90,000 Ib/week laundry the system requires two of these units having
_!, 200-gallon capacity. The two units operate in coordination with 192
each other. One stores and aerates while the other empties and 193
fills. Two 900-gallon units are required for the 25,000 Ib/week 194
laundry. These units are essentially aeration mixing devices that 195
have been installed ^p operate as part of the overall treatment 196
system. Units are available from a number of manufacturers. 197
The fourth step in the treatment system is passage of the 199
wastewater _through the monofilament filter/oxidation chamber. This 201
unit is essentially an aerated tank lined with a fabric filter.
I_nfluent waters are aerated and filtered through the filter, ^gain, 203
the size of these units could be 1,200 and 900-gallons of capacity
_for the 90,000 and 25,000 Ib/week laundries, respectively. 204
The fifth and final step in the system is carbon filtration. JEn 207
both cases — for the large and small laundry — this is assumed to
be a _300-gallon, upflow filter containing 75-100 Ib of granular 208
carbon.
VIII-7
-------
DRAFT
T_he estimated costs of installing and operating this treatment 210
system appear in Tables 32 and 33. 211
TABLE 32 215
COST OF BPCTCA 217
INDUSTRIAL LAUNDRIES 218
90,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 219
222
Investment Costs: 223
(Including installation and contingencies) 224
1,500-gallon equalization tank $3,000 226
Dissolved air flotation unit 15,000 227
Two aerated storage units 12,600 228
Filter/oxidation chamber 3,300 229
Carbon filter 1,100 230
200 square foot area @ $50/SF 10,000 231
Total $45,000 232
Annual Costs: 234
Capital $ 4,500 236
Depreciation 4,500 237
Sludge disposal ($12/day X 250) 3,000 238
Operation/Maintenance* 4,500 239
Carbon (replaced twice per year) 100 240
Filters (replaced twice per year) 60_ 241
Subtotal $16,660 242
Electricity 800 244
Total $17,460 245
Cost per pound of laundry — $0,004 247
*0ther package systems have required as high as one-fourth 249
pound of carbon replacement for every 1,000 gallon treated. 250
This would translate to about $3,000 per year. 251
VIII-8
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 33 267
COST OF BPCTCA 269
INDUSTRIAL LAUNDRIES 270
25,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 271
274
Investment Costs: 276
(Including installation and contingencies) 277
900-gallon equalizing tank $ 2,000 279
Dissolved air flotation unit 15,000 280
900-gallong aerated storage unit 5,700 281
900-gallon filter/oxidation chamber 3,000 282
Carbon filter 1.100 283
Subtotal $26,800 284
200 square feet @ $50/SF 10.000 285
Total 36,800 . 286
Annual Costs: 288
Capital $ 3,680 290
Depreciation 3,680 291
Sludge Disposal ($3/day x 250) 750 292
Operation and Maintenance 3,500 293
Carbon 50 294
Filters 50
295
Subtotal $11,710 296
Electricity 400 297
Total $12,110 298
Cost per pound of laundry $0.009 300
VIII-9
-------
DRAFl
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 253
(BATEA) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 254
The effluent requirements of BATEA and NSPS are the same as for 258
BPCTCA in the industrial laundry subcategory. The costs of BATEA and 260
NSPS might be somewhat less than BPCTCA because of _the possibility of 261
innovative process changes and overall lower installation costs.
Nevertheless, costs may be as high as those of achieving BPCTCA by 262
existing sources. Therefore, the costs of BATEA and NSPS are taken 263
to be the same as those in Tables 32 and 33.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing and New Sources 303
Pretreatment requirements for existing and new sources are 307
equivalent to BPCTCA. The costs of pretreatment for new sources are 308
estimated to be the same as the estimates for BPCTCA that appear in 309
Tables 32 and 33. pretreatment for existing sources would never be 310
more than the costs in Tables 32 and 33. I_n many cases the costs of 311
pretreatment for existing sources may be ze.ro provided the 312
municipality receiving the discharge is committed in its National 313
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to remove the 314
portion of incompatible pollutants equal to that which would be 315
provided by BPCTCA. I_n these cases, the savings achieved by not 316
having to install BPCTCA equipment will be offset by user charges. 317
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family an.d Commerical) 321
and Diaper Service 322
As was true for industrial laundries, this subcategory is 326
VIII-10
-------
DRAFT
characterized by variety —primarily with respect to size, rates of 327
wastewater flow, and concentations of constituents in the waste 328
flows. It would be fruitless to try to provide the great number of 329
separate cost estimates that would be necessary to capture all of the 330
diversity in this subcategory. The differences, though identifiable, 331
are not that great when reflected in their effects on treatment 332
systems costs or economic impacts owing to scale and equipment 333
limitations in pollution control engineering and technology.
£pst estimates have been developed for two sizes of linen supply 335
laundries. Costs for commercial and diaper service laundries are 336
assumed to be essentially the same for similar size operations. The 338
two sizes of laundries are the 90,000 Ib/week operation and the
25,000 Ib/week facility. These sizes cover the range for industrial 339
laundries and similarly appear to cover the range for linen, 340
commercial, and diaper services laundries.
Available (BPCTCA) 344
A_ lint screen and a heat reclaimer are again assumed to Comprise 349
base level of practice. Thereafter, BPCTCA consists of equalization, 350
screening, aerated storage, monofilament filtration/oxidation, and 351
carbon filtration. These unit processes are described in more detail 352
in the cost discussion for industrial Laundries with the exception of 353
the screening process. This screening process consists of a 354
motorized screen filter that is self cleaning. J5olids collect on the 355
VIII-11
-------
DRAFT
screen and are automatically scraped off into a sludge container that 356
€
is emptied periodically.
The costs of BPCTCA for linen supply, power laundries, and diaper 358
services are presented in Tables 34 and 35. 359 *
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BATEA) 362
and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 363
BATEA and NSPS require total recycle of wash and rinse, waters. 367 *
jjince a minimum of 10% and usually 15 or more percent of process 368
waters are j^ost through evaporation and being carried out with the 369
wash load, the recycle system requires considerable make-up water. 370
Recycle systems that have been operated have typically run at between 447
K) and 20% make-up water. 448
•
The BPCTCA system described in the previous section and costed 450
out in Tables 34 and 35 provides a level of effluent quality that can 451
be reused as wash and rinse water. The only modifications necessary 453 f
to the BPCTCA system are the addition of a_ storage tank, the 454
provision of recirculation pipes and pump, and the automatic valving 455
for make-up waters from the water supply. The costs of these 456 A
"~~ ^^
modifications have been estimated for the 90,000 and 25,000 Ib/week 457
plants and have been added to the BPCTCA costs to provide the
incremental BATEA cost estimates that appear in Tables 36 and 37. 458 A
VIII-12
-------
DRAF1
TABLE 34
COST OF BPCTCA
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDRIES, AND DIAPER SERVICE
90,000 LB/WEEK PLANT
374
376
377
378
381
383
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
393
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
403
404
406
Investment Costs:
1,500-gallon equalization tank
Traveling Screen
Two 1,200-gallon aerated storage tanks
1,200-gallon filter/oxidation chamber
Carbon filter
200 square foot area @ $50/SF
Annual Costs:
Capital
Depreciation
Sludge Disposal ($12/week)
Operation and Maintenance
Carbon (replace twice per year)
Filters (replace twice per year)
Electricity
Cost per pound of laundry $0.0026
$3,000
3,600
12,600
3,300
1,100
10.000
$33,600
$ 3,360
3,360
650
3,500
100
60
$11,030
800
$11,830
VIII-33
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 35 409
COST OF BPCTCA All
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDR"ES, AND DIAPER SERVICES 412
25,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 413
416
Investment Costs: 418
(Including installation and contingencies) 419
900-gallon equalization tank $2,000 421
Traveling screen 3,600 422
900-gallon aeration storage unit: 5,700 423
900-gallon filter oxidation chamber 3,000 424
Carbon filter 1,100 425
200 square feet of space @ $50/£iF 10,000 426
$25,400 427
Annual Costs: 429
Capital $ 2,540 431
Depreciation 2,540 432
Sludge disposal 200 433
Operation and maintenance 2,500 434
Carbon 50 435
Filters 50 436
$7,880 437
Electricity 400 439
$8,280 440
Cost per pound of laundry $0.0067 442
VIII-14
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 36 462
INCREMENTAL COSTS OF EATEA 464
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDRIES, AND DIAPER SERVICES 465
90,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 466
469
Investment Costs:
Storage Tank (12,500 gallons)
Piping and valves
Subtotal
144 square feet at $50/SF
Total
$18,000
500
$18,500
7,500
$26,000
471
473
474
475
476
477
Annual Costs: 479
Capital $ 2,600 481
Depreciation 2,600 482
Operation and maintenance 500 483
Total $ 5,700 484
Increased cost per pound of laundry $0.0013 486
VIII-15
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 37 489
INCREMENTAL COSTS OF BATEA 491
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDRIES, AND DIAPER SERVICES 492
25,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 493
496
Investment Costs:
Storage Tank (3,500 gallons)
Piping and valves
70 square feet $50/SF
$ 5,200
350
5,550
3,500
$ 9,050
498
500
501
502
503
504
Annual Costs: 506
Capital $ 905 508
Depreciation 905 509
Operation and Maintenance 300 510
Total $ 2,110 511
Incremental cost per pouad of laundry $0.0017 513
VIII-16
-------
DRAFT
The 90,000 Ib/week laundry is assumed to use approximately 5.5 517
gallons of water per pound of laundry. C)ne consultant has estimated 519
that by recycling a laundry one can save as much as $0.95 per 1,000 520
gallons of water used or $0.0052 per pound of laundry. Table 38 521
shows the consultant's estimates. I_f the figures in the table are 522
correct, the decision to go to BATEA directly rather than to BPCTCA 523
would result in a lower annual £er pound cost of laundry washed. The 525
total cost of BATEA from existing base level of practice would amount
to $0.0026 and 0.0013 less $0.0052 or a net saving of $0.0013 per 526
pound of laundry for the 90,000 Ib/week laundry and $0.0067 and 527
$0.0017 less $0.0052 or a net cost of $0.0032 per pound for the 528
25,000 Ib/week laundry.
TABLE 38 532
CONSULTANT'
Water purchase
Sewerage Surcharge
Water softening
Heating water
Laundry room supplies
S ESTIMATE OF RESIDUAL VALUE IN
LAUNDRY WASTEWATER
Value/1,000 gallons
$ 0.33
0.28
0.05
0.26
0.02
$ 0.95
534
535
538
540
542
543
544
545
546
547
VIII-17
-------
DRAFT
Hew Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 552
NSPS for linen supply, power laundries, and diaper services are 554
the same as the requirements for BATEA. The costs of achieving NSPS 556
for a new source are equal to the sum of the costs of BPCTCA and the 557
incremental costs of achieving BATEA. T_he costs of NSPS for the two 558
sizes of typical laundries appear in Tables 39 and 40.
TABLE 39 562
COST OF NSPS
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDRIES, AND DIAPER
90,000 LB/WEEK PLANT
Investment Costs:
1,500 gallon equalizing tank
Traveling screen
2 - 1,200 gallon aerated storage tanks
1,200 gallon filter/oxidation chamber
Carbon filter
Storage tank
Piping and valves
344 square feet @ $50/SF
Total
Annual Costs:
Capital
Depreciation
Sludge disposal
Operation and maintenance
Carbon replacement
Filter replacement
Electricity
Cost per pound of laundry $0.0039
SERVICES
$ 3,000
3,600
12,600
3,300
1,100
18,000
500
17,500
$59,600
$ 5,960
5,960
650
4,000
100
60
$16,730
800
$17,530
564
565
566
569
571
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
583
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
593
594
595
VIII-18
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 40 598
COST OF NSPS 600
LINEN SUPPLY, POWER LAUNDRIES, AND DIAPER SERVICES 601
25,000 LB/WEEK PLANT 602
605
Investment Costs: 607
900 gallon equalizing tank $ 2,000 609
Traveling screen 3,600 610
900 gallon aerated storage unit 5,700 611
900 gallon filter/oxidation chamber 3,000 612
Carbon filter 1,100 613
Storage tank 5,200 614
Piping and valves 350 615
270 square feet @ $50/SF 13.500 616
$34,450 617
Annual Costs: 619
Capital $ 3,450 621
Depreciation 3,450 622
Sludge disposal 200 623
Carbon replacement 50 624
Filter replacement 50 625
Operation and maintenance 2,800 626
$10,000 627
Electricity 400 629
$10,400 630
Cost per pound of laundry $0.0083 632
VIII-19
-------
DRAFT
Pretreatment Standards for Existing^ and New Sources 634
Pretreatment requirements for existing and new sources are 638
Equivalent to BPCTCA. The costs of pretreatment for new sources are 640
the same as those estimated for BPCTCA in Tables 34 and 35. In many 642
cases, the cost of pretreatment for existing sources may be _z_ero 643
provided the municipality receiving the discharge is committed in its
NPDES permit to remove the portion of incompatible, pollutants equal 644
to that which would be provided by KPCTCA. In these cases, the 646
savings achieved by not having to install BPCTCA equipment will be 647
offset by user charges.
Coin-Operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities, and Laundry 651
and Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 652
Coin-operated laundries and the catch-all subcategory of dry 657
cleaning and laundry and garment services not elsewhere classified
include a wide range of types and sizes of facilities. The dry 659
cleaning establishments not elsewhere classified should already be
practicing no discharge of any process wastewaters. The laundries 661
other than coin-operated laundries more than likely have wastes that
are similar to those of coin-operated laundries. _I_f the wastes of 663
these other laundries are not comparable, then they £an be treated as 664
linen or industrial laundries whichever has the strength of wastes
that more closely approximates that of the laundry in question. 665
VIII-20
-------
DRAFT
For the purposes of cost estimates, one size of coin-operated 667
laundry has been treated. jSjlnce coin-operated laundries cater to 668
local demand and depend heavily cm proximity to the user, these 669
facilities seldom exceed 50 machines. On the other hand the minimum 670
size coin-operated laundry would s_eldom contain fewer than 10 671
machines. _In view of this relatively limited range, a representative 672
facility of 25 machines will serve as a good basis for cost 673
estimates. The economies of scale are not so great that the 674
estimated unit costs for the 25 machine facility c_annot be readily 675
assumed about equal for the 10 or 50 machine facility. _S_imilarly, 676
the accuracy of the cost estimating techniques and the economic
impact techniques _is not so fine as might be offered by a multiple 677
set of estimates based on size of the laundry facility.
T_he typical facility is assumed to contain 25 washing machines. 679
The maximum daily design flow for the facility is assumed to be 1,000 680
gallons per hour or 4^0 washes per hour given a typical flow of 25 681
gallons per load. Base level of practice for the facility is assumed 682
to be passage of the wastewaters through a lint screen prior to 683
discharge.
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPCTCA) 685
BPCTA is passage through a lint screen and filtration. The 688
capital cost required is that for the installation of the filter and
a_ sludge gravity thickening tank for removal of sludge from the 689
VIII-21
-------
DRAFT
backwash water. The costs of BPCTCA appear in Table 41. (The costs 691
are based on the cost of a mixed media filter and not a diatornaceous
earth filter.) 692
TABLE 41 696
COST OF BPCTCA 698
COIN-OPERATED LAUNDRY 699
25 MACHINE INSTALLATION 700
703
Investment Costs: 705
3-phase filter, including media, $ 2,500 707
valving and skid mounting 708
Piping and valving 500 709
Gravity sludge thicking tank with pump drain 750 710
(100 gallon) 711
Space (20 square feet @ $50/SF) 1,000 712
Total $ 4,750 713
Annual Costs: 715
Capital $ 500 717
Depreciation 500 718
Sludge removal 50 719
Operation and maintenance 100 720
$ 1,150 721
Electricity 100 723
Tctal $ 1,250 724
Cost per wash 726
'(50,000 gal/wk @ 25 gal/wash) $0.012 727
VIII-22
-------
DRAFT
Best Available Treatment Technology Economically 729
Achievable (BATEA) 730
BATEA for coin-operated laundries and the other facilities in 734
this subcategory is r_ecycle of process wastewaters. j>everal 736
manufacturers produce physical-chemical units that provide this level
£f treatment. The systems consist of chemical coagulation, 738
clarification, filtration, and carbon absorption. Although these 740
systems are package units there is no reason why, with planning and
minor modifications, the filter installed for BPCTCA could not be 741
incorporated into the package plant for BATEA. 742
The estimate for the incremental costs of going from BPCTCA to 744
BATEA appears in Table 42. 745
Again it is useful to examine the possible offsetting savings 782
that might be made possible by recycling. According to the figures 784
in Table 38, and the flow assumptions with respect _tp the 25 machine 785
laundry, the recycling system could reduce production costs by £0.018 786
per wash. If these savings were realized, the incremental costs of 787
achieving BATEA would be equal to $0.066 less $0.018 or $0.048 per 788
wash.
VIII-23
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 42 749
INCREMENTAL COST OF BATEA 751
COIN-OPERATED LAUNDRY 752
25 MACHINE INSTALLATION 753
756
Investment: 758
Package plant installed $ 27,000 760
Less savings for filter from BFCTCA - 1,000 761
Additional space (100 - 20 = 8C SF) 4,000 762
$30,000 763
Annual Costs: 765
Capital $ 3,000 767
Depreciation 3,000 768
Sludge removal 0 769
Carbon replacement 300 770
Operation and maintenance 400 771
Subtotal $ 6,700 772
Electricity 50 774
Total $ 6,750 775
Incremental cost per wash 777
(50.000 gal/wk @ 25 gal/wash) $0.066 778
VIII-24
-------
DRAFT
New Source Performanc Standards (NSPS) 790
NSPS requirements are the same as BATEA. The total costs of 793
achieving NSPS will be somewhat less than the sum £f the BPCTCA costs 794
and the incremental costs of BATEA because no transition costs are 795
incurred in going from BPCTCA to BATEA. The costs of achieving NSPS 796
appear in Table 43.
TABLE 43 800
TOTAL COST OF NSPS
COIN-OPERATED LAUNDRY
25 MACHINE INSTALLATION
Investment Costs:
Installed package plant
Space (100 square feet)
Total
Annual Costs:
Capital
Depreciation
Sludge removal
Operation and maintenance
Electricity
Cost per wash
(50,000 gal/wk @ 25 gal/wash) $0.068
$27,000
5,000
$32,000
$ 3,200
3,200
50
500
$ 6,950
150
$ 7,100
802
803
804
807
809
811
812
813
815
817
818
819
820
821
823
824
826
827
VIII-25
-------
DRAFT
Again, should the savings of Table 38 be realized this cost could 831
be reduced to $0.068 less $0.018 or $0.05 per wash. 832
Pretreatment for Existing and New Sources 834
tfo pretreatment will be required of coin-operated laundries 836
except under very unusual circumstances. Therefore, the costs of 838
pretreatment are expected to be zero.
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning 840
Tlie dry cleaning subcategory discharges non-contact cooling water 842
only. BPCTCA, BATEA, NSPS, and pretreatment requirements for 843
existing and new sources all jspecify no discharge of processing 844
water. ]3ase level of practice in the subcategory is no discharge of 845
process water. The cost of water pollution control is zero for the 846
subcategory.
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning Facilities 848
The typical carpet and upholstery cleaning facility passes 850
its wastewater through a lint trap and discharges to a municipal 851
sewer. Generally, those wastewaters contain no incompatibles and 852
there will be no pretreatment requirements for existing or new 853
sources other than a lint trap which is already accepted practice so 854
the costs of pretreatment for existing and new sources are zero. 855
VIII-26
-------
DRAFT
The volume and characteristics of the wastewaters from carpet and 858
upholstery cleaning facilities are similar to those of the auto wash
industry. JBPCTCA requires recycling of treated wastewaters and no 859
discharge for carpet Eind upholstery cleaning facilities that 860
presently discharge to surface waters. Makeup water will be required 861
for such systems to replace the waters retained by the laundered 862
materials and lost through drying.
The cost of BPCTCA has been estimated for a typical carpet arid 865
upholstery cleaning facility. The typical facility is assumed to be 866
primarily a carpet cleaning operation. I_t cleans up to 1,200 square 868
yards of carpet per day using an average of _twelve gallons of wash 869
and rinse water per square yard of carpet. The daily design flow for 870
the waste treatment and recycle system is assumed to be _15,000 871
gallons per day.
The installed cost of a package recycle system for a £ar wash 874
would be approximately $12,000. The modification of the system to 875
incorporate the addition of activated carbon filtration could cost 876
another $3,000. The overall capital cost for the system installed 877
would be about $16,000.
The estimated investment and annual costs for BPCTCA for the 879
typical carpet and upholstery cleaning facility appear in Table 44. 880
VIII-27
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 44 885
ESTIMATED COSTS OF BPCTCA 887
CARPET AND UPHOLSTERY CLEANING FACILITY 888
(DESIGN FLOW -- 15.,000 GALLONS PER DAY, 889
CAPACITY — 1,200 SQUARE YARDS OF CARPET) 890
892
Investment Cost: 895
Modified package treatment system $16,000 897
Annual Costs: 899
Capital 1,600 901
Depreciation 1,600 902
Operation and Maintenance 903
(excluding energy and power) 1,000 904
Carbon replacement 1,500 905
Sludge disposal 50 906
Subtotal $ 5,750 907
Power 100 909
Total Annual Cost $ 5,850 910
Cost per square yard of carpet $0.019 912
Cost per (9 x 12) carpet $0.23 913
BATEA and NSPS for sources discharging to the surface waters are 918
the same as BPCTCA. T_he incremental costs of BATEA above those of 919
BPCTCA are zero. The costs of NSPS are the same as those for BPCTCA 920
presented in Table 44.
VIII-28
-------
DRAFT
SECTION IX
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available 8
Effluent Guidelines and Limitations 9
Introduction 13
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1, 1977, 15
jire to specify the degree of effluent reduction attainable through 17
the application of the best practicable control technology currently 18
available. There is, within the industry, a_ lack of technical 20
sophistication Jrhat derives from the fact that it is a service 22
industry. Because its custcomers are also potential competitors, 23
e_ach cost increase results in a diminished market. The industry-has, 25
therefore, done little research and development in the field of water 27
pollution control.
_Best practicable control technology currently available empha- 29
_s_izes treatment facilities at the end of the servicing process but 31
includes the con_trol technology employed within the process itself 32
when this is considered to be normal practice within an _industry. 34
Consideration was given to: 36
The total cost of application of technology in relation 40
to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved 41
from such application; 42
the size and age of equipment and facilities involved; 44
the process employed and the type of product being 45
processed; 46
the engineering aspects of the application of various 48
types of control techniques; 49
process changes; and 51
NOTICE
T-. . These are tentative recommendations based up an
information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
non-water quality environmental impact (including 53
energy requirements). 54
A_ further consideration is the degree of economic and engineering 60
reliability which must be established for the technology to be 61
currently available. As a result of demonstration projects and pilot 63
plants, there must exist a high clegree of confidence in the 64
engineering and economic practicability of the technology at the time 66
construction starts or Control facilities are installed. 68
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources 70
Some companies, particularly industrial and linen supply 72
laundries, may have to pretreat their wastewater if it contains 73
pollutants that are incompatible with a municipal sewer system. 74
incompatible pollutants, such as heavy metals, are discussed in 40 75
CFR, Part 128. Pretreatment should be to the degree attainable by 76
the application of the best practicable control technology currently 77
available, except that Credit may be taken if the municipality is 78
committed in its NPDES permit ^o remove a portion of the incompatible 79
pollutant. Pndustries other than industrial and linen supply 80
laundries wuld not generally have incompatible pollutants and would 81
not need to pretreat prior to discharge to a municipal system. Other 83
materials, such as rags, grease, acids, and explosive wastes, must 84
not be allowed to enter the sewerag,e system.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upcn
IX-2 '"formation in thw report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Identification of Best Practicable. Control Technology 87
Currently Available (BPCTCA) 89
Industrial Laundries 92
BPCTCA will include the following: 94
JL. A lint screen; 96
2_. an equalization tank large enough to handle varrying 99
operational fjLows; 100
3_. a flotation clarification system; 102
j4_. a chemical physical separator system employing aeration; 104
5_. a settling chamber where the remaining heavy particles and 107
insoluble salts will settle out;
6_. a monofilament filter/oxidation chamber; 109
_7_. a charcoal filter. Ill
The levels of effluent reductions obtainable by such a^ system are 114
listed in Table 45. J3jince present control ard treatment practices 115
followed at industrial laundries are almost completely inadequate, i_t 117
is not possible to delineate a specific existing sequence or
combination of in-process controls which could qualify a_s BPCTCA. 119
The system described above is not in use at any industrial laundry. 120
but represents a level of technology that can be applied by July 1, 121
1977.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based up - n
IX-3 information in this report and are subject to ch.-.r
based upon comments received and furlher intcr.u I
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
TABLE 45
BPCTCA
mg/1
BOD(5)
SS
Industrial
Laundries
30
30
Oil and
Grease 10
Hg
Ni
Cd
Zn
Cr
Cu
Pb
Units
PH
Still
NDP =
.0001
0.5
0.02
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.5
6-9
cooling water
No discharge
Linen
Laundries
30
30
10
.0001
0.5
0.02
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.5
6-9
not included.
of pollutants.
Auto
Washes
NDP
NDP
'STOP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
Carpet and
Upholstery
Cleaners
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
NDP
Dry 9
Cleaning
Coin-ops Plants
14
30 NDP 16
30 NDP 18
20
NDP 21
NDP 23
NDP 25
NDP 27
NDP 29
NDP 31
NDP 33
NDP 35
37
6-9 NDP 39
41
43
NOTICE
laete are tentative recommendations based upon
information in this report and are subject to chants
IX-4 based upon comment* received and further interned
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and 12A
Commercial), and Diaper Services 126
A typical system currently being used in linen laundries consists 129
of a screening operation, an oxidation ^ank, and an activated 130
charcoal filter. The effluent reductions obtainable by this system 131
are listed in Table 45.
Auto Wash Establishments 133
Approximately 30% of the auto wash industry has found it 135
economical ^p recycle process wastewaters. It is estimated that 137
approximately 15% of the wash water is lost through vehicle carryoff. 138
Recycling represents the best practicable control technology 139
currently available for this industry. A_ typical recycling facility 140
consists of a filter pump with basket strainer, a_ wash water filter 141
to remove dirt, a detergent filter to remove soap, and &_ recycling 142
tank. The system can be completely self-contained. 143
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 145
A_t present the carpet and upholstery cleaning industry does not 148
treat its process wastewater, but it can do so by making simple 149
modifications to systems used by the auto wash industry. This can 150
include, for example, adding a charcoal filter to remove color. By 151
taking such steps, carpet and upholstery cleaning industry can .152
achieve recycling. Makeup water is required to replace the water 153
lost through drying.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations bated upon
information in Ink report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further Internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Coin-Operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities, and Laundry 156
and Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 158
Various types of treatment exist within the coin-operated 161
JLaundries ranging from a simple lint screen to recycle. A_ system 163
that is consistent with the best practicable control technology 164
currently available for the coin-operated laundries is filtration 165
through a lint screen and a d_iatomaceous earth filter. The effluent 167
reductions obtainable by this type of treatment are presented in 168
Table 45.
T_he coin-operated dry cleaning segment discharges only noncontact 170
£ooling water and therefore the best practicable control technology 171
currently available will be no discharge of process wastewaters. The 173
soil that is removed from the garments is in the form of a muck or
sludge.
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning 176
The dry cleaning subcategory discharges only noncontact cooling 179
water and, therefore BPCTCA will be no discharge of _p_rocess 180
wastewater. T_he soil that is removed from the garments is in the 181
form of a muck or sludge. 182
Loadings Summary 184
The wastewater loadings for all subcategories in terms of Ib/unit 186
of production based on typical water volume and amount of fabric 188
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
IX-6 information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
processed are presented in Table 46. The concentrations are from
Table 45.
189
TABLE 46
1
4
BPCTCA
9
Parameter
BOD(5)
Suspended
Solids
Oil and
Grease
Hg
Ni
Cd
Zn
Cr
Cu
Pb
Waste Loading
Industrial*
Laundry
Ib/lb
0.0014
0.0014
0.0005
.5 X 10 (-8)
.2 X 10(-4)
.1 X 10(-5)
.2 X 10 (-4)
.2 X 10 (-4)
.9 X 10(-5)
.2 X 10 (-4)
Ibs/Unit Output
Linen**
Laundry
Ib/lb
0.0014
0.0014
0.0005
.5 X 10(-8)
.2 X 10(-4)
.1 X 10(-5)
.2 X 10(-4)
.2 X 10(-4)
.9 X 10(-5)
.2 X 10 (-4)
10
Coin-Operated*** 11
Laundry 12
Ib/load 13
0.0075 15
17
0.0075 18
20
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
*Average industrial load 800 pounds, average volume of water 38
used is 4,470 gallons as per pp 24-25 Rexnord Report. 39
**Average linen load of 550 pounds, average volume of 3,025 40
gallons as per page 148, Rexnord Report. 41
***Flow/unit = 30 gal/load, page VII of this report. 42
NOTICE
XX-7 ete are tentative recommendations based up
information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comment* received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
SECTION X
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 7
Introduction 11
The best available technology economically achievable guidelines 13
and limitations for the auto and other laundries are to be achieved 14
not later than July 1, 1983. The technologies described in Section 16
VII were determined by identifying _the best control and treatment 17
technology employed within the industrial Category or subcategory 18
during on-site inspections, by EPA laboratory analyses, and following 19
consultation with recognized experts in the industry. Unlike BPCTCA 20
technology, which is based on an average of the best performance,
BATEA technology is based on the best demonstrated ^echnology taking 22
into account such factors as: (1) type of process employed; (2) 23
operating methods; (3) batch as opposed to continuous operations; _(4) 24
use of alternative raw materials and mixes of raw materials; (_5) use 25
of dry rather than wet processes (including substitution of
^recoverable solvents for water); _(6) recovery of pollutants as by- 27
products.
Industrial Laundries 29
Industrial laundries must treat their effluent using a method 31
that reflects the best Demonstrated technology discussed in Section 32
VII. j[ince there are wide variations within the industrial laundry 33
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
x~-'- information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comment* received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
industry, no single system can be used by all plants. An example of 35
BATEA would be the use of recoverable solvents (oil) in the cleaning 36
of floor mopheads because this completely jeliminates wastewater 37
discharges. The dual-phase washing process can also represent BATEA. 38
Expanded modifications of individual modular treatment equipment, as 40
described in Section VII, used individually or in combination can
also qualify as BATEA. The effluent reductions obtainable by the 42
application of the best available technology economically achievable 43
are the same as those lasted in Table 30 of Section IX. 44
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and Commercial) 47
and Diaper Services . 49
The best available technology economically achievable by this 52
subcategory ±s recycling of process wastewaters. The technology for 54
achieving this is described in Section VII.
Auto Wash Establishments 56
By employing BPCTCA, this subcategory can achieve zero discharge 58
of process wastewater pollutants into navigable waters; BPCTCA was 60
discussed in Section IX.
Carpet and Upholstering Cleaning 62
By employing BPCTCA, this subcategory can achieve zero discharge 65
of process wastewater pollutants into navigable waters; BPCTCA was 66
discussed in Section IX.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
X-2 information b this report and are subject to char;
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities 69
and Laundry and Garment Services Not Elsewhere Classified 71
The best available technology economically achievable by this 75
subcategory is recycle of process wastewaters; the technology for 76
achieving this is described in Section VII.
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning 78
jiy employing BPCTCA, this subcategory can achieve zero discharge 80
of process wastewater pollutants into navigable waters; BPCTCA was 82
discussed in Section IX.
NOTICE
„_- These are tentative recommendations based v?
information in this report and are subject to cha
based upon comments received and further inter.
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XI
New Source Performance Standards and Pretreatment Standards 8
Introduction 11
The term "new source" is defined in the Act to mean "any source, 13
_the construction of which is commenced after the publication of 14
proposed regulations prescribing a standard of performance." £ew 16
source performance technology is based on an analysis of h.ow the 17
level of effluent may be reduced by changing the production process 18
itself either by extension or modification of ^xisting systems or by 19
complete conversion to new, more efficient methods.
Except for industrial laundries, new sources have two choices: 21
_(1) discharge to a municipally owned treatment plant with pre- 22
treatment where required by Federal regulations or as prescribed by 23
the J^ocal sewer ordinance, (2) wastewater treatment to reclaim and 24
recycle process water in what is basically a closed loop system. 25
Fresh water would be added only to make up what is lost through 26
evaporation or carryout in the product, periodic removal of 28
dissolved solids by sophisticated treatment inethods may be required. 29
Due to the possible build up of salts in industrial laundry 30
wastewater, new sources in Subcategory 1 will not have to employ a 31
closed loop system.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendation* based u;i .a
XI information in this report and are subject to d;;>r « -
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA,
-------
DRAFT
Industrial Laundries 34
Performance Standard 36
New sources within this subcategory _shall meet the limitations 39
outlined as best practicable Control technology currently available 40
in Section IX.
Pretreatment Standard 42
Before discharging into municipal systems all incompatible 44
pollutants, as defined in the Federal Register Vol. 3_8, No. 215, 45
November 8, 1973, shall be pretreated to or below _the levels 46
presented in Table 30 of Section IX. The technology consistent with 47
achieving these reductions is discussed in Section IX.
Linen Supply, Power Laundries (Family and Commercial) and 50
Diaper Service 52
Performance Standard 54
sources within this subcategory shall not discharge any 57
process wastewater pollutants into navigable waters. J^t shall be 59
recycled through reclamation plants, as outlined in Sections VII, IX, 60
and X for reuse.
Pretreatment Standard 62
If a once-through method of operation is used, ^incompatible 65
pollutants must be pretreated prior to being discharged ijito a 66
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
XI~2 information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
publicly owned treatment works and the pollutant levels achieved 65
shall riot exceed those given in Table 30 of Section IX. 66
Auto Wash Establishments 68
Performance Standard 70
New sources within this subcategory shall not discharge any 73
process wastewater pollutants into navigable waters. The technology 74
that can be used to achieve this objective is discussed in Section
IX.
Pretreatment Standards • 76
For new systems designed to discharge into publicly owned 79
treatment facilities, pretreatment £an be satisfactorily accomplished 80
by passing the wastewater through a detention sump to remove heavy 81
particulate matter.
Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 83
Performance Standard 85
New sources in this subcategory sshall not discharge any process 88
wastewater into navigable waters but recycle it as discussed in 89
Section IX.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
XI-3 '"formation in this report and are subject to change
bated upon comments received and further internal
review by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Pretreatment Standards 92
No pretreatment other than a lint screen is required because the 94
wastewater generated does not contain incompatible pollutants. 95
Coin-operated Laundries and Dry Cleaning Facilities and 98
Laundry and Garment Services, Not Elsewhere Classified 100
Performance Standard 102
New sources _in this subcategory shall not discharge any process 106
wastewater into navigable waters. 107
Pretreatment Standard 109
Because of the nature of the wastewater generated (Section V) jjnd 112
the economics involved (Section VIII) no treatment is required before 114
the wastewater is discharged into publicly owned treatment works. 115
'In the event that the effluent pollutant strength or flows 117
exceeds the _l_imits required by a municipality's sewer code, ^he 119
payment of a sewer surcharge would be economically preferrable for
the laundry.
Dry Cleaning Plants Except Rug Cleaning 121
Performance Standard 123
Jtew sources in this subcategory shall n.ot discharge any process 126
wastewater into navigable waters.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based v-
XI-'+ information in this report and are subject to c:
based upon comments received and further LU.I.
rsv!«w by EPA.
-------
DRAFT
Pretreatment Standards 128
Because the largest amount of water used by this ^ndustry is non- 131
contact in nature, jLt does not have to be treated before it is 132
allowed to enter a publicly owned treatment works. 133
Any solid waste generated as a result of _splvent recovery 136
operations should not be dumped into storm sewers but should be 137
disposed of in a well-operated landfill or h.auled to such a facility 138
by a firm approved by the governing authority.
NOTICE
These are tentative recommendations based upon
XI_5 information in this report and are subject to change
based upon comments received and further internal
r^-v e* bv t.FA.
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XII
Acknowledgments 7
MR. Donald Bulk, The Roscze Company, 3517 W. ERRISON Street, 11
Chicago, Illinois 60624
Mr. L. R. Danek, Culligan International Company, 1 Culligan Parkway, 13
Northbrook, Illinois 60062
Mr. Phillip Deegan, Laundry and Cleaners Allied Trades Association, 15
Inc., 11 East Illinois Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611 16
Mr. Max L. Feinberg, Attorney, Suite 600, 134 North Lasalle St., 18
Chicago, II. 60602
Mr. Ward A. Gill, National Automatic Laundry and Cleaning Council, 7 20
South Dearborn Street C_hicago, Illinois, 60603 21
Mr. Arthur Mallon, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, B.C. 23
Ms. Margaret Pritchard, Consulting Engineer to Medical Arts Linen 25
.Supply, 605 Wesfield Avenue, New York, NY 07090 26
Dr. Manfred Wentz, International Fabric Institute, 8001 Georgia 28
Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20910 29
XII-1
-------
DRAFT
Contacts 32
Mr. Tom Alexander, EPA-OPE, Economic Analysis Branch, Waterside Mall, 35
Washington, DC
Dr. Melvin M. Baevsky, Association of Interior Decor Specialists, 37
1815 N. Fort Meyer Dr., Arlington, Virginia, 22209 38
Mr. Albert Becker, Ace Tank and Heater Co., R.R. 1, Frankfort, 40
Indiana, 45041
Mr. Robert L. Borlick, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, 42
DC 20460
Mr. Charles Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, 3.421 45
Peachtree Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30309 ~
Mr. Stephen F. Brown, Dow Chemical Company, 2020 DOW Center, Midland, 47
Michigan 48640
Mr. Robert G. Chelton, Hytek International Corporation, 1035 49
Industrial Parkway, Medina, Ohio 44256.
Mr. Samuel T. Church, Central Laundries and Hospitals Laundries 51
Association, Inc., 175 Ipswitch, Boston, Mass. 02215 52
Mr. Robert Coleman, National Institute of Rug Cleaning, Arlington, 54
Virginia. 55
Ms. Delores Cooper, Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 100 57
California Street San Francisco, California, 94111 58
Mr. John Crawley, Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, 60
Hamilton County, Ohio. 61
Mr. Phillip W. Croen, Wisconsin Fabricare Institute, Inc., 229 E. 64
Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wise. 53205
Dr. James Cruver, Gulf Environmental Systems 66
Mr. Swep Davis, OPE, Economic Analysis Branch, Waterside Mall, 68
Washington, DC
Mr. Roger Doggett, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Acorn Park, Cambridge, 70
Ma., 02140
Mr. Paul Duruel, Cincinnati Water Works, Cincinnati, Ohio 72
XII-2
-------
DRAFT
Mr. Roger Doggett, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Acorn Park, Cambridge, 70
Ma., 02140
Mr. Paul Duruel, Cincinnati Water Works, Cincinnati, Ohio 72
Mr. Robert K. Ermatinger, Laundry and Cleaners Allied Trades 74
Association, .543 Valley Road, Upper Montclair, New Jersey, 07043 75
Mr. Paul Flannigan, State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 77
Columbus, Ohio. 78
Mr. Mike Ginsberg, Medical Arts Linen Supply, 605 Westfield Avenue, 80
New York, NY 07090
Mr. Richard Gray, Komline-Sanderson Engineering Corporation, Peapack, 82
New Jersey, 07977
Mr. Everett Hall, National Association of Institutional Laundry 84
Managers, Christ Hospital, 2139 Auburn Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio 45219 85
Mr. James Harrington, New York Environmental Conservation Department 87
Mr. Jeffrey Hass, Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Curtis 90
Building, 6th and Walnut Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
Mr. Ray Henderson, Hydrextor Company, 3839 Oakton Avenue, Skokie, 92
Illinois
Mr. Fred C. Herot, Colin A. Houstan and Associates, Inc. 1154 Old 94
White Plains Rd., Mamardneck, NY 10543
Mr. William Holt, Parkway Auto Wash Inc. 96
Mr. Colin A. Houston, Colin A. Houstan and Associates, Inc. 1154 Old 99
White Plains Road, Mamaroneck, New York 10543
Mr. Michael A. Jimenez, Aqua-Mizer Corporation, 216 Daniel Webster 101
Highway, Nashua, New Hampshire 03060
Mr. Lee Johnson, International Fabric Institute, P.O. Box 940, 103
Joliet, Illinois 60434
Mr. C. Roy Josephs, Cook Machinery Company, 4301 S. Fitzhugh Avenue, 105
Dallas, Texas 75226
Mr. Robert C. Knipe, Laundry and Cleaners Allied Trades Association, 107
_Inc., 543 Valley Road, Upper Montclair, New Jersey 07043 108
XII-3
-------
DRAFT
Mr. Louis Laden, Bade County Laundry and Dry Cleaners A_ssn., 434 111
Catalonia Avenue, Coral Gables, Florida
Mr. T. J. Lageman, Mission Linen Supply, 635 E. Montecito St., Santa 113
Barbara, Ca.
Mr. Richard Laskey, Procter and Gamble Company, 11530 Reid Hartman 115
Highway, Cincinnati, OHio, 45242
Mr. Ronald Levy, Arthur D. Little, Inc. Acorn Park, Cambridge, Mass., 117
02140
Mrs. Ruth Livesey, National Institute of Infant Services, 119
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Mr. David J. MacKenzie, Textile Rental Services Association, 942 121
Westwood Blvd, Los Angeles, Ca.
Mr. Jack Moore, Aqua Systems, Inc., P.O. Box 1578, Ft. Lauderdale, 123
Florida, 33302
Mr. H. Richard Moon, Norge Corporation, Edison, New Jersey, 08817 125
Mr. Erling Nielson, Technical Fabricators, Inc., Nutley, New Jersey. 127
Mr. Robert A. Olsen, Procter and Gamble Company, 11530 Reid Hartman 129
Highway, Cincinnati, OH 45242
Mr. Ralph Pettybone, Professional Laundry Institute, 118 W. Randolph 131
Street, Chicago, 111. 60601
Mr. Bert H. Perlmutter, Aqua Systems Inc., P.O. Box 1578, Ft. 134
Lauderdale, Florida, 33302
Mr. Henry Quackenbush, Industrial Equipment, 200 Ridgewood Place, 136
Springhill Station, Mobile, Ala
Mr. Earl Rosenberg, Laicon, Inc., Westchester, Illinois. 138
Mr. Barnet L. Rosenthal Institute of Industrial Launderers, 8608 N_. 141
W. 59 Court, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Mr. Ben Russell, American Laundry Digest, 500 N. Dearborn, Chicago, 143
Illinois.
Mr. Robert Schmidt, National Carwash Council, Chicago, Illinois. 145
Mr. Carl T. Schueren, Born Oil Company, Midland Building, Cleveland, 147
Ohio, 44115
XII-4
-------
DRAFT
Mr. William Seitz, Neighborhood Cleaners, Assn. 116 E. 26th St., New 149
York, NY 10016
Mr. Joseph R. Schuh, Linen Supply Assn. of America, 975 Arthur 151
Godfrey Road, _P.O. Box 2427, Miami Beach, Florida 33140. 152
Mr. Seller, Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, 26 Federal 154
Plaza, New YOrk, NY 10007
Mr. Samuel B. Shapiro, Linen Supply Association of America, 975 156
Arthur Godfrey Road, P_.0. Box 2427, Miami Beach, Florida, 33141 157
Mr. Jerry Siemour, Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, 159
Ohio.,
Mr. Mervyn Sluizer, Jr., Institute of Industrial Launderers, 613 W. 161
Cheltenham Avenue, Philadelphia, Pa. 19126
Mr. John Smith, National Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, 163
Ohio, 45268
Mr. Frank Spangler, Westinghouse Electric Corp. 246 E. Fourth Street, 165
Mansfield, Ohio, 44902
Mr. John Stanton, Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, 167
Hamilton County, Ohio. 168
Mr. Tom Steinkamp, Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, 170
Hamilton County, Ohio. 171
Mr. Thad Stephens, Procter and Gamble Company, 11530 Reid Hartman 173
Highway, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45242
Mr. Ronald C. Story, Cla-Val Company, Newport Beach, Ca., 92663 175
Mr. Robert Symenson, Standard Oil of Ohio, Cleveland, Ohio 177
Mr. Jean Thaneuf, Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, J. F. K. 179
Federal Building, Boston, Ma. 02203 180
Mr. Louis Theoharous, Procter and Gamble Company, 11530 Reid Hartman 183
Highway, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45242 ~~
Mr. Cecil Treadway, General Bouchelle Inc., 200 E. Marquette Road, 185
Chicago, Illinois, 60637 186
Mr. Carl Vomer, Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati, 188
Hamilton County, Ohio. 189
XII-5
-------
DRAFT
Mr.John L. Woolsey, Pennwalt Corporation, 9390 Davis Avenue, Laurel, 192
Maryland, 20810
Mr. Robert J. Zilli, John-Mansville Products Corporation, Greenwood 19A
Plaza, Denver, Colorado, 80217 195
XII-6
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XIII
References 7
1. Keffer, C. E., "The Syndet Problem After Five Years of 11
Progress," Public Works, 9_5, 1, 82 (1964). 12
2. Semling, Harold V., "Detergents and Water Quality,1' Household 14
and Personal Products Industry, July 1972, pp 30. 15
3. Lashen, Edward S., and Keith A. Booman, "Biodegradability 17
and Treatability of Alkylphenol Eehoxylates - A Class of 18
Non-ionic Surfactants, Jour. WPCF. 19
4. Eisenhauer, Hugh R., "Chemical Removal of ABS from Waste- 21
water Effluents," Jour. WPCF Vol. 37.. No. 11, pp 1567-1578. 22
November 1965. 23
5. Eckenfelder, W. Wesley,Jr., "Removal of ABS and Phosphate 25
from Laundry Wastewaters," Purdue Univ. Eng. Ext. Bull. 26
Series 117, Pt. 1, pp 467 (1965). 27
6. Coughlin, F. J., "Detergents and Water Pollution Abatement," 29
Am. J. Public Health, .55, 5, 760 (1965). 30
7. Sengupta, Ashis K., and W. 0. Pipes, "Foam Fractionation - 32
The Effect of Salts and Low Molecular Weight Organics on 33
ABS Removal," XIX Purdue Conference, pp. 811. 34
8. Buescher, C. A., and D. W. Ryckman, "Reduction of Foaming 36
of ABS by Ozonation," XIX Purdue Conference, p. 251. 37
9. U. S. Department of Commerce, "1967 Census of Business" 39
Selected Services, Laundries Cleaning Plants, and Related 40
Services. 41
10. National Automatic Laundry and Cleaning Council, "Coin 43
Laundry Waste Discharge Survey." 44
11. Wayman, C., et al., "Behavior of Surfactants and Other 46
Detergents in Water and Soil-Water Environments," Public 47
Works 96., 9, 160 (1965). 48
12. Hoover, Thomas B., "Polorographic Determination of NTA," 50
Environmental Protection Technology Series, June 1973. 51
XI1I-1
-------
DRAFT
13. O'Farrell, Thomas P., Dolloff F. Bishop, and Stephen M. 53
Bennett, "Advanced Waste Treatment at Washington, DC," 54
FWPCA, Taft Research Center, May 1969. 55
14. Feige, Walter A., and Edward L. Berg, "Full Scale Mineral 58
Addition at Lebanon, Ohio," Water and Sev;age Works, 1973, 59
pp R-79-94. 60
15. Stomberg, John B., Dolloff F. Bishop, Paul H. Warner, and 62
Samuel H. Griggs, "Lime Precipitation in Municipal Waste- 63
waters," Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, Water 64
1970, Vol. 67_, No. 107. 65
16. Ghassemi, Masood, and Harold L. Recht, "Phosphate Precipitation 67
with Ferrous Ion," Water Pollution Control Series, 17010 68
EKI, September 1971. 69
17. Rand Development Corp., "Phosphorus Removal by Ferrous Iron and 71
Lime," Water Pollution Control Series, 11010 ECO, January 1971. 72
18. Menar, A. B., and D. Jenkins, "Calcium Precipitation in Waste- 74
water Treatment," Research Reporting Sereis, No. 17080, DAB, 75
December 1972. 76
19. Boucher, P. L., "Micro-Straining and Ozonization of Water and 78
Wastexvrater, XIX PUrdue Conference, p. 771. 79
20. Villers, R. V., E. L. Berg, C. A. Brunner, and A. N. Masai, 81
"Municipal Wastewater Treatment by Physical and Chemical 82
Methods," W & SW Reference #1971 (Jour. WPCF, Part 1, 83
March 1972). 84
21. Hais, Alan B., John B. Stomberg, Dolloff F. Bishop, "Aluir. 86
Addition to Activated Sludge With Tertiary Solids Removal," 87
presented at 68th National Meeting of the A.I.Ch.E., March 1971. 88
22. Smith, John M., Arthur M. Masse, and Walter A. Feige, "Upgrading 90
Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants," Pergamon Press, 91
Inc., September 1972. 92
23. Rex Chainbelt, Inc., "Amenability of Reverse Osmosis Concentrate 94
to Activated Sludge Treatment," Water Pollution Control Series, 95
17040, EUE, July 1971. 96
24. Feige, Walter A., and John M. Smith, "Wastewater Applications 98
with a Tubular Reverse Osmosis Unit," A.I.Ch.E. Publication, 99
Water - 1973, January 1974. 100
XIII-2
-------
DRAFT
25. Bashaw, J. D., J. K. Lawson, and T. A. Orafino, "Hollow Fiber 102
Technology for Advanced Waste Treatment," Environmental 103
Protection Technology Series, 17040 FEE, December 1972. 104
26. Douglas, A. S., M. Tagami, and C. E. Milstead, "Membrane Materials 106
for Wastewater Reclamation by Reverse Osmosis," Water Pollution 107
Control Research Series 17040 EFO, June 1970. 108
27. "R.O.:A Profile," Industrial Water Engineering 110
Vol. 70_, No. 3, May-June 1973. Ill
28. "Removal of Synthetic Detergents from Laundry - Laundromat 113
Wastes," Research Report #5, New York State Water Pollution 114
Control Board, Albany, March 7, 1960. 115
29. Grieves, Robert B., Jerry L. Bewley, "Treating Laundry Wastes 117
by Foam Separation," Jour. Water Poll. Contr. Federation, 118
Vol. _45_, No. 3, 1973. 119
30. Galonian, G. E., and Autenbach, "Phosphate Removal from Laundry 121
Wastewater," Jour. Water Poll. Contr. Fed., August 1973. 122
pp. 36-53. 123
31. "Commercial Laundering Industry," Public Health Service 125
Publication No. SON. 126
32. Knutson, V. A., "Plant Operations," Hospitals, 46, pp. 171-6, 128
April 1, 1972. 129
33. Engley, Frank B., Jr., "Hospitals and the Environment Biological 131
Interrelationships," Hospitals., 46, p. 83, October 16, 1972. 132
34. Economics of Clean Water, Vol. _!, EPA, U. S. Government Print- 134
ing Office, Washington, DC (1972). 135
35. Smith, Robert, and Walter F. McMichael, "Cost and Performance 137
Estimates for Tertiary Wastewater Treating Processes," FWPCA 138
Report No. TWRC 9, June 1969. 139
36. "Air and Water News," Vol. 7_, No. 34, pp. 4-5, August 20, 1973. 141
37. Industrial Wastewater Discharges, New York State Department 143
of Health, Albany, New York, June 1969. 144
38. Bailey, James R., Richard J. Benoit, John L. Dodson, 146
James M. Bobb, Harold Wallman, "A Study of Flow Reduction 147
and Treatment of Wastewater from Households," Water 148
Pollution Control Research Series, Prog. No. 11050FKE, 149
December 1969. 150
XIII-3
-------
DRAFT
39. Hedges, Ralph C., "The Coin Carwash Industry," New York State 152
Coin Carwash Seminar, April 25, 1968. 153
40. Yu, Ben C. H., "A Report on Water Pollution Control Research," 155
May 1965 (Final Report, June 1965). 156
41. "Detergents in the Carwash Age," Detergent Age, Vol. 3_, No. 12, 158
May 1967. 159
42. Reilich, Helmut G., "Technical Evaluation of Phosphate Free 161
Home Laundry Detergents," EPA Project No. 16080 DVF, 162
February 1972. 163
43. Menar, Arnold B., and David Jenkins, "The Fate of Phosphorous 165
in Waste Treatment Processes: The Enhanced Removal of Phosphate 166
by Activated Sludge." 25th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue 167
University, 1970,p. 655. 168
44. Mulbarger, M. C., "The Three Sludge System for Nitrogen and. 170
Phosphorus Removal," EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring, 171
April 1972. 172
45. Bunch, Robert L., and M. B. Ettinger, "Biodegradability of 174
Potential Organic Substitutes for Phosphates," 25th 175
Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, 1970. 176
46. City of Baltimore, Maryland, "Phosphate Study at the Baltimore 178
Back River Wastewater Treatment Plant," Water Pollution Control 179
Research Series, No. 17010 DFV, September 1970. 180
47. Sadek, Shafik E., "An Electrochemical Method for Removal of 182
Phosphates from Waste Waters," Water Pollution Control 183
Research Series, No. 17010, February 1970. 184
48. Azad, Hardom S., and Jack A. Borchardt, "Phosphorus Uptake 186
by P-Starved Algae," 25th Industrial Waste Conference, 187
Purdue University, p. 325, 1970. . 188
49. Grieves, Robert B., "Foam Separation Processes From Industrial 190
Waste Treatment: Phenol, Phosphate, and Hexavalent Chromium," 191
25th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, p. 192, 192
1970. 193
50. Zenz, David R., and Jos. R. Pinnicka, "Effective Phosphorus 195
Removal by the Addition of Alum to the Activated Sludge 196
Process," 25th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue 197
University, 1970, p. 273. 198
XIII-4
-------
DRAFT
51. Campbell, Lome A., "The Rcle of Phosphate in the Activated 200
Sludge Process," 25th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue 201
University, 1970, p.214. 202
52. Witherow, Jack L., "Phosphate Removal by Activated Sludge," 204
25th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, 1970, 205
p. 1169. 206
53. Heinke, Gary W., and Jack E. Norman, "Hydrolysis of Condensed 208
Phosphates in Wastewater," 25th Indus. Waste Conference, 209
Purdue University, 1970, p.644. 210
54. Mulbarger, Michael C., and Shifflett, "Combined Biological 212
and Chemical Treatment for Phosphorus Removal," Chemical 213
Engineering Progress Symposium Series, Vol, 67_, No. 107, 214
1970. 215
55. Black & Veatch Consulting Engireers, "Process Design Manual 217
for Phosphorus Removal," Progrsm 17010 GNP,, October 1971. 218
56. Aulenbach, Donald B., Patrick C. Town, Martha Chilson, 220
Treatment of Laundromat Wastes," Research Reporting Series, 221
Project 12120 DOD, February 1973. 222
57. Flynn, John M., and Barry Andres, "Laundrette Waste Treat- 224
ment Processes," Journal Water Pollution Control Board, 225
p. 783, June 1973. 226
58. "Coin Operated and Other Commercial Laundr:'.es," West 228
Virginia 1970 Regulations, Sec, 14. 229
59. Rosenthal, Barnet L., Joseph E. 0"Brien, Gilbert T. Joly, 231
and Alan Cooperman, "Treatment of Laundromat Wastes by 232
Coagulation With Alum and Adsorption Through Activated 233
Carbon," Massachusetts Department of Public Health, March 234
1963. 235
60. Aulenbach, Donald B., Patrick C. Town, Martha Wilson, 237
"Treatment of Laundromat Wastes - I. Winfa:.r Water 238
Reclamation System," 25th Industrial Waste Conference 239
Purdue University, 1970, pp. 36-53. 240
61. Elenfelder, W. Wesley, Jr., Edvin Barnhart,, "Removal of 242
Synthetic Detergents From Laundry and Laundromat Wastes," 243
Research Report #5, New York State Department of Health 244
April 2, 1957. 245
XIII-5
-------
DRAFT
62. International Fabric Institute, "An Introduction to 249
Industrial Drycleaning Methods, Part 2," IFI Special 250
Reporter, Vol. I, No. 4, February 1973. 251
63. Rosenthal, Barnet L., et al, "Industrial Laundry Waste 253
Water Treatment Study," Massachusetts Department of Public 254
Health, Project 148, April 1964. 255
64. Guidelines Washing Formula, White Family Work, F - 1 - 1, 257
H. Kohnstamm and Company, Inc. 258
65. Guideline Washing Formula, White Industrial Garments 260
(Coveralls, Shirts and Pants), F-4-1, H. Kohnstamm and 261
Company, Inc. 262
66. Guideline Washing Formula - Diapers, F-6-1, H. Kohnstamn & Co., Inc.. 264
266
67. Guideline Washing Formula - Linen Supply Classification #1 - 267
Litht Soil - Motel and Hotel Sheets and Pillowslips, F-3-1, 268
H. Kohnstamn & Co., Inc.. 269
68. Guideline Washing Formula - Hospital, Motel, Hotel, Nursing 271
Home, Institutional Lightly Soiled White and Fast Colors, 272
F-2-l-l,H. Kohnstamn & Co., Inc.. 273
69. Guideline Washing Formula - H. K. Detergent Oil, Polyester/ 275
Cotton Garments Including "Ferment Press" White Fabrics, 276
"Light to Medium Soiled," F-7-1, H. Kohnstamn and Co., Inc. 277
70. International Fabric Institute, "Drycleaning Solvent Vapors 279
and O.S.H.A.," IFI Bulletin Service No. 5-491, Aug. - Sept. 1973. 280
71. I.F.I., "Rule 66 Petroleum Solvents," IFI Bulletin Service, 282
No. T-490, July 1973. 283
72. I.F.I., "Textile Damage Analysis Statistics for 1972," IFI 285
Bull. Service, No. T-489, June 1973. 286
73. I.F.I., "Monitoring Solvent Leaks," IFI Bull. Service, No. 288
T-488, May 1973. 289
74. I.F.I., "Performance of Vinyls in Drycleaning," IFI Bull. 291
Service, No. T-487, April 1973. 292
75. I.F.I., "Approved Solvents - 1973," IFI Bull. Service, No. 294
T-486, March 1973. 295
76. I.F.I., "Washing Formulas," IFI Monthly Special Reporter, 297
XIII-6
-------
DRAFT
1-3, September 1972. 297
77. I.F.I., "An Introduction to Industrial Drycleaning Methods, 299
Part I," IFI Special Reporter, 1-3, Winter 1973. 300
78. I.F.I., "Sewer Ordinances, Part I," IFI Special Reporter, 302
1-11, June 1973. 303
79. I.F.I., "Sewer Ordinances, Part 2," IFI Special Reporter, 305
1-12, July 1973. 306
80. I.F.I., International Fair Claims Guide for Consumer Textile 308
Products, IFI Special Reporter, 1-13, August 1973. 309
81. Livesy, Ruth P., "The Contribution of Diaper Service 311
Accreditation to Infant Health Care," Clinical Pediatrics, 312
Vol. II, No. 9, September 1972, 313
82. Standards for Accrediting Diaper Services, Diaper Service 315
Accreditation Council, July 1973. 316
83. National Automatic Laundry and Cleaning Council Vastewater 318
Treatment Committee, Coin Laundry Waste Discharge Survey, 319
NALCC, Chicago, Illinois " 320
84. American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, 322
"An Industrial Waste Guide to the Commercial Laundering 323
Industry," Industrial Laundrer,, p. 23. 324
85. Eckenfelder, W. Wesley, "Removal of ABS and Phosphate From 326
Laundry Waste Waters," 25th Industrial Waste Conference, 327
Purdue Univ., p. 467, 1964, 328
86. Chicago Sewer Ordinance, Metropolitan Sanitary District of 330
Greater Chicago. 331
87. McCabe, Joseph C., "Reclaiming Laundry Waste Water for Reuse, 333
Part I," Starchroom Laundry Journal, p. 70, November 1954. 334
88. McCabe, Joseph C., "Reclaiming Laundry Waste Water for Reuse, 336
Part II," Starchroom Laundry Journal, p. 70, December 1954. 337
89. Stark, Karl, "Treatment of Water Wastes," Industrial Launderer, 339
p. 29, March 1962. 340
90. Halton, J. E., L. L. Silver, and J. V. Graham, "Navy Points 342
Way to Water Savings," Starchroom Laundry Journal, p. 10, 343
July 15, 1957. 344
XIII--7
-------
DRAFT
91. Barnum, Marshall, "Water Reuse Project Shows Possibilities," 347
Line Supply News, p. 70, March 1969. 348
92. Douglas, Gary. Demonstration of a Modular Wastewater Treatment 350
System for the Textile Maintenance Industry, EPA Grant #FYY 12120 351
93. Oehnel, Erich, "Clean Laundry Without Pollution .. A Discussion 353
of Washfloor Supplies," Can Hosp., 48: 46-8, July 1971. 354
94. Eisenhauer, Hugh R., "Chemical Removal of ABS From Wastewater 356
Effluents," Jour. WPCF, Nov. 1965, p. 1567. 357
95. Pollution Control Department, City of Kansas City, Mo. 359
96. Degler, Stanley E., "News From Washington," Water and Wastes 361
Engineering, 10 September 1973. 362
97. U. S. Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development 364
Center, Fort Belvoir Virginia "Treatment of Wastewaters 365
From Military Laundries." 366
98. Allen News, Vol. JL, Number 3, 1973. 368
99. National Carwash Council, "Survey Report for Water and Sewer 370
Costs and Tap-on Fees in 295 U. S. Cities." 371
100. Wiltrout, Dale, "Water Reclamation and Vehicle Washington," 373
Auto Laundry News, Vol. 22, No. 8, Aug. 1973, p. 18. 374
101. Smith, Louis H. V., "Reclaimed Water Plays Role of Growing 376
Importance," Auto Laundry News, May 1970. 377
102. Moore, Jack W., "How the 1965 Water Quality Act Affects Coin 379
Laundry Operations," Management Guidelines from NALCO, No. 48, 380
September 1967. 381
103. Water Quality Standards of the United States, Territories, 383
and the District of Columbia, American Public Health 384
Association Subcommittee on Water Quality Control, June 1969. 385
104. Aqua Systems Equipment Brochure, Aqua Systems, Inc. 387
105. I.F.I. Bulletin 1-14 "Perchlorethylene Vapors in Dry 389
Cleaning," Sept. 1973. 390
106. Greater Cincinnati Metroplitan Sewer District, Sewer 392
Ordinances 1973" 393
107. Office of Research and Monitoring, U. S. Environmental 395
XIII-8
-------
DRAFT
Protection Agency, "Treatment: of Laundromat Wastes," 396
Environmental Protection Technology Series, EPA-122-73-108, 397
February 1973. 398
108. "Pretreatment of Discharges to Publicly Owned Treatment 400
Works," EPA Bulletin. 401 ^
109. Engineering Study "Denormandle Towel and Linen Supply 403
Company," Chicago Illinois - Laicon Corporation. 404
110. Engineering Study "Ideal Uniform Rental Service,1' Niles, 406
Illinois - Laicon Corportation. 407 f
111. Manfred Wentz, "Effluent Guidlines Survey," International 409
Fabricare Institute. 410
112. EPA 16080 DVF, Dec. 1970 "Development of Phosphate Free 412
Home Laundry Detergent." 413 f
113. Laicon Incorporated, "Engineering Report on Waste 415
Discharge from North Shore Uniform Inc." 416
114. Engineering Study "Morgan Laundry - Laicon Corp. 418
•
115. Eilers, Richard G., "Condensed One-page Cost Estimates 420
for Wastewater Treatment," Ncv. 1970. 421
116. North Carolina Dept. of Water Resources - "Investigation of 423
Treatment of Waste From Coin Operated Laundries," 1960. 424
•
117. Philadelphia Quartz Company, "Laundry Washroom Handbook." 426
118. Office of Permit Program "Interim Effluent Guidance for 428
NPDES Permits," 1973. 429
119. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Proposed Water 431 4
Quality Information, Volume I and II, October 1973. 432
120. J. M. Flynn, B. Andres, "Launderette Waste Treatment 434
Processes," Water Pollution Control Federation Journal 435
pp. 783-798, June 1963. 436
4
122. Ruffner, G., et al, "Encyclopedia of Association," Volume 438
I, National Organizations of the U. S. 439
122. Johns-Manville Corp, "Drycleaners Handbook," 10th Edition. 441
123. Laicon Incorporated, "Engineering Report on Pilot Precoat 443 4
Rotary Drum Vacuum Filter @ Morgan Linen Facility," 1973. 444
XIII-9
-------
DRAFT
124. "1967 Census of Business" Selected Service, Laundries, Cleaning 447
Plants, August 1970. 448
125. Robert C. Thomas, Innovative Consultants, Inc., "New Developments 450
for Treating and Reclaiming Waste Water," paper presented at the 451
61st Annual Convention and Exhibit; Linen Supply Association of 452
America, May 3, 1973, p. 10. 453
XIII-10
-------
DRAFT
SECTION XIV
ABS
Activated Sludge
Aeration
Afterfloc
Analine dye
Anionic synthetic
Bacterial static
agents
Bench scale
testing
Bentonite clay
Blueing compounds
BOD
Break
Calcium hardness
Glossary 7
Alkyl benzene sulfonate. 10
The gross mass of viable cells and their 12
associated solid products. 14
The ratio of a volume of air drawn into a volume 16
of gas £r liquid. 18
Solids formed by the precipitation or 20
crystallization of dissolved material in water 21
upon standing. This material is measured as 22
jsuspended solids in subsequent analysis. 23
Coal tar dyes. 25
Surface active agents which attract grease and 27
dirt from the surface to the water. 28
Quaternary ammonium compounds and two phenol 30
compounds. 32
Lab testing that closely simulates full scale 34
waste treatment unit processes and are utilized _tp 37
size full-scale equipment. These tests are quick, 38
portable, and easily performed. 39
Diatomaceous earth (D.E.). 41
Water solubles of analine dye stuff. 43
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, a term which signifies 45
_the amount of dissolved oxygen which will be taken 47
out of the water during the decomposition of the 48
wastes.
The first step in a wash cycle in which supplies 51
^re used. It is designed to wet down the.loadand 53
remove as much of the readily _spluble soil as 54
possible.
Hardness based on a calcium carbonate ^itration to 57
a £H of 4.5. 58
XIV-1
-------
DRAFT
City softened
water
Cycle time
D/E. body feed
Water with the calcium hardness removed.
60
62
D.E. filter
backwash
D.E. precoat
Dissolved Solids
Dry Time
Effluent
The time required for a vacuum filter to inake one 65
complete drum revolution. 66
The addition of filter aid (D.E.) while filtering
wastewater on a precoated DE filter to the
wastewater feed; thus, providing a continuous
clean surface for subsequent _solids separation.
The act of reversing the water flow to the DE
filter at a flowrate sufficient to knock off the
filter ake. This occurs when the filter cake
resistance _is too great to accommodate the
required flow rate.
The initial layer of DE added to the DE filtering
elements jjrior to starting the dirty wastewater
feed, generally, 0.5 to 0.76 kg/sq m (0.1 to 0.15
Ib/sq ft) of filter aid is applied to _treat the
initial wastewater flow.
Those solids passing through a standard glass
fiber filter and dried at constant weight at ^
degrees C.
That portion of a vacuum filtration cycle joccur-
ring between the point of drum rotation out of the
sludge to the point of vacuum release.
Waste containing water discharged _f_rom a plant.
Effluent Criteria Maximum or minimum _limits for waste loads
Established by regulatory agencies.
A protein produced by a living cell that jicts as a
catalyst.
Filter leaf
Filter septums
A small filter system of. known area that is free
draining and utilized for holding filter cloths
during vacuum filter sizing bench tests.
The filter aid support element, generally long
tubular stainless j^teel supports or cloth bags
jsupports, that retain the filter aid.
69
70
71
72
74
76
78
79
81
83
85
86
88
90
94
95
96
100
103
104
108
112
113
116
117
118
XIV-2
-------
DRAFT
Flush
A wash operation occurring at the beginning of the 121
wash cycle in which no supplies are added to 122
merely wash out loose soil and dirt to increase 123
the effectiveness of the supplies when they are 124
added.
Grease
See Hexane Solubles.
126
Heavy metals Lead, cadmium, zinc, mercury, iron, chromium, 129
n_ickel and copper in this report. 130
A general term for organic compounds which contain 133
^nly carbon and nydrogen in the molecule. 134
Hydrocarbons
Industrial Laundry A laundry washing especially shop towels, printers 137
towels, and dust mops, wherein the wastewater 138
contamination is abnormally high compared to other 139
laundry types.
LAS
Linen laundry
Mass loading
Neutralizers or
Anti-chlors
Oxygen-sag curve
Pickup time
Pilot Plant
Linear alkyl sulfonate.
141
A laundry washing primarily linen flatwork jsuch as 145
sheets, table linen, continuous towels, kitchen 146
towels, etc., wherein the wastewater contamination
is low Compared to the other laundry types. 147
The mass of suspended solids; applied to a unit
area of the flotation tank in a unit of time,
measured as kgs/day/sq m or Ibs/day/sq ft.
Sodium sulfate and sodium sulfite.
A curve that represents the profile of dissolved
oxygen content along the course of a stream,
resulting _f_rom deoxygenation associated with
biochemical oxidation of organic matter and
reoxygenaticn through the absorption of
atmospheric oxygen and through biological
photosynthesis . Also called dissolved oxygen sag
curve.
150
151
152
154
156
159
160
161
162
163
164
That portion of the v_acuum filtration cycle 167
joccurring during the time the drum is submerged iri 169
the sludge.
Small scale continuous testing of model waste
171
XIV-3
-------
DRAFT
Testing
Point Source
Quaternary
Recycle ratio
Rise rate
Scum
Sewer charge
Sewer surcharge
SIC code
Soil
Sour
Specific
resistance
Spotting agents
treatment processes to develop design data for 173
direct scale up to full scale equipment. 175
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, 177
jLncluding any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, 178
conduit, well, discrete operations, or vessel, or 179
other ^floating craft, from which pollutants are or 180
may be discharged.
Consisting of four components.
182
Pressurized flow rate divided by _the raw flow r_ate 186
times 100, expressed as percentage. 187
The rate at which solids Reparation occurs in a 190
flotation unit, i.e., the velocity with which a 191
^uspended particle is lifted in the liquid medium. 192
The liquid fraction containing the _solids that is 195
skimmed from _the flotation unit and used as vacuum 196
filter feed.
A sewer use tax, or cost Charged by a municipality 199
jzp a sewer user to pay for this service. 200
A sewer tax above the sewer charge determined by 203
the strength of the wastewater discharge, 204
generally in terms of wastewater BOD and suspended 205
solids.
Standard Industrial Classification code. 207
The dirt, grease, and other material present ^in 210
laundry prior to washing. This is the material 211
that must be cleaned from the articles.
An acid compound a_dded to the last wash operation 215
to adjust the pH of the final rinse riear 216
neutrality.
A measure of the ability of a vacuum filter 218
sludge cake to impede the flow of water through 220
jits pore structure; utilized to measure the effect 222
of sludge chemical conditioning.
Dichloro benzene, carbotols, ard _emulsifying 225
agents.
XIV-4
-------
DRAFT
Stripers
Submergence
Suds
Supplies
Surface overflow
rate
Suspended solids
Syndets
Sodium hydro sulfite, J^itanium sulfate and 229
titanium chloride.
A measure of sludge depth in the vacuum filter, 231
usually expressed as the percentage of the drum 233
diameter beneath the filter vat sludge level. 234
The wash operation wherein the detergent ^s added 238
to emulsify oil and greases and to _s_uspend the 239
majority of the soil for discharge.
The chemicals used for removing _the soil in the 242
wash cycle; this includes all chemicals added to 243
the wash cycle.
The hydraulic loading of the flotation unit per 245
unit area of tank per unit time, usually expressed 2.47
a_s 1 pm/sq m _(gpm/sq ft) of tank.
Solid matter retained by a standard glass j!_iber
filter and dried to constant, weight at 103-105
Degrees C.
Synthetic detergent.
Thermal pollution A rise in water temperature jLnduced by higher
temperature effluents.
Total solids
Treatment load
(Waste load)
Treatment Work
Vacuum Filter
blinding
The sum of the homogeneous suspended and f_pr one
hour at 180 degrees centigrade.
Numerical value of any waste parameter (such as
BOD content, etc.) that serves to define the
Characteristics of a plant effluent.
Includes sewage treatment facilities, sewage
Collection systems and their appurtenances.
2.49
252
253
255
258
259
262
263
265
267
269
271
272
Vacuum filter
solids loading
The deposition of solids in the weave of a filter 274
cloth such that the cloth cannot pick up any new 277
solids. On a belt filter, cloth blinding leads _to 279
no cake discharge from the discharge roll;
therefore, no sludge is being dewatered by those 280
areas manifesting blinding.
The mass of dry sludge solids picked up per unit 282
area of filter; a measure of cake thickness. 285
XIV-5
-------
DRAFT
Vacuum filter
yield
Vacuum filtrate
Wash cycle
Wash formula
Wash operation
Washroom
Wash wheel
Water level
Wipers
The mass of dry sludge solids dewatered on a unit 287
area of filter in a unit of time, normally 290
measured as kgs/sq m filter/hr 91bs/sq ft/hr). 291
The water passing through the filter cloth and riot 295
retained in the sludge.
The entire operation required to launder a machine 298
load of an article. 299
The complete schedule _of application of detergents 302
_and other supplies in laundering. 303
One discrete machine discharge during a wash 306
crycle, e.g. a flush, suds, or rinse. 307
The area where the wash wheels are located. 309
The washing machine itself. 311
The depth of water in the cylinder of the w_ash 314
wheel while it is laundering an item. This depth 315
is often used to calculate the volume of water 316
used in the laundering process, and _in the 317
calculation of water volume used in one wash
operation.
Shop towels and printers' towels. 319
XIV-6
-------
DRAFT
Abbreviations 322
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand 326
BTU British Thermal Units 327
cm centimeter 328
cfm cubic feet per minute 329
cmm cubic meter per minute 330
cu ft cubic feet 331
cu m cubic meter 332
cu jd_ cubic yard 333
DI5 diatomaceous earth 334
_ft foot 335
gal gallons 336
gpm gallons per minute 337
hp_ horsepower 338
hr_ hour 339
in. inches 340
kg kilograms 341
kg-cal kilogram-calories 342
I liter 343
Ib pound 344
1pm liters per minute 345
ii microns 346
ug micrograms 347
XIV-7
-------
DRAFT
umohs micro-mohs 348
mg milligram 349
min minute 350
mm millimeter 351
mpm meters per minute 352
psi pounds per square inch 353
sq cm square centimeter 354
sq ft square feet 355
sq m square meters 356
TOG total organic carbon 357
XIV-8
-------
DRAFT
CONVERSION TABLE
ENGLISH TO METRIC UNITS
4
5
8
Multiply (English Units)
by
to Obtain (metric Units) 9
English Unit
Abbreviation Conversion Abbreviation Metric Unit
acre
acre -
feet
ac
ac ft
0.405
1,233.5
ha
cu m
hectares 13
cubic meters 14
British Thermal
Unit BTU
British Thermal
Unit/pound BTU/lb
cubic feet/minute cfm
cubic feet/second cfs
cubic feet cu ft
cubic feet cu ft
cubic inches cu in
degree Fahrenheit F°
feet ft
gallon gal
gallon/minute gpm
horsepower hp
inches in
inches of mercury in Hg
pounds Ib
million gallons/day mgd
mile mi
pound/s quare
inch (gauge)
square feet
square inches
tons (short)
yard yd
0.252
0.555
028
kg cal
kg cal/kg
0.028 cu m/min
1.7 cu m/min
0.028 cu m
28.32 1
16.39 cu cm
0.555(QF-32)1 °C
C.3048 m
785
0631
3
C
0.7457
2.54
0.03342
0.454
3,785
1.609
1
I/sec
kw
cm
a tin
kg
cu m/day
km
psig (0.06805 psig +1)1 atm
sq ft 0.0929 sq m
sq in 6.452 sq cm
ton 0.907 kkg
0.9144 m
1 Actual conversion, not a multiplier
11
15
kilogram-calories 16
17
kilogram calories/ 18
kilogram 19
cubic meters/minute 20
cubic meters/minute 21
cubic meters 22
liters 23
cubic ccintimeters 24
degree Centigrade 25
meters 26
liters 27
liters/second 28
killowatts 29
centimeters 30
atmospheres 31
kilograms 32
cubic meters/day 33
kilometer 34
35
atmospheres(absolute) 2
square meters 37
square centimeters 38
metric tons (1,000 39
kilograms 40
meters 41
43
Pr3tect':on
ChL^go, Illinois 60604
XIV-9
US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OF:ICE 1974— 758-493/1171
-------
-------
------- |