-------
Chapter W6. Mineral-Based Industries
For the purpose of this report, Mineral-Based Manufacturing
Industries are defined as those establishments primarily engaged in the
gathering or physical processing of minerals into a form suitable for use
by the ultimate consumer. These include:
Mineral Mining and Processing
Glass Manufacturing Industry
Insulation Fiberglass
Asbestos Manufacturing
Cement Industry
Paving and Roofing Materials
Costs for the reduction of water pollution for these industries
are summarized in Table W6.
W6-1
-------
in
en
00
erv
o
en
I
oa
en
en
O
0
_:
O
as
z
o
u —
en
Z IX
o <
» -:
£ c- -3
a 3 o
en J Q
< -
03 O —
1 04 03
J en
< a ->
CC Cd
u e- cu
z < o
HI 3
Z en
•v
00
1
a\
r~
en
^^
5"
Z
a
Z
e«
en
Ed
>
Z
^^ <^
03
1
on
r^
ci •«•
en en
r- in
in oo
CO 9\
in vo
00
I
Ofl
i a r- r»
t so ~* 03
03 CT>
•-O 03
CN
en
en
O
0
_:
<
3
z
z —
< 00
1
03 en
O in
VO "I
rn
03 en v
m ^ o
oo in T
— • m
m
O
o
f*l
,^
^
r»
fN
f-4
en o
3 as j
e. H
a en z
- 3
a a z
< Z HI
o ^
r» r»
r*» in P*
o in in
09
CM
O
en
in en
m r»
—• ^r \o fN r-
o
(N
fN
00
I
IN
•n r- vo
m oo 04
oa
o «a* —*
*r r- -; en
= jze-oo
a «c «c3S5«
z ettuucn
U
^-o —
=>
a
z
a
Z
Z en
« • z en O
ZOO* *"
b. M j en z
J Z E- O O
< < K c- 5-
en
o
a
O
Z
Z O f> < U a. O
S 'J w -SI^IQ. OZ
CJ 333 333
CJ 323 233
W6-2
-------
Chapter W6.1 Mineral Mining and Processing
Regulations
The only regulations that have been promulgated for this industry
are BPT for industrial sand and BPT and NSPS for phosphate rock. The costs
shown here are based on these two subcategories of this industry.
Industry Characteristics
mining.
The mineral mining and processing industry is concerned with the
separation, cleaning, and beneficiation of the following minerals:
dimension stone
crushed stone
construction sand and gravel
industrial sand
gypsum
asphaltic minerals
asbestos & wollastonite
lightweight aggregates
mica
barite
fluorspar
borates
salines
tripoli
garnet
phosphate rock
talc
kaolin
feldspar
potash
trona
sodium sulfate
mineral pigments
lithium
bentonite
diatomite
Frasch sulfur
graphite
jade
magnesite
novaculite
shale and common clay
aplite
attapulgite and montmorillonite
rock salt
kyanite
fire clay
ball clay
The production of minerals in the U.S. is closely associated with
the rise and fall of the U.S. Gross National Product. Many subsectors have
a small production rate in the U.S. due to competition with higher grade or
cheaper foreign minerals, small demand for selected U.S. minerals, or
alternative supplies of minerals, e.g., sulfur, which is a by-product of
many chemical and pollution control processes. Production of minerals from
year to year is a dynamic phenomenon for the separate sectors, showing
great growth and recession. The following discussion includes only the
industrial sand and phosphate rock subcategories, since no final
regulations exist for the other groups.
Industrial Sand. Industrial sands are deposits that have been
worked by natural processes into segregated mineral fractions. Such
deposits are utilized for their contained quartz (S.CL). The deposits are
W6.1-1
-------
found in a broad range of locations and formations, some as loose and
visible as dune sand, others as dense and obscure as the hardest of rocks
buried under a variety of surface materials, and in literally all
intermediate types of formations. They may be found as low-lying
water-bearing sands, as hard-faced bluffs and cliffs, as out-cropped
escarpments on a level plain or as a massive ridge or mountain face. It
believed that there is only one operating underground mine.
Phosphate Rock. "Phosphate rock" is a commercial term for a ro
that contains one or more phosphate minerals—usually calcium phosphate—
sufficient grade and suitable composition to permit its use, either
directly or after concentration, in manufacturing commercial products. T
term "phosphate rock" includes phosphatized limestones, sandstones, shale
and igneous rocks.
Present western phosphate mining operations are open pit.
However, most of the western reserve is deep, requiring selective
underground mining, which will continue to be economically viable only if
future phosphate rock prices are high. The western region accounts for
only 13 percent of domestic phosphate rock production. Due to local
mineral characteristics and corresponding process practices, and because
the favorable rainfall/evaporation balance existing for the western
facilities, all six producers in this region will soon be operating with
discharge of wastewaters. Therefore, they will experience no incremental
costs upon implementation of the proposed effluent guidelines. Producers
in the eastern district must already comply with effluent guidelines clos
to those proposed. Only four facilities are known to be exceeding the
proposed limits; all four are in Central Florida. As far as is known, tf
facilities in North Carolina and Tennessee (each state accounting for on!
about 5 percent of national production) will not be affected.
Pollutants and Control Technology
Effluents from the mineral mining and processing industry are
generally high in suspended solids and mineral content, depending on the
solubility of the specific ores. Typically, treatment technology consist
of settling ponds to remove suspended solids and sometimes lime
precipitation to remove metals and adjust pH. For difficult suspended
solids, flocculant addition and thickeners can be used. Where settling
ponds are not sufficient, filters can be used to augment treatment.
Effluents are generally from two distinct sources, mine dewatering and
beneficiation operations (milling, washing, and separation of minerals).
The effluent from beneficiation operations is usually higher in suspendec
solids than that from mining operations.
Costing Methodology
Table W6.1.1 is a summary of BPT compliance costs for the above
categories of the mineral mining and processing industry. The costs were
developed using model plant treatment technology sufficient to meet the
effluent guidelines.
W6.1-2
-------
o
e*
1
O O O O O *T
O O O O O t*i
o a s o o m
o o o o o in
o o o o o
o o o o o
—i m
in as
CD
en
efl
c
en
tn
o o o o o —
?
•H
ooooo CN ooooo "i m in
OOOOO — OOOOO ?M fi m
t/1 f*l CO CO
OOOOO e* OOOOO — O O
OOOOO T OOOOO -" f \O
CU
c
I
(N
p-
o o o o o r»
o a o o o —•
o o o o a
o o o o o
o o o o a
o o o a o
in
o
M
O
93
cr>
O O O O O CN
O O O O O —
o o o o o r~
o o o o o —
o o o o o
o o o o o
tn
o
CJ
O tn — .
as ss a,
z J *
O J —
o o
Q Cd
Z CJ
O fc4 «C
M o J
E-i . ft-
3 Z Z
•J O M
0 M
0. J J
OS M e-
U 2 M
r- 0.
tf Z tf
3 M CJ
tn
6-
_i
a.
O
z
=- l-l
z s-
a aj
S w
E" X
tn a
>
z
tn
a.
tn
z_
en
CM
z
3
E- E- a.
a. <
a 03 3
u
z
5-
Cd
MM
^4
a
£
•^^
tn tn
M Z
en tn
a. a.
_;
<
E-
0
E-
?
tn
O tn
CJ H
- <
< M
£•* a*
M
tn a, o
H < z
tn o M
O S- 5"
•_> — en —
<: M a
J 3 X
< z a
Z "^
z
<
en
a>
tn E-
Z <£
— a
en x.
S- r-
Z M
< Ct
- a,
s-, a. -~~
^
£• <•
O 3
J- Z
z
<
tn
z
_:
a,
O
Z
>~t
8- =•
tn a.
w ca
X
a
tn
a.
tn 5-
z <
— u
en s:
E- 5-
z a
< as
_: a.
S- a >»
< tn tn
— 3 a z
a tn tn
z a. a.
O
4-
J
<
b
a.
<
CJ
< —
—i ^
b s
=• z
z
<
en
6"
tn
O
CJ
^
3
tr
2
<
«
_Z
<
W6.1-3
-------
Chapter W6.2 Glass Manufacturing Industry
Regulations
The costs presented in this chapter are reflective
of EPA's promulgated regulations that establish effluent limitations
guidelines for best practicable technology (BPT) and best available
technology (BAT), performance standards for new sources (NSPS) and
pretreatment standards for new and existing sources (PSNS, PSES) for firms
in the glass manufacturing point source category. The promulgated
regulations were specified for twelve subcategories of the industry in two
phases. The first phase of regulations addressed firms engaged in the
manufacturing of flat glass and were published in the Federal Register on
February 14, 1974 (Ref. 7). The second phase addressed those firms engaged
in the manufacturing of pressed and blown glass, and were published in the
Federal Register on January 16, 1975 (Ref. 8). Subsequent amendments to
the regulations were published in the Federal Register on February 11, 1975
(Ref. 9) and August 29, 1979 (Ref. 10).
Since the subcategories of the industry were divided into two
groups in the regulations (Ref. 7,8) and contractor's cost reports (Ref. 3,
4, 5, 6), the remaining sections of this chapter are presented separately
for each group—(1) flat glass, and (2) pressed and blown glass.
Industry Characteristics (Flat Glass)
The flat glass industry may be divided into six major
subcategories based on the process employed. These are:
Sheet Glass Manufacturing
Rolled Glass Manufacturing
Plate (or primary) Glass Manufacturing
Float Glass Manufacturing
Automotive Glass Tempering
Automotive Glass Laminating
The sheet and rolled glass manufacturing industries do not
discharge wastewater, therefore, they are not considered in this analysis.
Plate glass is formed by a rolling process; then it is ground and
polished on both sides. Float glass is formed by cooling a layer of molten
glass on a bed of molten tin. Tempered glass is flat glass that has been
toughened by being heated above its strain point and then quickly cooled.
Laminated glass consists of plates of glass bonded to a sheet of plastic to
provide protection against shattering.
The major division within the industry is between primary and
automotive glass manufacturers and the processes they use. Plants that
W6.2-1
-------
produce plate and float glass are classified in SIC 3211 as establishment
primarily engaged in manufacturing flat glass and flat glass products fro
materials taken from the earth in the form of sand (i.e., primary glass
manufacturers). Plants that fabricate glass products (e.g., automotive
window glass) from purchased glass are classified in SIC 3231 (Ref. 3, pp
15, 18).
The flat glass industry is a cyclical industry, heavily affecte
by economic conditions in the construction and automotive industries, the
two largest users of flat glass. Both of these industries were depressed
in 1980 and 1981 but are expected to recover in 1982. Concerns for energ.
conservation will continue to aid the market for double and triple glazin
and for solar products. The rehabilitation and retrofitting of real esta
are other expanding markets for flat glass. Consequently, for the five
years ending in 1985 flat glass shipments are expected to rise at a real
compound growth rate of 4 percent (Ref. 2, p. 21). For the same period,
automotive glass shipments are expected to grow at the same rate as
automotive production, i.e., 1.5 percent.
Pollutants and Sources (Flat Glass)
In the manufacture of sheet and rolled glass, no process
wastewater is produced. Although water is added to raw materials for dus
suppression, the water is evaporated in the melting tank.
In plate glass manufacturing, process wastewater is produced in
the grinding, polishing and washing operations. Most of the wastewater i
contributed by the grinding process. The major waste constituent,
resulting from plate glass manufacturing is suspended solids, although
dissolved solids, BOD, and COD may also be present in the wastewater. Tf
grinding operation contributes most of the suspended solids.
Some plants in the float subcategory wash the glass prior to
packing and this constitutes the only wastewater stream. TSS, oil, COD,
and dissolved solids were identified in the wastewater.
In the automotive glass tempering subcategory, wastewater is
produced in the seaming, grinding, drilling, quenching, cooling, and
washing operations with the washing and drilling operations accounting fc
90 percent of the wastewater. Suspended solids are added by the seaming,
grinding, and drilling wastewaters; oil by the grinding solution carryove
BOD by oil in the coolant solution carryover; and dissolved solids by wat
treatment regenerants and boiler blowdown.
Water is used in the automobile glass laminating subcategory fc
cooling, seeming, and washing. Three or four washes are required when oi
autoclaves are used, and initial vinyl, and postlaminated washes are
required in all cases. Some plants still employ prelamination washes.
Eighty percent of the wastewater is contributed by initial washing, and
final washing. Major wastewater constituents are suspended solids, oils,
COD, BOD and phosphorus. Suspended solids are contributed to the
wastestream by the seeming operation; oil is contributed by the laminatir
W6.2-2
-------
process; COD is contributed by the post!ami nation wash as a result of the
high oil content. Phosphorus results from detergents used in the
preassembly and post!ami nation.
The concentration of pollutants in the wastewater varies by
subcategory. EPA estimated that the concentration of suspended solids was
as high as 15,000 mg/1 in the plate glass subcategory and only 15 mg/1 in
the float glass subcategory. Oil and COD concentrations were estimated to
be 1700 mg/1 in the automobile glass lamination subcategory and
significantly lower in all other subcategories. Phosphorus was found only
in the automobile glass lamination subcategory, although information was
not available for the float glass subcategory.
Control Technologies (Flat Glass)
There are no specific pretreatment standards for new sources
other than to comply with national pretreatment standards. The
pretreatment standards for existing sources in all subcategories except
automotive laminating and float glass specify no limitations. Pretreatment
standards for the automotive laminating and float glass subcategories have
not been promulgated.
Although BPT, BAT, and NSPS effluent limitations for the sheet
glass and rolled glass subcategories call for zero discharge, plants in
these subcategories have no process wastewater, thus, no technologies are
needed to meet these regulations.
For the plate glass subcategory, BPT technology requires
partitioning of existing lagoon cells and polyelectrolyte addition. No BAT
regulations are currently in force. For NSPS, EPA has promulgated zero
discharge limitations, although it does not recommend a specific
technology. The Development Document indicates that it is unlikely that
any new plants will be built, consequently no costs were assigned for new
source plants.
For the float glass subcategory, BPT technology is the
elimination of detergents in the float washer to reduce the discharge of
phosphorus. BAT regulates only phosphorus and at the same level as BPT,
thus, no additional treatment technology is needed. For NSPS, EPA
recommended diatomaceous earth filtration and elimination of detergents.
In the automotive glass tempering, BPT technology is coagulation
- sedimentation with centrifugation of waste sludge. No BAT regulations
are currently in fo-rce. For NSPS, EPA recommended diatomaceous earth
filtration in addition to BPT technology.
For automotive glass laminating, EPA recommended continuously
recycling initial hot water rinse, centrifugation of the recycled hot water
rinse to remove oil, and gravity oil separations. BAT regulations are
currently in force for phosphorus control, however, no end-of-pipe
treatment exists. NSPS standards are diatomaceous earth filtration in
addition to BPT.
W6.2-3
-------
Costing Methodology (Flat Glass)
Model plants are used to estimate the regulatory costs in the
flat glass industry. These model plants for each subcategory were derive-
in the Development Document (Ref. 3). The Appendix summarizes the sizes '
model plants, the costs for each model plant and the resulting equations.
Industry Characteristics (Pressed and Blown Glass)
The effluent limitations guidelines for the pressed and blown
glass manufacturing industry cover manufacturers of glass containers for
commercial packing, bottling, home canning, and the manufacturers of glas
and glassware, which is pressed, blown, or shaped from glass produced in
the same establishment.
The industry has been divided into the following subcategories,
based upon differences in production processes and wastewater
characteristics:
Glass containers
Machine-pressed and blown glass
Glass tubing
Television picture tube envelopes
Incandescent lamp envelopes—forming and frosting
Hand-pressed and blown glass—leaded and hydrofluoric acid
finishing, and nonhydrofluoric acid finishing
Four manufacturing steps are common to the entire pressed and
blown glass industry: weighing and mixing of raw materials, melting of ra
materials, forming of molten glass, and annealing of formed glass product
Further processing (finishing) is required for some products, especially
television tube envelopes, incandescent lamp envelopes, and hand-pressed
and blown glass.
Sand (silica) is the major ingredient of glass and accounts for
about 70 percent of the raw materials batch. Other ingredients may inclu
soda or soda ash (13-16 percent), potash, lime, lead oxide, boric oxide,
alumina, magnesia, and iron or other coloring agents. The usual batch al
contains between 10 and 50 percent waste glass (cullet).
Melting is done in three types of units: continuous furnaces,
clay pots, or day tanks. Methods used to form glass include blowing,
pressing, drawing, and casting. After the glass is formed, annealing is
required to relieve stresses that might weaken the glass or cause the
product to fail. The entire piece of glass is brought to a uniform
temperature that is high enough to permit the release of internal stresse
and then cooled at a uniform rate to prevent new stresses from developine
finishing steps include abrasive polishing, acid polishing, spraying witF
frosting solutions, grinding, cutting, acid etching, and glazing (Ref. 4)
The U.S. Bureau of Census, Census of Manufacturers, classifies
the manufacturers of glass containers in SIC 3221 and the manufacturers c
all other pressed and blown glass products in SIC 3229 (Ref. 6).
W6.2-4
-------
The most promising growth prospects for the glass container
industry are in the beer and soft drink markets. Competition from other
types of containers, however, is expected to keep the annual growth rate in
the glass container industry at approximately 1.0 percent per year (Ref. 4,
p. 73). Indirect competition from plastics will continue to affect the
demand for handmade glassware and glasstubing; however, the adverse affects
are expected to be minimal and growth will be at about the same annual rate
as the GNP, i.e., 3.2 percent. There is no material competitive with glass
for electric light bulbs, as such, demand will grow as electricity demands
increase (Ref. 6).
Pollutants and Sources (Pressed and Blown Glass)
Water is used during the manufacture of pressed and blown glass
for noncontact cooling, quenching of cullet, contact cooling of metallic
forming of cutting devices, batch wetting, abrasive polishing, edge
grinding, washing, and assorted other uses.
For the purpose of establishing effluent limitations guidelines,
the following pollution parameters were determined significant: fluoride,
ammonia, lead, oil, total suspended solids (TSS), and pH. These parameters
are not present in the wastewater from every subcategory, and may be more
significant in one subcategory than in another. Wastewaters from
noncontact cooling and boilers are not considered process wastewaters and
are not covered by the-guidelines.
In the manufacturing of glass containers, process water is used
for cullet quenching, batch wetting, and contact cooling of shears. Water
used for cullet quenching accounts for nearly all of the flow. Principal
pollutants associated with this subcategory are oil, which is present in
the shear spray or is due to leaking lubricants, and TSS, which is present
in the wastewater from cullet quenching.
In the Danner tubing subcategory, the major source of process
wastewater is from cullet quenching while the principal pollutant
discharged is TSS.
In the manufacturing of television picture tube envelopes,
process wastewater originates from many sources. TSS originates in the
cullet quench water, batch wetting, abrasive polishing and acid polishing
discharge streams. Fluoride is contributed to the waste stream by the fume
scrubbers and acid polishing rinse waters. Lead is present in both the
abrasive polishing and edge grinding streams.
In the incandescent lamp envelope subcategory, major pollutants
include oil, TSS, fluoride, and ammonia. Oil is contributed by shear spray
drippage and lubrication leaks, while TSS is present in the cullet quench
water, contact cooling of shears, and the rinse water of frosted bulbs.
Fluoride and ammonia are present only in wastewaters of plants that have
frosting operations. The frosting rinse water contains fluoride and
ammonia. Ammonia is also present in fume scrubber discharge.
W6.2-5
-------
In the production of hand pressed and blown glass, TSS is preser
in wastewaters of all finishing steps including grinding, polishing, and
cutting. Lead is contributed to the waste stream by acid treatment of lee
glass. Acid polishing and etching rinse waters contain fluoride.
The concentration of these pollutants in the wastewater varies t
subcategory. In the sampling of wastewaters from plants in the pressed
blown and glass industry, EPA found that TSS in the raw wastewater was as
low as 24 mg/1 while the concentration of lead varied from 30 mg/1 to 100
mg/1. Oil varied the least from 10 mg/1 to 25 mg/1. Ammonia which was
found only in the wastewater •from frosting operations of incandescent lamf
plants was 650 mg/1.
Control Technologies (Pressed and Blown Glass)
BPT--None of the subcategories need additional treatment to mee'
BPT effluent limitation guidelines although EPA projected that improved
housekeeping techniques may be needed for some glass container and glass
(Danner) tubing plants. However, most plants could meet the guidelines
through normal maintenance and cleanup operations.
For plants in the television picture tube envelope and
incandescent lamp envelope subcategories, EPA also recommended no further
treatment. At the time of promulgation, it was common practice for plant:
in both subcategories to employ lime addition, precipitation, coagulation
sedimentation and pH adjustment. Incandescent lamp envelope plants also
used oil skimmers. Some plants may need to employ stricter housekeeping
to meet the BPT guidelines.
For plants in the hand pressed and blown glass manufacturing
subcategory, EPA did not specify any BPT limitations due to anticipated
serious economic impacts.
BAT—for two subcategories (glass containers and glass tubing),
EPA has revoked BAT standards and no cost estimates were made. For the
remaining subcategories, EPA recommended technologies to meet BAT-standar
are:
TV tube envelopes: sand filtration of lime precipitati
on
• Incandescent lamp envelopes: sand filtration, stream strippi
for removal of ammonia, recarbonation
• Hand pressed and blown glass: batch lime precipitation,
sedimentation, recarbonation, sand filtration. (Plants in
this subcategory with a discharge of less than 50 gallons pe
day of process wastewater are exempted from meeting BAT
guidelines.)
NSPS--For TV tube envelopes, incandescent lamp envelopes and
hand-pressed and blown glass, NSPS is identical to BAT standards and the
same technologies are assumed. For glass containers and glass (Danner)
tubing, the following technologies were costed:
W6.2-6
-------
1. Glass containers: stream segregation, recycling of cullet
quench through a gravity oil separator, treatment of blowdown
by dissolved air flotation
2. Glass (Danner) tubing: recirculation of cullet quench through
a cooling tower with blowdown treated by a diatomaceous earth
filter
PSNS—For PSNS regulations, EPA specified no limitations for the
glass (Danner) tubing subcategory. For the glass container subcategory,
EPA specified standards for oil (mineral) which were identical to the BPT
standards. Since the BPT standards did not require further treatment, it
was assumed that no further treatment would be required for new source
pretreaters. Thus, for glass (Danner) tubing and glass containers, costs
were assumed to be zero. For all other subcategories, PSNS limitations are
identical to BAT limitations for oil (mineral) and fluoride while no
limitations were specified for other pollutants. Because limitations for
oil (mineral) and fluoride were identical to BAT, BAT technologies were
assumed.
PSES—EPA has not promulgated regulations for existing
pretreaters.
Costing Methodology (Pressed and Blown Glass)
For each of the subcategories, capital and O&M costs were
presented for a typical model plant in the Development Document (Ref. 4).
The cost estimating equations for each subcategory are presented in the
Appendix. The costs for each of the model plants as presented in the
Development Document (Ref. 4) are also included.
These costs and model plants are used in this study to estimate
the total regulatory cost, shown in Table W6.2.1.
W6.2-7
-------
o
g^
1
^H
CD
r-»
"
?
O r~
T a\
>, a u ""
CO "" .
3
•a
e
c CD
3 -f r»
.u o a cr>
y *
J Z < Z
JO «aw
2 j > 7^ .
j -* S <
d I-H O ^
MS < M
r- ft. « 0*
< Z < 2 <
^f^r*»r* uno^'"^GN o^tN"^^ r**
or*»f*^OfN rn i/i(NODOO 1/1 cNLnr^o^ '-o ^
Oun^O^ Cft "^r^oo^4 vfi oj^'^oo c\ "*O
**4 W4 ro ^ ^ r*1 co f**>
i^
omojoo r^ ^o^oo o fsinooo oo cs
o •* ^ o o CN o ^o t/i o o <^ <~^ r^ *^ o o ^ ^
'
•v ^o o ^n-^ n m M o\ ^ ^
O^Or^OO ^" ^O^OO ^* \flifif^oO rp tO
O OD 00 O O P» OfSP^OO O O^OOO (*J f*l
SoSoo ? ^oSoo 5 SoSoo a ?
^H ^N ^H
oo o eft in CN o r^ -^ co o en t^
OOOvOOO «• — > O ^O O O C» PM^JOCOO rN 3
OP^OOO pn o— IPNOO m o — i ^3 O O so -i
•r*
-* "4 — * •-» ^.
enen <^enen enen •*"
^••a. ^E^a* ^-ta. o
zens- i-izene-i zenei
-i ja. -* Ja. i.
Z c^ £* r^ a* • — . O^^S^E^E^a.^. £-c^r-a.'^* ^
aena.< enen _ cj — en a.
-------
Chapter W6.3 Insulation Fiberglass
Regulations
The costs of compliance shown in this chapter are based on
documentation associated with the regulations as originally promulgated.
BAT regulations for this industry are currently under review. The chapter
has not been updated since costs for compliance are subject to change if
the BAT regulations are modified.
Industry Characteristics
The insulation fiberglass industry has no subcategories. The raw
materials for fiberglass production are 55-73 percent silica and 45-27
percent fluxing oxides (e.g., limestone and borates) to manufacture the
fiberglass filaments, and a phenolic resin to bind the filaments together.
Four basic types of glass are used: low-alkali lime alumina borosilicate,
soda-lime borosilicate, lime-free borosilicate, and soda-lime.
The basic process for fiberglass manufacture is as follows. The
raw materials batch is melted to form a homogeneous glass stream. There
are two ways that the melting process can be done: direct melting or
marble process. The molten glass stream is then fiberized to form a random
mat of fibers which are bonded together with a thermosetting phenolic
binder or g.lue. The glass is fiberized by either flame attenuation or
rotary spinning. The trend in the industry is toward more direct melting
and rotary spinning.
The primary domestic uses for insulation fiberglass are:
insulating material, noise insulation products, air filters, and bulk wool
products.
There are 19 insulation fiberglass plants owned by three major
companies. Ten of these plants currently have BPT equipment in place. The
typical plant produces 123 thousand metric tons (136 thousand short tons)
per year, and all plants have a wastewater discharge.
Pollutants and Sources
The main sources contributing to total waste load are summarized
in Table W6.3.1.
Control Technology and Costs
Because of the large volume of process waters and because the
chain wash water often contains phenol, formaldehyde, and other
contaminants, total recycling of wastewaters is the most economical
treatment alternative for the insulation fiberglass industry. Sample
W6.3-1
-------
recycling systems consist of coarse filtration, followed by either fine
filtration or flocculation and settling.
Effluent control costs are summarized in Table W6.3.2.
W6.3-2
-------
Table W6.3.1.
Insulation fiberglass industry pollutant
sources waste streams
Air
Pollutants Scrubbing
Phenols
BOD,
CODD
IDS
TSS
Oil and
Grease
Ammonia
PH
Color
Turbidity
Temperature
(Wasted
heat)
Specific
conductance
X
X
X
X
X
_
_
-
X
X
X
X
Boiler
Blow-
down
-
-
X
X
_
_
-
-
X
X
X
Caustic
Blow-
down
-
-
X
X
_
_
X
-
X
X
X
Chain
Spray
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
Gullet
Cooling
-
-
X
X
-
-
-
-
-
X
"
Fresh
Water
Treat-
ment
-
-
X
X
_
-
X
-
X
X
X
Hood
Spray
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
Noncon-
tact
Cooling
Water
-
-
X
-
_
_
-
-
-
X
**
Source: EPA Development Document, January, 1979
W6.3-3
-------
o
en
I
— O a O O
a
i
o a
o a
• o o
• o o
o
a
o a
» a o
(N O •» O O
33 o '-C O O
ca
CO
03
00
1)
-Q
C
O
3
CO
c
O O U1 O O
O O vO O O
— o CO O O
<"> 3 «r o o
o
a
—i vo r- co
.-* O <"*) O O rn <*H
i o O
CN
O O O O O
a o a o O
r-
o
r- a
—• o o i
-* o » o o
•v o ^ o o
2
O O
— o — o a
3 3
a 3
C en —
O •-• ^
f) Q
c a
z "j
S2-
2 « CJ
<
a,
0.
ss
c- — ^ -: c.
a in c. < "" w en
~ x
en a
u S-
< -:
a.
en a.
z <
— a
2 i
en a. o z a
?• < z < s
. < -i a 3 :: a z
~ z a s a. i.
il
•^ f-
6- Z
en <
^ a
cj a.
~ 'J
•z.
en
a.
— a
z a
< x
en
C
-- c- 5- a. -^
O en ;. < _^ en en
_: x "~ ~ 2 en 35
< a = a. a.
W6.3-4
-------
Chapter W6.4 Asbestos Manufacturing
Regulations
Regulations for all eleven industry subcategories have been
promulgated for BPT, BAT (old), NSPS and pretreatment for new sources. BAT
limitations have been revised. In 1981, the BCT requirements, originally
added in 1979, were remanded. Therefore this chapter does not include any
estimate of BCT costs. All other costs are based on the development
documents referenced in the Appendix.
Industry Characteristics
As of 1978, the main asbestos consumers were the manufacturers of
cement pipe (35%), floor tiles (20%), friction products (12%), roofing
products (10%) and cement sheet (6%). Asbestos-cement pipe is used mainly
for sewer lines. Asbestos sheet is used for laboratory table tops and
other structural uses. Asbestos paper and millboard have a wide variety of
uses, but are particularly used for applications where direct contact with
high temperatures occurs. Asbestos roofing and floor tiles are fabricated
products that take advantage of the unique qualities of asbestos. The
primary reasons for the use of asbestos fiber in textile products are its
durability and resistance to heat, fire, and acid. Asbestos is the only
mineral that can be manufactured into textiles using looms and other
equipment. Textile products are primarily used for friction materials,
industrial packing, and electrical and thermal insulation.
Asbestos cement pipe, cement sheet, paper, and millboard are
manufactured with similar methods. The asbestos fibers and other raw
materials are slurried with water and then formed into sheets. Settling
tanks (save-alls) are used in all processes. In roofing manufacture,
asbestos paper is impregnated with asphalt or coal "tar. In floor tile
manufacture, asbestos is added to the tiles for its special structural and
dimension-holding qualities. Textile manufacture involves the coating of
asbestos yarn or cloth. The material is drawn through one or more dip
tanks and the coating material is spread by rollers, brushes, or doctor
blades. The coated textile product then passes through a drying oven where
the solvent is evaporated.
Shipments of asbestos (mostly chrysotile) in 1978 from mines in
the United States increased minimally from those in 1977. Imports were 4
percent higher than in 197-7, but U.S. demand continued to lag well below
the peak year of 1973. The predicted annual growth rate of 2.0 percent for
U.S. asbestos consumption is an average of three predicted growth rates
presented in Table 2 of the Appendix. The apparent consumption for 1974
was about 767,000 MT and for 1978 about 619,000 MT. It is expected to
increase to about 800,000 MT by 1985 and to about 940,000 MT by the year
2000.
W6.4-1
-------
Pollutants and Sources
Asbestos manufacturing wastes include total suspended solids
(including asbestos fibers), BOD-, COD, pH, alkalinity, high temperature,
total dissolved solids, nitrogen, phosphorus, toxic substances, oil and
grease, organic matter, nutrients, color and turbidity. The basic
parameters used to define asbestos plant effluents are COD, TSS, and pH.
The major source of wastewater in the industry is the machinery
that converts the asbestos slurry into the formed wet product. Water is
used as an ingredient, as a carrying medium, as a coolant, and for such
auxiliary uses as pump seals, wet saws, and pressure-testing pipes.
Textile plants use little water in their operations. The addition of
moisture during weaving or braiding and during coating generates small
amounts of wastewater. In all subcategories, water is removed to the
settling tank (save-all system).
Control Technology
The basic treatment technology used by the asbestos industry to
meet BPT guidelines is sedimentation. Neutralization, coagulation, and
skimming are also used in combination with settling tanks to achieve BPT
levels. No discharge limitations, which apply to most BAT and some NSPS
and BPT guidelines, can be met with a complete recycle process.
Costing Methodology
The costs of compliance were estimated using an industry model
for each of the regulated subcategories and a single model for the Phase
portion of the industry. Most of the information for the cost estimate v\
taken from Development Documents, Economic Analysis Documents, or
associated prior studies of economic impact by EPA contractors. The
estimated costs of compliance are listed in Table W6.4.1.
W6.4-2
-------
(•^^•o -* o^ r* -* r- m o eft
o nrj^ioo 03 e* -« o o o — « 9*0000
i o«-
00
C
Lj
3
3
C in *r o oc^o ON
03 -" oapr-oovo ^ovvaoo^
e co ...... ......
t O-*OOOaDin -co
oo r^rsir^oo -»o ^<»>r»oo un —•
" -H OOOOO O OOOOO O OOOOO
in GO
a*
tn
O
O
•3 _—- ••
O tn — tn
OS 25 Cu £••
: . tn
z — is tn tn
O J — E-I O.
O O Z tn 5- _ . _
Q a <£ z «s — < z < tn< z < + tn
u j — a : - -- r • " :
CEu< cu toe HO, tnx ua> tna: — tn
>-iOJ &-:- •- r-r- 5-H &*
< Z < Z
3 w U w
O
'J
tn —
tn u
O
CJ J
J S
-------
-------
Chapter W6.5 Cement Industry
Regulations
BAT regulations for the industry covered in this chapter are
currently under review by EPA. It is anticipated that the review may
result in some change in the regulations, with subsequent effects on the
estimated cost of compliance. Because of possible changes in the BAT
regulations following the review, this chapter has not been updated. The
costs shown here are based on documentation associated with the regulations
as originally promulgated, and the costs for compliance with BAT are
subject to change if the BAT regulations are modified.
Industry Characteristics
The cement industry is divided into two basic manufacturing
processes: wet and dry.
A facility using the wet process grinds up the raw materials with
water and feeds them into the kiln as a slurry.
A facility using the dry process dries the raw materials, grinds
and then feeds them into the kiln in a dry state.
In each of these processes, there are three major steps:
grinding and blending, clinker production, and finish grinding. .Clinker is
a material about the size of a large marble which has been through the kiln
but has not been fine-ground into finished cement.
The raw materials for cement production include lime (calcium
oxide), silica, alumina, iron, and gypsum. Lime, the largest single
ingredient, comes from cement rock, oyster shell marl, or chalk.
Prices have increased due to higher production costs and
pollution abatement costs. Fuel cost increases are also expected to affect
prices.
Pollutants and Sources
In terms of the generation of water pollutants," the cement
industry is divided into three subcategories:
• Leaching plants. The contaminated water is from leaching
systems installed to reprocess collected kiln dust and from
the wet scrubbers that control stack emission.
• Nonleaching plants. The contamination of water is not a
direct function of the water usage.
W6.5-1
-------
• Pile materials. Runoff from piles of kiln dust, clinker, coe
or other materials that are subject to rainfall.
The main sources contributing to the total waste load come from
the following: in-plant leakage, noncontact cooling water, process water,
kiln dust pile runoff water, housekeeping water, and effluent from wet
scrubbers.
In order to define waste characteristics, the following basic
parameters were used to develop guidelines for meeting BPT and BAT: pH,
total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, alkalinity, potassium,
sulfate, and temperature (waste heat).
BPT for plants in the nonleaching subcategory has been defined «
no discharge of pollutants from manufacturing except for thermal discharge
for which an increase of 3°C (5.5°F) is permitted.
For plants in the leaching subcategory, BPT is the same as for
the nonleaching subcategory except for the dust-contact streams where a
reduction of pH to 9.0 and of suspended solids to 0.4 kg/metric ton of du:
leached is required. For plants subject to the provisions of the Materia'
Storage Piles Runoff Subcategory, either the runoff should be contained tc
prevent discharge or the runoff should be treated to neutralize and reduce
suspended solids.
BAT for both leaching and nonleaching plants is defined as zero
discharge of pollutants. For plants subject to the provisions of the
Materials Storage Piles Runoff Subcategory, the definition of BPT is
applied to BAT.
NSPS is the same as BPT except that no discharge is permitted f<
plants with materials storage pile runoff.
Control Technology and Costs
The main control and treatment methods for the cement industry
involve recycle and reuse of wastewater. The devices employed include
cooling towers or ponds, settling ponds, containment ponds, and clarifier
For leaching plants, additional controls are needed for adequat
control of alkalinity, suspended solids, and dissolved solids. Alkalinity
is controlled by neutralization, or carbonation; suspended solids by
clarification, sometimes with the addition of flocculating agents.
Although none of the leaching plants currently uses a treatment method to
control dissolved solids, several processes that might be employed includ>
precipitation, ion exchange, reverse osmosis, electrodialysis, and
combinations of these followed by total evaporation.
In-plant control methods include good maintenance and operating
procedures to minimize solid spillage and to return dry dust to the
process. Solids introduced into storm water runoff can be minimized by
paving areas for vehicular traffic, providing good ground cover in other
W6.5-2
-------
pen areas, removing accumulations of dust from roofs and buildings, and by
building ditches and dikes to control runoff from materials storage piles.
Control costs are summarized in Table W6.5.1.
W6.5-3
-------
O
3\
I
03
— no
V
O
o 1*1 r- o O —i
o in r- o o i~i
03 "^ VO O O
in r-i —i o O
i o o o
CO
O
cfl
3
•a
c
i
o o o o
-. •» o o
09 O
— cr\ o o o
o o o o
CO
o
— in
r- o eo o o
\o m o
— o «f> o o —"
-------
Chapter W6.6 Paving and Roofing Materials
Regulations
The costs included in this chapter are for 8PT, BAT, and NSPS
requirements. This industry has been exempted from additional federal
guidelines under paragraph 8 of the 1976 settlement agreement with NRDC.
The regulations for this industry are cited in 40 CFR 443.
Industry Characteristics, Pollutants and Control Technology
Establishments covered under these guidelines include: (1)
Asphalt emulsion plants (SIC 2951); (2) Asphalt concrete plants (SIC 2951
and 1611); (3) Asphalt roofing plants (SIC 2952) and (4) Linoleum and
asphalt felt flooring (SIC 3996).
Asphalt Emulsion Plants. About 50 plants produce asphalt
emulsions. The chief source of pollutants is water from the wet collection
of waste fumes and the runoff of precipitation.
The costs of meeting the regulations for a typical plant of 5,500
metric tons (6,000 short tons) per day have been developed by EPA for the
BPT, BAT, and NSPS case, and are applied to the 7 plants not in compliance
in 1974, the year the regulations were proposed. Eighteen plants at that
time were meeting the BPT standards, of which 8 met BAT standards. (This
was industry practice, not anticipation of the regulations.) Twenty-five
plants discharge to municipal sewers.
Industry size was static from 1971-75 but was expected to grow at
4 percent per year through 1980 and at 1.65 percent per year from 1981 to
85. These estimates were based qn expected highway construction and
repair.
Asphalt Paving Plants. Approximately 3,180 plants usa wet
scrubbers to remove particulates from the air, thereby creating a potential
water pollution problem. (The rest of the industry group uses fabric
filters.) The BPT, BAT, and NSPS requirements are the same—no discharge
of pollutants. This can be readily achieved by the use of an earthen'
settling basin or lagoon, or by use of a mechanical sedimentation tank.
Costs derived in the EPA Development Document have been used. No
pretreatment costs have been calculated, since, according to a recent
survey, only one plant discharges to a municipal system. Forty percent of
new plants or expansions occurring after 1974 are expected to use wet
scrubbing; the balance will use dry air pollution control methods and thus
will not incur water pollution control costs. The balance are estimated to
have changed to fabric filters to abate air pollution and avoid the costs
of upgrading their water clean-up system. Forty percent of future plants
are expected to use wet systems.
W6.6-1
-------
Asphalt Roofing.. In 1974, 225 plants produced a variety of
asphalt and tar roofing materials including shingles, felts, siding
materials, and coatings. The chief pollution problem arises from oil and
particulate in the cooling water that is used directly on the material.
addition, most plants have a tower for blowing asphalt. The ground
adjacent to this unit is usually saturated with asphalt so that
precipitation runoff becomes contaminated with oils.
The costs for meeting BPT, BAT, and NSPS for a plant of 450
metric tons per day (500 short tons per day) have been developed by EPA a
have been applied to the 21 plants not conforming to BPT regulations and
the additional 21 plants meeting BPT but not BAT standards.
Growth of the industry was assumed to be 3.5 percent per year.
Linoleum and Asphalt Felt Flooring. This industry segment of t
tar and asphalt products industry is quite small (3 plants estimated) and
the costs for conforming to the regulations are small ($6,100 capital
investment and $2,570 O&M for a typical plant). For these reasons, the
costs have not been tabulated or included.
Control Costs
The total costs for asphalt emulsion plants, asphalt paving
plants and asphalt roofing plants are shown in Table W6.6.1.
W6.6-2
-------
o
en
09 •
O I
m o O
| CO O O
VO (N O
F*I in '""i
o o
o o
39
co
in
ej
Z
Z &-i c-*
a en cu
SMS
^ X
en a
u
>
z
.«*
en
o<
en s-
z <
— u
en a:
5- r1
*4 OM
taj Q4
C-. Qi *^
< en en
C3 3 U Z
a en en
z cu cu
a
£->
j
< en
H E-i
Qa 2
*C J
U CU
en Q c
§•" U Z
en N M
O M 5^ &
cj J en s
< w a
J 3 X
< z a
3 Z
Z <
Z
M
en
CU
en £•*
z <
— a
en os
r* £^
z a
"£ Gi
J 04
^ C-t Qi >^
u < en
a en
z o,
z
en eu
J M C3
< X
5- s a
o
£1 +
Z
a 3
z
as
B.
^s.
en en
u z
en en
a. a.
o
+
04
<
u
g |
en
£->
en
O
z
z
W6.6-3
-------
-------
Chapter W7. Forest Products Industries
For the purpose of this report, the Forest Products Industries
are defined as those establishments engaged in gathering and processing
forest products and in the manufacture of consumer goods from these
materials. These are the:
• Timber Products Processing
t Timber Products Process: Wood Furniture and Fixture
Manufacturing
• Gum and Wood Chemicals
• Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Costs for the reduction of water pollution for these industrial
sectors are summarized in Table W7. These costs and other data are
repeated below in the appropriate sections together with the assumption
specific to the industry and other details.
W7-1
-------
in CM
in fN
o
0\
I
CO
MS
!N
o
o\
r- >J3
9 in
» O
r- r» ••• o>
in —0
in
vo
=0
co
5-
cn
o
CJ
in a
as
m
01
Sn
Z
O
CJ —
yi
z as
en O <
Si w J
0 6. -
3 3 O
c j a
o -
OS O —
o> a. to
£» as ,-»
Ul Cd
u e- b
as < o
0 Z
GU cn
z
• « O
r- a M
M J
3 « J
a en z
3 a z
< Z M
e- « —
00
1
a>
r-
a\
M«
^«
z
a
z
!•"
a
z
00
1
91
r-
31
~*
oo o — o
o» o <— oj
o
o
IN m ui — o
\o -• ON
— i oo
10
ao
CO
i
o .
<; f*°i o o <** r*
3
Z ^o —• oo r- fN
Z —• VO fN 04 tN ^
< 00 -i ^* vd
I fN fN
I
-------
Chapter W7.1 Timber Product Processing (Nonfumiture)
Regulations
Effluent discharge regulations for the timber product processing
(nonfurniture) subcategories are reported in the Federal Register (Vol.
46, No. 16, Monday, January 26, 1981) and summarized in the appendix. The
regulations apply to fourteen subcategories including:
A. Barking H. Wood Preserving - Boulton
B. Veneer I. Wet Storage
C. Plywood J. Log Washing
D. Dry Process Hardboard K. Sawmills and Planning Mills
E. Wet Process Hardboard L. Finishing
F. Wood Preserving - M. Particleboard
Water Borne or N. Insulation Board
Nonpressure
G. Wood Preserving-Steam
The prior categories cover both processes (i.e., barking and log
washing) and products (i.e., plywood and particleboard) and an individual
establishment may be impacted by more than one category if it is a
multi-product plant or encompasses a regulated process as well as a
product.
Industry Characteristics
The nonfurniture timber product processing industry encompasses
a large, diversified and complex set of establishments and companies. The
industry converts wood raw materials in a wide range of lumber, flat board,
and other wood building and construction materials. Over 15,000
establishments (1979) are covered by this industry category including:
Type of plant No. of plants
Sawmills 11,000
Millwork and finishing 3,000
Veneer and plywood 500
Wood preserving - NP, steam and boulton 476
Particleboard 75
Dry process hardboard (only) 16
Wet process hardboard (only) 11
Insulation board 10
Combined insulation and wet process
hardboard 5
Total (approximate) 15,000 plus
W7.1-1
-------
The plants are located contiguously with the natural range of
timberlands in the Pacific Northwest, Southeast, North Central and
Northeastern United States. Their capacity will vary from small family
operations to facilities employing a thousand workers. Capacity
utilization generally varies from 80 to 95 percent although the recent
housing market recession has dropped utilization rates much lower and
caused several plant closings.
In 1981, industry value of shipments were over $18.5 billion.
Real annual growth rates were growing at 4.1 percent per year from 1972-7
but showed declines of 6.2 percent per year for the 1978-81 period. Grow
is expected to be positive in the near future, if the housing industry
recovers.
Most of the nonfurniture timber processing industry is covered
the following SIC groups.
2421 Sawmills and Planning Mills
2435 Hardwood Veneer and Plywood
2436 Softwood Veneer and Plywood
2491 Wood Preserving
2492 Particleboard
Of these groups, the sawmill and planning mill group is the largest
accounting for about two-thirds of the employment and value of shipment.
Softwood veneer and plywood plants are the second largest group
representing one-fifth of employment and value of shipments. Each of the
other groups accounts for less than ten percent of the industry employmer
or shipments.
The method of waste disposal is highly variable, with some
categories including all or predominately indirect dischargers. Detailec
information on method of discharge is presented in the appendix.
Pollutants and Sources
Water use varies widely among the subcategories in the timber
products processing industry. The major pollutants are chemicals leachec
from wood, particles from washing or cutting operations, and oils, pheno'
and metals from fishing and preserving opera-tions. The major pollution
parameters considered in developing treatment standards are BOD, COD,
suspended solids, oil and grease, phenols, and metals.
Water use and major pollutants in each subcategory are summari;
below.
The barking subcategory includes the operations which remove b<
from logs. Barking may be accomplished by several types of mechanical
abrasion or by hydraulic force. For the purpose of this regulation
"hydraulic barking" means that method of barking wood that utilizes wate
at a pressure of greater than 68.0 atm (1000 psi) as the means of removi
bark from logs. The product from the barking subcategory is normally us<
W7.1-2
-------
as a raw or feed material to other subcategories in the timber products
processing category rather than being sold as a finished product.
Wastewaters generated by the barking operation vary widely. Large volumes
of water are used in hydraulic barking. Abrasion type barkers use less
water and certain type barkers are operated dry. The wastewaters contain
suspended solids and BODS in concentrations ranging up to 3,000 and 1,000
mg/1 respectively.
The veneer subcategory includes the operations used to convert
barked logs or heavy timber into thinner sections of wood known as veneer.
Log conditioning, veneer dryer wash water, and cooling water are the main
sources of wastewaters. The primary parameters contained in raw
wastewaters are BODS and suspended solids. BODS loading may be as high as
2,500 kg/million sq m (515 Ib/million sq ft) of board on a 9.53 mm (3/8 in)
basis, and suspended solids may range as high as 29,000 kg/million sq m
(6,000 Ib/million sq ft) of board on the same basis from log conditioning
steam vat wastewater.
The plywood subcategory includes the operations of laminating
layers of veneer to form finished plywood. Plywood manufacturing is an
almost entirely dry operation using water in significant quantities only
for cleaning the glue mixing and glue application equipment. This
wastewater may contain the various components in protein, urea or phenolic
glues. Principal pollutants include suspended solids, nitrogenous
materials, BOD5, phenols and formaldehydes. Both suspended solids and BOD5
concentrations may be extremely high ranging into hundreds of thousands of
mg/1.
The dry process hardboard subcategory includes all of the
manufacturing operations attendant to the production of finished hardboard
from chips, dust, logs, or other raw materials using the dry matting
process for forming the board mat. Water usage in dry process hardboard
manufacturing is low, and waste dischargers are minimal. Sources of
wastewater are log and chip washing, caul wash water, resin wash water, and
cooling water. Typical wastewater flows are less than 2,000 I/day (500
gal/day).
The wet process hardboard subcategory includes all of the
manufacturing operations attendant to the production of finished hardboard
from chips, dust, logs, or other raw materials using the wet matting
process for forming the board mat. The nature of the wet matting process
in which the fibers are diluted from 40 percent consistency to less than
1.5 percent prior to mat formation, is such as to create volumes of
wastewater in the range of 4.6 to 46 cu m/kkg (1,100 to 11,000 gal/ton).
While the water use may vary from mill to mill, the main sources of
wastewater are log wash, chip wash, and caul washwaters, fiber preparation,
and mat formation (wet matting). The principal pollutants found in these
wastewaters are BOD5 and suspended solids. BODS may reach 50 kg/kkg (100
Ib/ton), and suspended solids loading usually averages under 19 kg/kkg (38
lb/ton).
W7.1-3
-------
The wood preserving—water borne or non-pressure subcategory
includes all wood processes in which steaming or boultonizing is not the
predominant method of conditioning, all non-pressure preserving processes
and all pressure or non-pressure processes employing water-borne salts.
The actual volume of water used at a wood preserving plant is not static,
but varies depending upon the condition of the stock being treated (eithe
green or seasoned) and the size of the individual items. Wastewater
characteristics vary with the particular preservative used, the volume of
stock that is conditioned prior to treatment, the conditioning method use
and the extent to which effluents from retorts are diluted with water fro
other sources. Typically, wastewaters from creosote and pentachlcrophenc
treatments have high phenolic, COD, and oil content and may have a turbid
appearance that results from emulsified oils. They are always acid in
nature and the pH values usually fall within the range of 4.1 to 6.0. Th
COD for such wastes frequently exceeds 30,000 mg/1 , most of which is
attributable to entrained oils and to wood extractives (principally simp!
sugars) that are removed from wood during conditioning. The wastewater
resulting from vat type treatment using water soluble salts is highly
variable in both volume and pollutant content. As the source of this
wastewater is primarily from drips, leaks and minor spills, it cannot be
effectively characterized.
The wood preserving—steam subcategory includes all processes
that use direct steam impingement on the wood as the predominant method c
conditioning. Steam conditioning of wood produces a large volume of
condensate containing extraneous components from the wood in addition to
the wood preserving chemicals. The volume of wastewater may vary widely
from day to day within the same processing facility; value ranges from
6,000 to 150,000 I/day (2,000 to 40,000 gal/day) have been recorded in a
single facility. Pollutants are generally similar to those outlined for
the wood preserving subcategory above.
The wood preserving—boultonizing subcategory covers those wooc
preserving processes which use the Boulton process as the method of
conditioning stock. Boultonizing generates wastewaters similar in
character to those in the steam subcategory. The volume, however, is
substantially lower because the only source of process wastewater is the
water removed from the wood during the conditioning step.
Wet storage includes storage of logs in estuaries and streams,
log ponds, mill ponds and wet decks. Pollutants are washed'off the surfa
of logs and leached from the wood. The principal pollutants of concern c
COD, BOD, dissolved and suspended solids and phenols.
The processing operations of sawmills and planning mills have
very limited process water requirements and the volumes of wastewater
generated are not sufficient, with reasonable process management, to resi
in a process wastewater stream.
Finishing operations include gluing, application of surface
coatings, and the application of sealers, stains, dyes, primers, and
fillers, of either organic or inorganic nature. Pollutants typically
W7.1-4
-------
include mercury and other metals, dissolved solids, phenols and organic
resins, BOD, COD, and pH.
The primary sources of wastewater generation in the particleboard
manufacturing industry are resin blender cleaning water, cleaning of
additive storage tanks, caul cooling sprays, mat sprays, and fire control
water. Pollutants typically include high BOD, COD, dissolved and suspended
solids and phenols, nitrogen and phosphorus.
Insulation board manufacture generates a large volume of process
water. Water may be used in a number of the following operations: chip ~
washing, white water (i.e., water used in processing and carrying the wood
fibers through the insulation board manufacturing process) finishing
operations, cooling, seal water, fire control and housekeeping. Pollutants
typically include BOD, COD, dissolved and suspended solids, and dissolved
organic materials.
Treatment Technologies
Various treatment technologies can be used to achieve BPT, BAT,
and NSPS guidelines. Technologies for the nine subcategories that are to
achieve zero discharge under BPT or BAT include a combination of:
Water conservation
Recycling and reuse
Waste stream segregation
Inplant process changes, and
Disposal processes such as spray irrigation, evaporation,
incineration, and discharge to impoundments
Technologies for the five other subcategories have been chosen to
reduce pollution loadings without completely eliminating discharges under
BPT or BAT. These technologies have been chosen because standards
requiring zero discharge would not be cost effective or economically
feasible. Technologies and standards for these subcategories are
summarized below.
Hydraulic barking, wet process hardboard, and insulation board
plants are required under BPT to achieve numerical discharge limitations
for BOD, suspended solids, and pH based on primary treatment followed by
biological treatment. More stringent BAT standards have been withdrawn.
Wood preserving—steam facilities are required to achieve
numerical discharge limitations for BOD, phenols, oil and grease, and pH,
based on oil recovery, waste stream segregation and water conservation
followed by one or more of the following:
Biological treatment
Oxidation
Soil irrigation
Evaporation; and
Incineration of oil wastes
W7.1-5
-------
More stringent BAT standards have been withdrawn.
8PT and BAT standards for wet storage require minor modificatic
to existing facilities to eliminate discharge of debris.
NSPS treatment technologies are designed to achieve zero
discharge for all subcategories except hydraulic barking and wet storage.
In each of these categories NSPS technologies are the same as BPT
technologies.
PSES for eleven subcategories are based on general pretreatment
regulations. Technologies for these subcategories have not been specifie
The wood preserving—water borne or non-pressure subcategory mi
achieve zero discharge under PSES. This requirement is based on careful
water management and recycling, as specified in the BPT standard.
The wood preserving—steam and wood preserving—boulton
subcategories have PSES requirements which require facilities to meet
numerical standards for oil and grease, copper, chromium and arsenic.
These limitations can be met using in-place oil separation technology.
Costing Methodology
Cost estimates for each subcategory are derived from one or mor
of the following sources:
0 Model plant costs from a Development Document
t Plant specific data from a Development Document
• Exogenous data from an Economic Analysis
• Exogenous data from a Federal Register notice
For each subcategory, the cost estimates reflect the currently
promulgated regulations.
Total costs for each regulation affecting direct dischargers w<
estimated from a cost estimating power equation developed from model plar
data or from exogenous data. Cost estimating equations were presented ir
the form y=Ax , in which:
y = capital or O&M costs, and
x - plant capacity
If more than one model plant was available for a technology, A
and b were calculated using regression techniques. If only one model pl<
was available, values for A were calculated assuming b = .6 for capital
costs and b = .8 for O&M costs.
Cost estimating equations, model plant data, exogenous data, a
costing assumptions for direct dischargers in each subcategory are
presented in the Appendix to this chapter.
W7.1-6
-------
Pretreatment standards more stringent than general pretreatment
levels have been established for:
• Wood preserving - water borne or non-pressure
t Wood preserving - steam
• Wood preserving - boulton
Compliance costs for these subcategories are minimal and have
been assumed to be zero.
The aggregate cost of compliance for all significantly impac
subcategories is presented in Table W7.1.1. These costs are developed
a combination of exogenous and model plant data depending on the
subcategory. Specific cost data and assumptions are presented in the
appendix.
W7.1-7
-------
O OOOOO O OOOOO 3 OOOOO T in O
en
I OOOOO O OOOOO O OOOOO 01 en O
^H f^ o f^
03 fi c*4 in
en
JJ T OOOOOtN OOOOO '-O OOOOO03T O
2 03 . . .
3 I O O O O O !— O O O O O en OOOOOr^M o
4-1 — O* O (N (-1
c
o
c
SO -
_. en
C rt O O O 0 O PM
CO — I O O O O O t—
CD -> en
CU 4- r-
cj f*! a en
O a o -1
jj en m
Q. """I
4-1
CJ
3
T3
o
u ^
Q^ 03 OOOOOO
•H 1 OOOOOO
iJ -t-
OJ 03 oa r- CM
^3 f"* f*" ^
5 22
H
rn r* o O
ooooo m ooooo en en o (*•>
OOOOO V OOOOO O ^ O *-H
O \£ ^-O sO
1— ( ,—(.—«
(-g '•NJ ^* ^r
OOOOO CM OOOCO ^ ^O O ^O
ooooo r^ ooooo -* 03 o ca
•~* \o r^ P*"
— i — ( f^
3
cu
^
OJ
H
en
en
o
CJ
O en
as K
6- <
Z J
O J
O O
a
•z.
O &4
M O
EH
3 en
•4 *S
- O
2 "
^4
as M
ea s
<: s
"* i—4
-
4- —
a a o 03
en m c\
a in ""
•
^
S
M
i4
•™»
a
CJ
a: J
> cu
^^
EH Z
•• Cb M
X
EH 3 J
*"* CJ <
CJ EH
c- •• a.
r i u- 1 r \
en
£^
^
i^
J
cu
ej
z
— » hH
S 6-
a en
ZI ^
=H X
en a
Cd
—
ooooo
ooooo
^.
en
Cb
en 5-
= <
" a
en cs
E- EH
•z a
«c cc
•J Q-T
EH EH CU ^
2. < en en
r^j .*T) ^ T^ ?
a en en
Z Cu i.
o
o
-
•£ en
EH E;
Cu <
< -
a cu
en a u
EH Cd Z
en N HH
O M EH
cj J en
i-^ ^ t^
«S _: 3 x
S- < z a
0 3 Z
c- -z <
z
ooooo
ooooo
*_
en
Cu
en £-1
Z <
— a
en 2:
r- —
z a
^ uX
-: a.
E- 5- a. -^
cu < en en
a: 03 ~ a z
a en c.-.
Z Cu CU
o
— 0
in o
en
EH
Z
J
CU
U
M
c-i e-.
en CM
^ i~i C
<< X
=^ r a
o
E- +•
^-N
O O O O
o o o o
1-fc
en
Cu
en t-t
Z «S
en as
z a
•M CU
EH CU ~^
< en en
ca 3 a z
a vi en
Z CU Cu
en 03
oo en
o in
;N in
^
+
O
+•
j
^
i^
u^
Cu
^J
*
< J
r- <
o =
Z
o
o
en
a
CJ
,*;
•^
^
a
en
CO
_^
_/^
en
£-1
eh
O
j
^
-^
~
^
,
i-
W7.1-8
-------
Chapter W7.2
Timber Product Processing: Wood Furniture
and Fixture Manufacturing
Regulations
The wood furniture and fixture manufacturing industry is subject
to BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS regulations described in the Code of
Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 429, Subparts 0 and P and as updated in
the Federal Register (January 26, 1981). The two subparts are:
0, Wood Furniture and Fixture Production Without Water Wash
Spray Booth(s) and Without Laundry Facilities
P. Wood Furniture and Fixture Production With Water Wash Spray
Booth(s) or With Laundry Facilities
The specific regulations causing significant costs are BPT and
NSPS for Subpart 0 and BAT and NSPS for Subpart P. Each of these
regulations allow no discharge of process wastewater pollutants into
navigable streams. BAT limitations for Subpart 0 equal BPT and thus
generate no additional costs. BPT limitations for Subpart P are estimated
to generate minimal costs. Dischargers to POTWs meet no special standards
but must conform with general pretreatment standards provided in 40 CFR,
Part 403.13.
Industry Characteristics
The two regulatory subcategories cover a diverse set of
establishments that produce upholstered and nonupholstered wood household
furniture; wood cabinets for televisions, radios, stereos, and sewing
machines; wood office furniture; wood public building and related
furniture; and wood partitions, shelving, lockers, and various other wood
fixtures. Most of these special groups of producers are identified under
the standard industrial classification (SIC) major group No. 25.
The wood household furniture segment has historically accounted
for the majority of production in this industry as well as the largest
number of plants.
The furniture and fixture manufacturers have experienced little
or no growth in demand in recent years. Constant dollar sales for the
period of 1972 to 1980 for wood furniture, upholstered furniture and wood
cabinets have exhibited average annual changes of -0.2, 0.9 and -4.8
percent respectively. Only moderate growth is anticipated for the future
and it is dependent on real economic growth in the U.S., a decline in
interest rates and a recovery in the housing industry.
W7.2-1
-------
The total number of establishments covered by the SIC categoric
6,898, is larger than the number of wood product plants effected by wood
furniture and fixture regulations as some of these plants produce only
metal products. The number that produce only metal products is unknown i
this study will use plant number estimates in development and economic
documents to estimate costs. These sources indicate 6,097 plants would t
covered by the wood furniture and fixture products.
Pollutants and Sources
Wastewater from wood furniture and fixtures manufacturing is
produced primarily by three processes: glue cleanup, water wash spray
booths, and laundry operations. Minor amounts of wastewater may also be
produced by bleaching and steaming operations, and blowdown from air
pollution scrubbers.
The wastewater parameters of primary significance in this
industry include COD, total suspended solids, dissolved solids, pH,
temperature and phosphorus. Parameters of secondary significance include
BOD, phenols, color, oil and grease and inorganic ions.
For the purpose of establishing effluent limitations guidelines
the wood furniture and fixtures manufacturing industry has been divided
into two subcategories, based on water usage. One subcategory includes
those facilities which do not have water wash spray booths or laundry
operations. Facilities in this subcategory typically have small wastewat
loads. The other subcategory includes facilities which have water wash
spray baths or laundry facilities (or both). Facilities in either
subcategory may or may not include glueing, bleaching, steaming, or air
pollution scrubbing operations.
Spray booths are used to filter air from finishing operations t
provide fire and health protection. Dry booths, which use paper or
fiberglass materials to collect overspray, are.used in some plants.
However, water wash spray booths are generally preferred because of safet
and efficiency considerations.
The characteristics of the wastewater discharged from spray
booths is dependent on the amount and type of overspray material capturec
by the water. The amount of material captured is a function of the
efficiency of the booth in removing overspray from the air, the intensify
of usage of the spray booth, and the length of time between drainages. 1
type of material used is dependent primarily upon the particular type of
finishing operation being performed. The pH of these wastewaters is
generally high because of alkaline dispersing agents which are used in
finishing materials. Solids concentrations, COD and BOD are all high.
Wastewater from spray booths are typically drained weekly.
Laundry facilities are used to clean rags used in finishing
operations. Wastewaters from laundry machines have high pH and solids
concentrations from the addition of soda ash, caustics, clay, and strong
detergents to the wash water. The wastewaters are highly colored and
contain high levels of COD and BOD.
W7.2-2
-------
Glueing operations occur during furniture assembly, prior to
finishing. The glues, which may be applied manually or by automatic
machines, may be solvent based or water based. Small volumes of wastewater
may be generated during clean up of glueing operations. These waters have
high COD and volatile solids concentrations, low pHs and low phenol
concentrations.
Bleaching may be included in finishing operations to remove
natural wood coloring by treating furniture pieces with a strong oxidizing
agent such as hydrogen peroxide. Wastewaters from bleaching operations are
generally small in volume, but high in solids concentrations and pH. They
may also contain low concentrations of phenol.
Steaming may be used for wood bending operations. Wastewaters
from steaming, which contain phenols, and high COD, BOD and solids
concentrations, are generally small in volume.
Wet scrubbers are used at some plants to control air pollutant
emissions from boilers. Continuous bleed off of scrubber waters may be
required to avoid high solids build up and a resulting loss of efficiency.
These wastewaters have high COD and solids concentrations.
Control Technologies
Wastewater has not been a major concern in the wood furniture and
fixtures manufacturing industry. The Development Document estimates that
90 to 96 percent of all furniture factories either discharge their
wastewaters to a municipal sewage system, contract to have them hauled away
by a commercial disposal company or use a combination of these disposal
methods.
The Development Document identified existing treatment or
disposal technologies which could be used in this industry to achieve no
discharge of wastewater to surface waters. The designated technologies
are:
1. discharge to a publicly owned treatment works;
2. trucking wastewater to landfills;
3. incineration by spraying on hog fuel;
4. use of evaporation ponds; and
5. spray irrigation.
All of the technologies, except spray irrigation, can be used by
both of the industry subcategories. Spray irrigation was considered
applicable to only facilities with laundry facilities because their
wastewaters are sufficiently biodegradable.
Table W7.2.1 summarizes the technologies required for BPT, BAT,
and NSPS. The effluent limitations guidelines for the two subcategories
are summarized briefly below.
W7.2-3
-------
en
'£
3
O
ro
4-
3
C
2
E
0)
3
X
4-
•O
C
ro
O)
i-
3
•r*
3
M~
•^j
O
O
3
S_
O
4-
(/)
OJ
cn
o
"o
c
.c
cj
01
H-
•
CM
r~.
3
rO
OJ
on
I —
a.
CO
(/)
rO
OJ
E
ro
C
O 3 O J= ro O C
0 3 ••- 0
"O Q 1— r— — 1 JZ UJ
0)
o c
z o • • • •
^
(U
J^ 1
^•^
fO i—
3 0
•M - — • (/I
3 ul ,4-
•r- S_
-i-> a- >,
CJ U1 5-
3 "O
-a -S =
O (^ 3
U ro ra
Q- 3-—
C3
1—
CO
(/)
fO
i
^
3
4-
cn
r— O
C •!-
0 3 4- .C ul
i— -a •»-» -a c
•o o c •>- c o
a) a. ra 3 o •<-
tO r— Q.-P
ro • * O C ro
_o 4- 4_) o o c en
O +J -i- O -t-
(U U -t-> -i— i-
cn ,
(J (JO-r-Q.ro
(/IS- I/I 3 O ra S_
•i- o T- i- c > a.
•a a i— i— i uj oo
O)
o c
z o • • • • •
a>
a> ra
en 3 c
-a o
3 en —
•— C -M
on M— l. d)
en o en
-as- a. s_
0) ro ra
i — -C i- J=
•+-> O Oj O
O) -r- ro -1-
t/i -o 3-0
c
aj ai o aj aj
> S_ -r- i — S_
§o -*-^ ^* o
4- i- 4-> 4-
OJ Oj o <1) 3J
Q£ _O Q.OO J3
* *
i- (/>
GJ <1>
-M *—••> -^
ra LO -M
3 *•— " 'f~
^ ' ' «^"
_^_ ^w *^~
•M O U
•r- O ro
3 -a 4-
c >, >,
O ro S_
•t- S- T3
-M Q. C
O i/l 3
^ fl
T3 .JZ i—
O (/)
S_ ra S_
Q. 3 O
Q_
W7.2-4
-------
BPT. Facilities without water wash spray booths or laundry
facilities are required to achieve no discharge using one or more of the
technologies listed above. Facilities with water wash spray booths or
laundries are required to meet a less stringent standard because of the
adverse economic impact which could be expected from requiring these
facilities to meet a no discharge requirement. Facilities in this
subcategory are required to meet an effluent quality limitation which can
be achieved with existing technology. They are required to minimize the
effect of wastewaters on the environment by removing settled sludge and
allowing the water portion to settle before discharging. Compliance cost
data are not available; however, costs are assumed to be minimal.
BAT. Facilities in both subcategories are required to achieve no
discharge by using one or more of the technologies listed above.
NSPS. Facilities in both subcategories are required to achieve
no discharge by using one or more of the technologies listed above.
PSES and PSNS. Facilities in both subcategories are required to
meet the general pretreatment requirements listed in 40 CFR Part 403.
Costing Methodology
Costs for the furniture and fixture manufacturers were determined
from a model plant approach.
The Development Document presents capital and 0+M costs for four
model plants. One model plant represents the subcategory of facilities
without water wash spray booths or laundry facilities. Three model plants
represent the subcategory of facilities with water wash spray booths or
laundry facilities.
Cost estimating equations of the form y = Ax were used to
estimate total costs (y represents capital or 0+M costs, while x represents
plant capacity). Data relating plant production to wastewater generation
were not available from the Development Document; consequently, plant
capacity has been expressed as gallons of wastewater per day.
The cost estimating equations for each model plant, costing
assumptions, and the method for assigning size categories to model plants
are summarized in the appendix.
The cost of compliance for wood furniture and fixture
manufacturers are presented in Table W7.2.2. They are based on an industry
population of 6,097 plants of which only about 10 percent were estimated to
be direct dischargers.
W7.2-5
-------
CN
O O *sO ~+
03 -i o
5-
3 cn
-i ^
-i O
O •*
3
« H^
a r
— «
< z
3 1-1
cu
M
«£ CJ
a <
cn cu
z
oz
•• J M
X —
t* < J
w C <
CJ S"
< 1-1
a, .. CU
< Z <
CJ - CJ
cn
<
cu
O
z
Z 6- 5- (
s »— i a (
fr- x
cn a
a
>
2
—
cn
a.
cn e*
z <
— a
cn v.
z* e-i
z a
< OS
J 04
••* cu ^-
<: cn cn
a 3 a z
a cn cn
Z CM CU
J
<
CU
<
CJ
cn ^
r- U
CJ J
< J 3
S"< i^ 2
C 3 Z
r- Z «C
z
<
cn cn
e- a.
2 cn 6-
< z <
j — . a
a, cn a:
6- t-
cj z a
z
o
z
M
cn
—4
X
^ a
+
0
cn
cu
cn c-
z <
— a
cn cs
5-1 ^
z a
< «
— a.
6- •- a. -~,
2. < w cn
a a 3 a z
a cn cn
u i« 3rf
S
4-
O
J
<;
c*
s— t
^
^j
_;
< J
r- <:
3 3
s* z
<
cn
a
^
^
—
CJ
2£
a
cn
en
cn
O
CJ
5
—
2
2
^
_;
«
•i
W7.2-6
-------
Chapter W7.3 Gum and Wood Chemicals
Regulations
Effluent regulations for BPT were promulgated in interim final
form on April 30, 1976. On the same date, effluent regulations were
proposed for BAT, NSPS, and pretreatment for new sources. Costs are based
on the promulgated BPT regulations and the other proposed regulations.
This industry has been exempted from additional federal guidelines under
Paragraph 8 of the 1976 settlement agreement with NRDC.
Industry Characteristics
While the majority of products included in this chapter are
classified under SIC 2861, some products are also classified under SIC 2821
or SIC 2899 and some of the establishments producing these products are
almost certainly classified the same way.
The Gum and Wood Chemicals Industry has been divided, for
pollution control purposes, into six categories, as follows:
Charcoal and charcoal briquets
Gum rosin and turpentine
Wood rosin, turpentine, and pine oil
Tall oil rosin, fatty acids, and pitch
Essential oils
Rosin derivatives.
Charcoal and Charcoal Briquets. There are no wastewater
discharges from the industry subsector, and it will not be discussed in
detail, although it represents about 50 percent of the value of shipments
of SIC 2861 establishments.
Gum Rosin and Turpentine. These products are produced by
distillation of crude oleoresin (gum) collected from scarified longleaf and
slash pine trees in southeastern United States. These plants are primarily
located in Georgia or Alabama. It is estimated that 90 percent of the
capacity is in establishments classified in SIC 2861 and 10 percent in SIC
2821.
The annual production of gum rosin and turpentine has been
declining for several years. The collection of gum oleoresin is a
labor-intensive operation, and this industry is expected to continue to
decline.
Wood Rosin, Turpentine and Pine Oil. These products are obtained
by distillation of oleoresin extracted from chipped stumps remaining after
the harvesting of southern pine forests. Plants in this sector are located
W7.3-1
-------
in Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi. It is estimated that 40 percent of
production is in plants classified in SIC 2861, 40 percent in SIC 2899, a
20 percent in SIC 2821.
The annual production of wood rosin and steam-distilled
turpentine (from stumps) has also been declining. The availability of
stumps of a size that is economic for collection is decreasing as the
inventory of sawmill size pine trees is diminishing in the Southeast. Th>
production of natural pine oil from pine stumps is also declining, being
displaced by the production of synthetic pine oil from turpentine.
Tall Oil Fractionation. Crude tall oil is a by-product of the
kraft pulping process, although it is classified by the Bureau of the
Census as a SIC 2861 product. The fractional distillation of crude tall
oil yields tall oil rosin, tall oil fatty acids, and tall oil pitch. It
estimated that about 80 percent of the fractionation of crude tall oil
occurs in establishments assigned to SIC 2861 and about 10 percent each i
establishments assigned to SIC 2821 and SIC 2899.
As long as kraft paper is produced from pine trees, a potential
supply of tall oil rosin and tall oil fatty acids should be available.
This product is gradually replacing both gum rosin and wood rosin.
Essential Oils. These products are obtained by the steam
distillation of scrap wood fines of the appropriate wood. The only
essential oil included in the EPA documentation is cedarwood oil, which i
classified in SIC 2899.
Rosin Derivatives. Most rosin is chemically modified to improv'
some of its properties prior to its ultimate use. The most common chemic
modifications are probably condensation reactions with unsaturated organi
acids or esterification with mono- or polyhydric alcohols. One reason fo
the decline in demand for rosin is that 30 pounds of fortified rosin is a:
effective in sizing paper as is 100 pounds of unmodified rosin. It is
assumed that about 50 percent of rosin derivatives are produced in
establishments classified in SIC 2821 and the remainder in establishments
classified in SIC 2899.
Pollutants and Sources
The pollutant characteristics for the six categories of gum and
wood chemicals are outlined below.
Char and Charcoal. No wastewater discharge has been identified
from this process since it involves high temperature kiln distillation.
One possible discharge is storm water runoff which carries suspended
solids. This discharge can be controlled, however, by proper materials
handling systems that reduce dust and solid materials in the plant area.
Gum Rosin and Turpentine. Three wastewater sources have been
identified in this process. These are (1) rosin washing to remove solubl
impurities, (2) distillate condensation, and (3) brine used to dehydrate
W7.3-2
-------
the gum rosin. This waste load is largely generated during washing
operations.
Wood Rosin, Turpentine, and Pine Oil. Process wastewater
includes stripping as well as vacuum and steam condensates from the
distillation operation. Another possible source of wastewater is from the
washing of stumps for dirt removal. In a properly operated plant, however,
this washwater is returned to a settling pond and reused after the solids
have settled out. The solids are then periodically removed to a land fill.
Tall Oil Rosin, Pitch, and Fatty Acids. This is a highly
efficient distillation process, with the primary source of wastewater being
an acid wash given to the crude tall oil. Additional wastewater is
accumulated during washdowns of process equipment.
Essential Oils. This process generates large amounts of
wastewater since it is based primarily on steam distillation and the use of
separators to recover the desired oils from the steam condensate. Large
amounts of wastewater are involved, with a high waste load in the water.
Rosin Derivatives. These processes produce wastewater from a
variety of point sources, including water of reaction, spray steam, vacuum
jet steam, and condenser cooling water.
Control Technology
The Development Document identified 139 facilities in this
industry category and found that approximately one-third used municipal
sewage plants and were not covered by the final effluent guidelines.
Approximately 20 percent of the plants had treatment ponds with no direct
discharge, while 8 percent used the effluent for land irrigation in remote
areas. Only approximately four percent had point-source discharges, and of
these, eighty percent had no additional requirements to meet the BPT
guidelines.
Treatment of wastewater consists of both in-plant and end-of-pipe
treatment.
In-Pi ant Treatment. In-plant treatment techniques generally
amount to more efficient housekeeping practices such as:
• Separating drainage lines so that effluent not requiring
treatment (i.e. storm water) is handled separately.
0 Improved efficiency of equipment washing procedures such as
the use of several small quantities of rinsewater which can be
recycled into the process.
• Use of techniques such as a squeegee to remove material before
rinsing.
W7.3-3
-------
End-of-Pipe Treatment. Applicable end-of-pipe treatment
processes include the use of primary clarifiers, aerated lagoons, oxidati<
ponds, dissolved air flotation, and combinations of these. Additional
improvement in wastewater quality can be obtained through the use of
filtration or carbon adsorption of the biological treatment plant effluen-
Costing Methodology
The cost of controlling the waste load in the effluent for five
categories of the Gum and Wood Chemicals Industry has been estimated at
three levels of control (BPT, BAT, and NSPS). To obtain the estimate,
model systems were developed for the various subcategories, and cost
estimates made based on end-of-pipe treatment. In-plant costs were not
included because of their highly variable nature depending upon the purpo
for which the plant was constructed.
Costs for end-of-pipe technologies were applied to the model
plants, as applicable. Of the 51 plants included in the five subsectors
when the regulations were promulgated, BPT costs were applicable to only
one producer of rosin derivatives. BAT costs, however, will apparently bi
applicable to two wood chemicals plants, ten tall oil fractionation plant
and eight rosin derivatives plants. All other plants were in compliance
with BAT regulations which were expected to be promulgated in 1980. It i
assumed that all plants will be in compliance by 1984.
Costs derived for this industry are summarized in Table W7.3.1.
W7.3-4
-------
a
ON
i
O O rn
—• «• r— O O
fN
(N
50 -» a* cc
r- r*j m o O « \O T O O
33
in
CO
O
OV
r-
01
—> r-
o — ^o o o
o IN — o o
r>) O in o O
O CM co o O
CO
o
C4 O O -"
f*1 (N in o O —i —
—4 ;N \o
•a
o
o
•a
ca
s
CJ
CO
I
o o -<
o vo m o o -*
O O
-> us — o o
in o fi o o
co o
r- T
o o
o <-• o o
ON -«
o o
o
CO
,3
0)
i
j o O
o o
o
ON
o CN n o o
in o —» o o
m
\a
CM O) CO O O
^* ^ ^
? X
en a
>
z
^
en
Cb
en JH
s <
— a
en s
z a
_: a!
S-i &• ~^
< en en
a 2 a z
a en en
Z CM CM
en
in
O en
y e-
j <
<4 taM
E-i 0.
M
en o< cj
e« H m
H 2 z a
O 3 Z
s- z <
<
en
CM
en s-
z <
en o:
r* &^
z a
< si
J Q,
5- a, ^
< en en
en 2 a z
a en en
z a. cu
en
en E"
s- z
en <
O J
CJ -M
S U
z
u> ^
p4
O en
J M
< _: x
s* < a
0 3
5- Z
••
<
en
en E-
2 <
— a
en —
e- =-
z u
^ iM
&< p" a. ^
CM < en en
Q 03 ~ a z
a en en
z - —
4.
O
+
J
-------
Chapter W7.4 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Regulations
Effluent control regulations affecting the pulp, paper and
paperboard industry arise from the Clean Water Act and are codified in the
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Subchapter N, Parts 430
and 431. Amendments to these regulations are announced in the Federal
Register with the following announcements being critical for limitation
guidelines on best practical technology (BPT), best available technology
(BAT), new source performance standards (NSPS), pretreatment standards for
existing sources (PSES) and pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS).
• 39 FR 18747, May 29, 1974: Promulgated BPT guidelines for
Part 430, Subparts A-E, and Part 431, Subpart A
• 42 FR 1407, January 6, 1977: Promulgated BPT'guide!ines for
Part 430, Subparts F-V
t 47 FR 52006, November 18, 1982: Promulgated BPT guidelines
for certain subcategories of 40 CFR Part 430 and Promulgated
BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS guidelines for 24 of 25
subcategories, (supersedes 46 FR 1430)
t 47 FR 52006, November 18, 1982: Proposed BAT and NSPS
guidelines to limit PCBs where fine and tissue papers are
made from deinked wastepaper.
Effluent control regulations exist for 26 industry subparts or
subcategories within the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. These
include:
430 CFR
A. Unbleached Kraft
B. Semi-Chemical
C. [Reserved]
D. Unb'leached Kraft-Neutral
Sulfite Semi-Chemical
(Cross Recovery)
E. Paperboard from Wastepaper
F. Dissolving Kraft
G. Market Bleached Kraft
H. BCT Bleached Kraft
I. Fine Bleached Kraft
J. Papergrade Sulfite
(Blow Pit Wash)
K. Dissolving SUlfite Pulp
L. Grounded-Chemical -Mechanical
M. Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
N. Groundwood-CMN Papers
0. Groundwood-Fine Papers
P. Soda
Q. Deink
R. Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
S. Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
T. Tissue from Wastepaper
U. Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
V. Unbleached Kraft and Semi-
Chemical
W. Wastepaper-Molded Products
X. Nonintegrated-Lightweight Paper
Y. Nonintegrated-Filter and Woven
Z. Nonintegrated-Paperboard
431 CFR
Builders1
Felt
Paper and Roofing
W7.4-1
-------
Industry Characteristics
A total of 674 operating facilities have recently been identifi
as pulp, paper and paperboard producers. The industry is highly
diversified utilizing both wood and nonwood pulp and paper materials to
produce a wide variety of products including pulp, newsprint, printing an
writing papers, unbleached and bleached packaging
glassine, greaseproof papers, vegetable parchment.
papers,
board.
bleached
and
unbleached paperboard, felts
papers, tissue papers,
, special industrial
, and building paper and
For analytical purposes, the industry is divided into three maj
segments: integrated, secondary fibers and nonintegrated mills. Mills
in which pulp alone or pulp and paper or paperboard are manufactured
on-site are referred to as integrated mills. Those mills in which paper
paperboard are manufactured but pulp is not manufactured on-site are
referred to as nonintegrated mills. Mills which use wastepaper as the
primary raw material to produce paper or paperboard are referred to as
secondary fibers mills. While the virgin fiber source is predominantly
wood (98 percent), secondary fiber sources such as wastepaper have gained
increasing acceptance. Wastepaper recently accounted for over 22 percent
of the fiber used in the United States.
In 1980, the value of shipments by the pulp, paper and paperbo?
industry was estimated at $30.7 billion dollars. Total employment was
220,000 and the quantity of shipments was 70.9 million short tons. Basec
on 706 facilities, shipments per plant would average about $43 million or
100,000 short tons in 1980. Shipments per employee would equal $140,000
about 320 short tons.
The plants in the industry are also classified in SIC codes.
These categories and the distribution of plants and shipments are as
follows:
SIC Code Title
2611 Pulpmills
2621 Papermills
2631 Paperboard mills
2661 Building paper & building
% of Plants
6
50
36
8
TOU
% of Shipment
11
54
33
2
TM
Historically, the pulp, paper and paperboard industry has been
a solid performer with stable annual growth rates. The growth has evolve
from a strong domestic market and active exporting. The current recessic
(1981-82) has depressed growth recently, but the overall long-term trend
favorable.
Pollutants and Sources
The production of pulp,
general manufacturing processes:
paper, and paperboard involves four
(a) raw material preparation, (b)
W7.4-2
-------
pulping, (c) bleaching, (d) papermaking. Water is used in each of the four
major manufacturing processes as a medium of transport, a cleaning agent,
and as a solvent or mixer.
Depending on the form in which the raw materials arrive at the
mill, log washing, bark removal, and chipping may be employed to prepare
wood for pulping. These processes can require large volumes of water. The
use of dry bark removal techniques or the recycle of wash water or water
used in wet barking operations significantly reduces water consumption.
Pulping is the operation of reducing a cellulosic raw material
into a pulp suitable for further processing into paper or paperboard or for
chemical conversion. The primary types of pulping processes are:
(a) Mechanical pulping (groundwood); and
(b) Chemical pulping (alkaline, sulfite, or semi-chemical
processes).
After pulping, the unbleached pulp is brown or dark colored due
to the presence of lignins and resins or because of inefficient washing of
the spent cooking liquor from the pulp. In order to remove these color
bodies from the pulp and to produce a light colored or white product, it is
necessary to bleach the pulp.
In stock preparation, the pulp is resuspended in water. Further
mixing, blending, and the addition of non-cellulosic materials are
necessary to prepare the stock for making most paper or board products.
The various papermaking processes have basic similarities regardless of the
type of pulp used or the end-product manufactured. A layer of fiber is
deposited from a di.lute water suspension of pulp on a fine screen, called
the "wire." This layer is then removed from the wire, pressed, and dried.
The two basic types of machines used to make paper or paperboard are a
Fourdrinier machine or a cylinder machine.
As indicated above, the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry is a
high water-use industry. Major uses of water are similar throughout the
industry although the amount used varies from segment to segment. The two
methods of wastewater discharge include direct discharge to navigable
waters and indirect discharge to a publicly owned treatment works (POTW).
At some mills, recycle systems or evaporation techniques are used so that
no wastewater is discharged. It has been estimated that wastewater
discharges from the industry total 4.2 billion gallons per day. The
wastewater characteristics differ from subcategory to subcategory due to
the varying nature of processes employed and/or products manufactured. In
general, the wastes are complex mixtures of natural and synthetic organic
materials and inorganic chemicals. Pulping wastes, which are the major
portion of the industry's water pollution, come from grinding, digester
cooking, washing, bleaching, thickening, deinking, and defibering. These
wastes contain sulfite liquor, fine pulp, bleaching chemicals such as zinc
hydrosulfite and chlorine, mercaptans, sodium sulfides, carbonates and
hydroxides, sizing, casein, clay, ink, dyes, waxes, grease, oils, fibers,
W7.4-3
-------
and chlorophenolics from biocide and slimicide formulations. Papermill
wastes originate in water which passes through the screen wires, showers,
and felts of the paper machines, beaters, regulating and mixing tanks, anc
screens. The paper machine wastes contain fine fibers, sizing, dye, and
other loading material. The most important pollutants associated with the
production of pulp, paper, or paperboard which are controlled by BPT, BAT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS regulations are:
1. Toxic pollutants—chloroform, zinc, trichlorophenol, and
pentachlorophenol; and
2. Conventional po!lutants--BOD5_, TSS, and pH.
Control Technologies
The two major technological approaches used to reduce wastewater
and/or wastewater pollutant discharge in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry are: (a) production process controls; and (b) effluent treatmen'
technology. Production process controls are those technologies implement*
in-plant to reduce the effluent volume and pollutant loading discharged
from the manufacturing facility. Effluent treatment technologies are tho:
end-of-pipe treatment systems used to reduce the discharge of pollutants
contained in mill effluents. In most instances, pollution abatement
programs developed for use at individual mills include both approaches.
Production Process Controls. Available methods for reduction of pollutan'
discharges by internal measures include effective pulp washing, chemicals
and fiber recovery, treatment and reuse of selected waste streams and
collection of spills and prevention of "accidental discharges." Internal
measures are essentially reductions of pollutant discharges at their
origins and usually result in the recovery of chemicals, by-products, and
the conservation of heat and water.
Effluent Treatment Technologies. Effluent treatment technologies are tho1
processes which are employed after the effluent leaves a mill for the
reduction of suspended solids and BOD5_ and adjustment of pH before it
enters the receiving waters. Many types of wastewater treatment systems
are employed at mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and can
include:
• Screening
• Pumping stations
• Primary clarification
• _ Sludge lagoon
• ' Biological treatment
- Aerated stabilization basis (ASB)
- Activated sludge
- Oxidation basins
Equalization basins
Secondary clarification
Neutralization
Flotation thickening
Sludge dewatering
Foam control
Outfall sewers
Diffusers
W7.4-4
-------
Control Technologies for Compliance with Regulations
The control technologies are based on regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations, revised as of July 1, 1981, and promulgated and
proposed regulations in the Federal Register of November 18, 1982. The
regulations promulgated in the Federal Register notice include 8PT and
revised BAT regulations and supersede prior NSPS, PSNS, and PSES
regulations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. The proposed FR
regulations are to control PCBs from deinked wastepaper. Table 1 (in the
Appendix) lists the status of the effluent limitations guidelines,
pretreatment standards, and new source performance standards which were
used in selecting control technologies for compliance.
BPT Control Technology. The control technologies selected for
compliance with BPT effluent limitations are a combination of in-plant and
end-of-pipe control technologies. In-plant technologies can include
additional spill collection, low volume-high pressure cleaning showers,
collection and reuse of vacuum pump waters, and water reduction.
End-of-pipe technologies include bar screens, mechanical clarifiers,
emergency spill basins, one and two stage biological treatment, foam
control, sludge lagoons and sludge dewatering. The specific technologies
used for coating of the various subcategories are listed in the appendix to
this chapter. It should be noted that all of the end-of-pipe technologies
developed for Phase I and II subcategories would probably not be
implemented by a mill. The end-of-pipe technologies developed are merely
guidelines for the types of technologies that work for a subcategory.
The pollutant parameters regulated by BPT are BOD, TSS, and pH
for all subcategories and zinc for those mills using zinc hydrosulfite as a
bleaching agent in the manufacturing process in the Grounded-Chemical-
Mechanical, Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical, Groundwood-CMN Papers, and
Groundwood-Fine Papers Subcategories.
BAT Control Technology. In general, BAT uses BPT as a basis for
further improvements.With one exception, the additional technology
considered BAT is chemical substitution for the control of toxic
pollutants. Slimicides and biocides containing trichlorophenol and
pentachlorophenol can be replaced with formulations that do not contain
toxic chemicals. The exception is the proposed control of PCBs for the
Deink-Fine and Deink-Tissue subcategories which requires the best
performing existing technology for all Deink subcategory mills.
The pollutant parameters proposed for regulation by BAT are
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol for all subcategories; zinc for the
Groundwood Subcategories; chloroform for the Dissolving Kraft, Market
Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached Kraft, Papergrade Sulfite
(both drum wash and blow pit wash), Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, Soda, and
Deink Subcategories; and PCB (1242) for the Deink Subcategories. In the
Groundwood Subcategories, the proposed BAT limitations for zinc are
identical to BPT limitations for control of this toxic metal. It has been
determined that zinc discharges from mills in the Groundwater Subcategories
have been greatly reduced to levels in compliance with BPT effluent
W7.4-5
-------
limitations guidelines through the substitution of the bleaching chemical
sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite. The control of chloroform is
based on the application and proper operation of biological treatment,
which forms the basis of existing BPT regulations. The necessity for
additional end-of-pipe treatment or production process controls is thus nc
required except for best performing existing technology to control PCBs
from Deink mills.
NSPS Control Technology. The control technology required for
compliance with New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) is the best
available demonstrated technology. These include in-plant and end-of-pin*
treatment technologies for the integrated segment, nonintegrated segment,
and secondary fibers segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
The pollutant parameters promulgated for regulation by NSPS are
BOD, TSS, pH, trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol for all subcategories
zinc for the Groundwood Subcategories, and chloroform for the Dissolving
Kraft, March Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached Kraft,
Papergrade Sulfite (both drum wash and blow pit wash), Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp, Soda, and Deink Subcategories. NSPS pollutant parameter regulation;
are proposed for PCBs for the Deink Subcategory. Significant costs will
originate only from the control of BOD, TSS, and pH based on information
the November 18, 1982 Federal Register.
PSES Control Technology. The treatment technology for complyin<
with Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES) is based on
chemical substitution. Slimicide and biocide formulations containing
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced with formulations
that do not contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc hydrosulfite, a chemica
used to bleach groundwood pulps, can be replaced with sodium hydrosulfite
The pollutant parameters proposed for regulation by PSES are
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol for all subcategories and zinc for
the Groundwood Subcategories.
PSNS Control Technology. The treatment technology required for
compliance with Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS) is the same
as that for PSES described above. The pollutants controlled are also the
same as those for PSES listed above.
Costing Methodology
Water pollution control costs to the pulp, paper, and paperboan
industry for compliance with effluent limitations and new source
performance standards' were obtained exogenously from the Economic Analyse
Development Documents, and the Federal Register. These documents cover
various guidelines, industry subcategories and specific phases of
regulatory action'including:
• BPT - Phase I Subcategories A-E and Builders' Paper
t BPT - Phase II Subcategories F-V Except Builders1 Paper
• BPT - Four new proposed subcategories
• BAT - Proposed PCB standards for the Deink Subcategory
W7.4-6
-------
t NSPS - BODS, TSS, and pH standards for all subcategories
• BAT except Deink, PSES & PSNS - Regulatory guidelines
generally cause minimal or insignificant costs
The exogenous costs of compliance developed from the reports and
used as input for the ABTRES costing model are presented below. The
exogenous cost data are primarily based on existing plant data that were
obtained from EPA "308" surveys. Model plants were not utilized in cost
aggregation. These data are net costs as costs for capital-in-place were
also deducted on an exogenous basis.
Base year Capital costs O&M costs
Regulations of costs ($ million) ($ million)
Phase I - BPT 1971 368.1 51.3
Phase II - BPT 1975 1,672.0 191.0
Wastepaper molded-BPT 1982 8.4 0.72
Deink-BAT 1982 29.4 3.21
NSPS 1982 27.7 3.51
BAT — insignificant
PSES — insignificant
PSNS — insignificant
The cost of compliance for the pulp, paper and paperboard industry derived
from the previous input data are presented in Table W7.4.1.
W7.4-7
-------
— o oo co a
o ooooov oooooo o o o o o m m in
i o o o o o «»• ooooovo o o o o o en m in
MM cn rn in cn on
crt ^" m co 03
<•" vo m —. -M
T OOOOOO O O O O O —" OOOOOO fN tN
T3 5° •
L4 i ooooovo oooooin o o o o o rn co oo
CO ? m "" !N >0 VJ5
o £• m m os oo
_2 2 ^ IN ^ TT
^ ""
<3J
a.
CO
a.
•a
C
"I -1 I- TT —1 _l
—i ooooo o ooooo r- ooooo in ci ro
)J OS • • . ,
4) i oooooco oooooco o o o o o oo r- r-
Q. °* *° in rM J> OOOOO
OOOOO CO OOOOO ^ OOOOO ^O O O
!N 03 — -.
^ m oo 03
en
o
CJ
0 en —
a. ix a.
E- < M
Z J x
O J —
O O
a a
Z CJ
O Cb <
M 0 J
=- -
3 W
-3 Z Z
J 0 «
0 -
C. — J
— <
<*. M e.
a z M
S z <
s 1-1 cj
en
z
<
—
a.
O
z
— —
Z E- 6-
i: en a
z r- a:
E- X
cn K
a
>
z
M
cn
a<
cn s-
•z. <
•— u
en a:
E- E-i
z a
< —
_; -
6< eu ^.
< w cn
S3 2 U Z
u en en
Z 04 O4
cn
e-i
cn
O to
CJ E"
Z
J <
< —3
E-i c-
M
cn & u
E- < Z
cn cj M
06-6-
u J en a.
_: < — ^
< J = X
r- < Z U
c = z
i- Z <
Z
<
en
a.
cn &
z <
— Cti
en a
Z M
< -
— a.
6- o. ^,
< cn cn
ca 2 a z
a cn cn
z Cu a.
cn
en E-
E- Z
cn <
o -^
cj a.
r u
z
hd I-*
C«
O cn
j -i
< J X
E- < a:
O 3
E- z
<
C/5
ev-
en 5-
Z <
— u
en as
CM CM
z a
< =:
— a.
CM C. CM ^
£. < en cn
cs cs 2 u z
u cn en
z i. a.
£
-t-
O
-t-
!_4
<
r-
!— 1
£M
<
O
< —
S" <
C 3
r- Z
Z
<
cn
en
O
W7.4-8
-------
Chapter W8. Foods and Agricultural Industries
For the purpose of this report the Foods and Agricultural
Industries are defined to include those establishments which prepare or
process farm or ranch products for delivery to an ultimate consumer. Farms
and ranches are specifically excluded; these are discussed in Chapter 10
under Nonpoint Sources. The industries covered in this chapter are:
Grain Milling
Sugar Processing
Canned and Preserved Fruits and Vegetables
Canned and Preserved Seafood
Dairy Products Processing Industry
Feedlots Industry
Meat Products Processing
Leather Tanning and Finishing Industry
Costs for the abatement of water pollution for these sectors are
summarized in Table W8. These costs and other data are repeated below in
the respective sections of this chapter, together with the assumptions
specific to the industry and other details.
W8-1
-------
o
en
1
CO
en
en
en
-a
o
o
r~
CM
,0 r- r«- — -a
\o CD vo oo i1
en •» coon in -.
•» — m en rr in
o —
O CO !N
en 1-1
OS
cn
•v oo en cn (*t r**
v0 co cn cn IN ?*i
CD o "" cn
z
• w c
00 Cd M
00
1
en
p*
en
r*
£4
Z
Cd
£
Jr-
cn
Cd
^
z
>•* "^
CD
1
en
p^.
cn
»-«
3 £ -
cd|5
m a z
< Z M
en
o
o
CD
O
(N
VO »
03
09
\o —• r- (N
in on o en o
(N m -o r- O
va » en o
r-
o
m
p» an in o
vo 03 IN (N a
on on 4
a:
6-
cn
a
z
cn o tn
_: z cu
j M -
z 2;
•J 01
a
a
=- u
C
05 w
E-i Z
o z e-
3 r- Ld
, o z
o a. cd cn
> -: = cd
cn
g*
U
3
a
o
tn
> cn o
as J Z Cd
c- -3 « J
x >-" cn ^ as
3 z cn <
o cd cn
z z as a &« cd
_« W* IM* —• ^^ -*.
a cn i. cj
a
cn z cn
6« cn M e-
U S-i Z «
3 CJ Z C
a a 3 < cj
Cd O Q &.
i > a as cn o
a o a* r- si a:
1 Cd O O 3* Cd
i cn &. » -: s _:
:cd< asae-r-jrf
* 21 CtJ ^^ CcJ ^ tf, ^ ^3
' rt 'n ^J CiJ CiJ U ^ 2
a b. r _: o z
c:
Cb
CL
4
00 03 00 03
23 S3
03 CO CO 03
2=23
a.
oo 00
2 3
00 OD
3 3
CD 03 00 OD
3233
W8-2
-------
Chapter W8.1 Grain Milling
Regulations
In August, 1979, BCT was defined as being equal to BAT for all
but one of the subcategories in this industry. BAT regulations for bulgur
wheat flour milling were found to be unreasonable and were suspended.
Pending revision of these regulations and the publication of new cost data,
this chapter has not been updated. Only BPT and NSPS regulations have been
costed for this chapter.
Grain Milling Industry (Phase I)
For purposes of establishing water effluent guidelines, Phase I
of the grain milling industry was divided into four major subcategories:
wet corn milling, dry corn milling, bulgur wheat flour milling, and
parboiled rice milling. Two other subcategories, normal wheat flour
milling and normal rice milling, have been excluded because they do not use
process water.
Industry Characteristics. Wet corn milling comprises three
basic process operations: mi 11 ing, starch production, and syrup
manufacturing. The finished products of starch and corn sweeteners are
used for paper products, food products, textile manufacturing, building
materials, laundries, home uses, and miscellaneous operations.
Dry corn (Hilling processes separate the various fractions of
corn, namely the endosperm, hull, and germ. These fractions are later
ground and sifted after separation. The final products include: corn
meal, grits, flour, oil, and animal feed.
Bulgur wheat flour milling produces parboiled, dried, and
partially debranned wheat for use in either cracked or whole grain form.
Bulgur is produced primarily for the Federal Government as part of a
national effort to utilize surplus wheat for domestic use and for
distribution to underdeveloped countries.
Parboiled rice milling utilizes rice that is carefully cleaned,
parboiled by soaking in water, and then cooked to gelatinize the starch.
After cooking, the water is drained and the parboiled rice is dried before
milling. The bran and germ are later separated from the milled rice. The
final product has superior nutritive qualities because vitamins from the
bran are forced into the endosperm.
Shipments of wet corn milling products are expected to increase
at an annual rate of 7.5 percent. The use of dry corn milling products
directly in foods has declined significantly over the past 20 years but
this decline has been offset by the growing use of the products as
W8.1-1
-------
ingredients in processed foods. Total production has remained about
constant. Consumption of bulgur wheat flour milling products has been
increasing in developing nations due to the high nutritional values of
bulgur wheat. Rice milling including parboiled products are about 60
percent exported and 40 percent used for domestic trade. An increase in
rice mill products of 2.3 percent is expected annually from 1976 to 1985.
Pollutants and Sources. Principal wastewater sources in wet co
milling are modified starch washing, condensate from steepwater
evaporation, mud separation, and syrup evaporation. Dry corn milling
process wastes originate from washing of corn and infrequent grain rail c<
washing. Bulgur wheat flour milling process wastewater stems from steami
and cooking of bulgur, although these quantities are relatively small.
Parboiled rice milling process wastewater stems from steeping or cooking
operations, and at least one plant uses wet scrubbers for dust control,
which generates an additional source of wastewater.
The basic parameters used to define wastewater characteristics
are BODc, suspended solids, and pH. About one-fourth of the wet corn
milling plants discharge directly into surface water. The majority of thi
plants in the other subcategories discharge into municipal systems.
Control Technology and Costs. Except for wet corn milling,
little attention has been focused on either in-plant control or treatment
of wastewaters. In many instances, the treatment technologies developed
for wet corn milling can be transferred to the other industry
subcategories. Current in-plant control consists of water recycling,
cooling systems (barometric condensers), and some plants use biological
treatment (activated sludge).
Best practicable technology for the four subcategories consists
of the following:
• Wet corn milling—Equalization of flows, activated sludge
treatment, and stabilization lagoon
• Dry corn milling--Primary sedimentation and activated sludge
treatment
• Bulgur wheat flour milling—Activated sludge treatment
t Parboiled rice milling—Activated sludge treatment.
New source performance technology for the four subcategorie.s is
deep bed filtration in addition to BPT.
Since the wet corn milling industry contributes the largest
amount of wastewater discharges, control costs for this industry are of
primary concern.
W8.1-2
-------
Grain Milling Industry (Phase II)
For purposes of establishing water effluent guidelines, the Phase
II segments of the grain milling industry consist of three major
subcategories: animal feed, breakfast cereal (ready-to-eat and hot
cereal), and wheat gluten and starch. Animal feed and hot cereal mills do
not generate any significant process wastewaters.
Industry Characteristics. For the purpose of estimating costs,
the ready-to-eat cereal subcategory has been divided according to average
daily production into plant classes consisting of: small (91 metric tons
or 100 short tons per day), medium (230 metric tons or 250 short tons per
day), and large (540 metric tons or 600 short tons per day). The division
of the wheat gluten and starch subcategory daily production values is:
small (30 metric tons or 33 short tons per day), medium (45 metric tons or
50 short tons per day) and large (60 metric tons or 66 short tons per day).
The animal feed, breakfast cereal, and wheat gluten and starch
industries all utilize products from the basic grain processing mills for
raw materials. Grain and grain milling by-products are the chief
ingredients in animal feed. The manufacture of breakfast cereals utilizes
both milled and whole grain, particularly corn, wheat, oats, and rice.
Wheat gluten and starch manufacturing employs wheat flour as its raw
material.
Animal feed manufacturing comprises: ingredients mixing, meal
production, pelleting, cooling and drying pellets, rolling, and finally,
formation of granules. Of all the cereal grains produced in the U. S.,
only about 15 percent is used directly as food for human consumption. The
vast majority of the grain harvest is used to feed poultry and livestock.
Breakfast cereals can be broadly classified as either hot cereals
or ready-to-eat cereals. Hot cereals require cooking before serving and
are normally made from oats or wheat. Ready-to-eat cereal manufacturing
methods vary depending on the type of cereal. Raw materials include whole
grain wheat and rice, corn grits, oat flour, sugar, and other minor
ingredients. The general processes involved include ingredient mixing,
cooking, drying, forming (either flaking or extruding), toasting or
puffing, and vitamin addition.
The wheat starch industry may be properly termed the wheat gluten
and starch industry, as the gluten presently brings a higher economic
return than the starch. Basically, wheat starch manufacturing involves the
physical separation and refinement of the starch and gluten (protein)
components of wheat flour.
Pollutants and Sources. Animal feed and hot cereal manufacturing
plants utilize little or no process water and generate no wastewaters.
Water is used quite extensively in ready-to-eat cereal manufacturing
plants. The various operations where water is used include: grain
tempering, flavor solution makeup, cooking, extrusion, and coating. Water
is also used for cooling, flaking, and forming rolls; extruders; and for
W8.1-3
-------
wet scrubbers. Most of the unit processes do not result in process
wastewaters. Only the cooking operation in shredded cereal manufacturing
generates a continuous or semi-continuous waste stream. In wheat starch
manufacturing, process water is used for dough making, dough washing,
backwashing of screens, and counter-current washing of centrifuge
discharges. Water is also used for plant cleanup and for auxiliary syster
such as boiler feed water and cooling.
The basic parameters used to define wastewater characteristics
are BODr, suspended solids, and pH. For all practical purposes, all of tt
plants in both the ready-to-eat cereal and wheat gluten and starch
categories discharge to municipal systems.
Control Technology and Costs. The costs for the industry
categories Tn this group include increased user charges for plants
discharging to municipal sewerage. New plants may be expected to pretrea
their process waste before discharging to municipal systems or to provide
secondary treatment.
Best practical technology (BPT) for the ready-to-eat cereal
subcategory is activated sludge treatment and sedimentation. Activated
sludge treatment and equalization is required for wheat gluten and starch
plants.
Abatement costs for Phases I and II of the Grain Milling Indust
are combined in Table W8.1.1.
W8.1-4
-------
O
CT\
I
90
L^ O ^ O O
-« o -• o o
00 O 1/1 O 3
\n o =o o o
,-M o r~ o 3
T O — O O
O
CO
o
CO
cs
o o « o o
u"l O f^ O O
i-l O «>• O O
i o r- o o ^i
I O ~* O O T
CO
o
S3
o
ao
c
C
T-l
CO
M
a
a
i
en
O VO
r* o vo O O
CN o »^ O O * f*l
-« o •» o o • m «
oo
3
0)
oo
r~
I
•J5 O>
^ o r» o o
O en o O v
oo o t— o o
—« o <*> o o
O O O O ^>
*— O '-^ O O ^"
o
o
o
o
CO
o
00
en
o o •» o o •*•
o o CN o o IN
o> o
l/l O CN O O
O O !N o O
T O OO O O
o o — o o
CN —•
CN O
NTROL COSTS
LARS)
KIP) :
O J —
CJ O
2 til
z r cj
« O -
5- a,
3 en
»•! "^ Z
J 0 M
O i-.
M dl
££ *H %*
S3 £ N-I
^- &
< Z <
3 w U
cn
r*
•4
Qw
i
Z £ H
a en a.
z 1-1 a
s- x
w u
5>
z
t— *
en
a.
en
z
•••
en
E-
Z
J
H a.
3 3
Cd
Z
5
Ed
S
C-.
i
2S
O.
en en
fjj 3
cn aa
en
en
O
u
< J
r> <
O 3
5- Z
Z
<
en
en
O en
CJ 6-
Jl
Z
2
<
en
en
O
a
z
W8.1-5
-------
-------
Chapter W8.2 Sugar Processing
Regulations
BPT standards have been promulgated for the seven subcategorles
included in this industry, although they were later revoked for one of the
subcategories. BAT, NSPS, and pretreatment standards have been promulgated
for three of the subcategories but only proposed for the other four. This
chapter has not been updated pending promulgation of the remaining
regulations and publications of applicable cost data.
Sugar Processing, Phase I—Cane Sugar Refining
Industry Characteristics. Raw sugar consists primarily of
crystals of sucrose with small percentages of dextrose and levulose.
Various impurities such as particulates, organic and inorganic salts, and
microorganisms are also present. A film of molasses is contained on raw
sugar. Crystalline raw sugar is washed to remove part of the molasses
film, put into solution, taken through various purification steps, and
finally recrystallized.
The major processes involved in cane sugar refining are: (1)
melting, (2) clarifying, (3) decolorizing, (4) evaporating, (5)
crystallizing, and (6) finishing. Melting is the first step in which raw
crystals are put into solution by heating; this syrup is then fine screened
to remove insoluble materials. In the clarifying step, screened melt
liquor which still contains fine suspended and colloidal matter is treated
chemically to cause these to precipitate. Decolorizing involves the
physical adsorption of impurities; bone char is the primary adsorbent used
to remove color. The object of the evaporating process is concentration of
the decolorized sugar liquor and sweet water (water containing syrup); this
is done in continuous evaporators. Crystallizing of the concentrated sugar
liquor and sweet waters is done in batch evaporators called vacuum pans.
Finishing is a drying or granulation step in which moisture is removed and
the crystals are separated and later cooled and fine screened.
The molasses produced as a by-product of cane sugar refining is
used as a sweetener, as an ingredient in animal feed, for making alcohol,
for organic chemicals, and for other uses.
The cane sugar refining industry consists of two subcategories:
(1) crystalline cane sugar refining, and (2) liquid cane sugar refining.
Liquid sugar production is essentially the same as crystalline sugar
production except that the primary product is not recrystallized.
The domestic sugar industry in recent years has not been very
profitable with the exception of 1974, when the prices of sugar were very
high. Currently, there is very keen competition from foreign sugar
W8.2-1
-------
producers. Although a price-support system has recently been activated,
resurgence of the industry is not expected. Ratner, it is believed that
this will protect the industry as it is and will not encourage increased
acreage of cane or the building of new sugar mills. As a matter of fact,
in a period from 1973 through 1976, three mills closed in Louisiana, thre
in Hawaii, and the rated capacity in Puerto Rico declined. For these
reasons, the study used a zero growth rate.
Pollutants and Sources. Major process wastewaters from cane
sugar refining include char (activated carbon process water from nonchar
refineries) wastewater from decolorization. Most of the waste streams
produced in other processes are recovered as low-purity sweet water.
Wastewater from barometric condenser cooling is usually recirculated and
represents a minor waste stream.
Wastewater contaminating pollutants are associated with (1) the
water used as an integral part of the process (primarily the decolorizing
steps of either bone char or activated carbon washing), (2) the result of
entrainment of sucrose into barometric condenser cooling water, and (3)
the water used to slurry the filter cake.
Parameters under effluent guidelines for meeting BPT, BAT, and
NSPS include BODc, suspended solids, and pH. Additional parameters of
significance to the industry include COD, temperature, sucrose, alkalinit
total coliforms, fecal coliforms, total dissolved solids, and nutrients.
Currently, 50 percent of crystalline sugar refineries and 60
percent of liquid cane sugar refineries discharge into municipal systems.
On an average 38,400 liters per metric ton (9,200 gallons per short ton)
wastewater is discharged from crystalline sugar refineries; the
corresponding figure is 18,800 liters per metric ton (4,500 gallons per
short ton) from liquid cane sugar refineries.
Control Techno!ogy. Current technology for control and treatme
of cane sugar refinery wastewaters consists primarily of process control
(recycling and reuse of water, preventing sucrose entrainment in barometr
condenser cooling water and recovering sweet waters), impoundage (land
retention), and disposal of process water to municipal sewerage systems.
Best Practicable Technology (BPT) consists of a combination of
in-plant changes and end-of-pipe treatment. In-plant changes include: (
collection and recovery of all floor drainage, (2) use of improved
baffling systems, demisters, and/or other control devices in evaporators
minimize sucrose entrainment in barometric condenser cooling water, and (
dry handling of filter cakes after desweetening, with disposal to sanitar
landfills, or complete containment of filter cake slurries. End-of-pipe
treatment consists of biological treatment of all wastewater discharges
other than uncontaminated (noncontact) cooling water and barometric
condenser cooling water.
Best Available Technology (BAT) is essentially the same as BPT
but, in addition to BPT, the following are applicable: (1) recycle of
W8.2-2
-------
barometric condenser cooling water by utilizing either a cooling tower or
pond, (2) biological treatment of the (assumed 2 percent) blowdown from the
cooling system, and (3) sand filtration of effluent from the biological
treatment system. Essentially the same control technology is applicable to
both crystalline and liquid cane sugar refineries.
Sugar Processing, Phase II—Raw Sugarcane Processing
Industry Characteristics. Sugarcane milling (SIC 2061) involves
the conversion of freshly harvested sugarcane into raw sugar and molasses.
Because the quality of the juice drops rapidly after harvest, sugar mills
are located close to the fields in which the cane is grown. On the other
hand, refineries, which convert raw sugar to refined sugar, are typically
located close to the market area. Only a few cane mills are integrated
with a refinery. (Pollution problems in sugarcane refining are discussed
elsewhere.)
The processes carried out in the sugar mill are conceptually
rather simple. The cane is hauled into the mill, weighed, and dumped. In
areas where collection procedures cause large amounts of dirt and rocks to
be included in the material brought to the mill (Hawaii, Louisiana, and
Puerto Rico), the cane is usually cleaned by blowing air through it and
washing it with water. Rocks are removed by passing the material over
grates. (In some regions of Hawaii, it is not unusual for 50 percent of
the gross weight of cane brought to the mill to be rocks, dirt, and field
trash such as leaves.) The clean cane is then chopped or run through a
hammermill and then crushed with rollers that squeeze much of the juice
out. This is followed by 4-6 three-roll mills that squeeze out almost all
the remaining sugar. Water is added at the last mill to help wash the last
of the sugar from the fiber. This juice is then used to wash the fiber in
earlier stages so that a counter-current extraction is achieved. The
bagasse from the last mill has about 50 percent moisture and is sent to the
boiler or to the bagasse house. The bagasse can be used as boiler fuel,
processed to make the chemical furfural, or used in making wallboard or
paper. In some regions where fuel is cheap or where the bagasse exceeds
the needs for the boiler and where no by-product industry exists, unwanted
bagasse is either landfilled or dumped in the ocean.
The fresh cane juice is heated and treated with lime to
precipitate impurities. The precipitate, "mud", is separated from the
clarified juice by decantation and vacuum filtration of the sludge from the
clarifier. The mud, which is mostly inorganic material but which contains
sugar, wax, organic salts, and fine bits of bagasse, is frequently a
disposal problem. The clarified juice is next evaporated using
multiple-effect evaporators to reduce its volume and increase the
concentration of sugar. After the solution is partly evaporated, it is
conveyed to vacuum pans in which it is further concentrated. The final
concentrated sugar solution in the vacuum pans is seeded with crystals of
pure sugar and, because the solution is supersaturated, the sugar grows
around these seeds, excluding the water and impurities. The final product
is raw sugar, which is centrifuged, washed with hot water, and discharged.
It is pure enough to be free-flowing even though it has a light brown
W8.2-3
-------
color. The centrifugate, which Is known as blackstrap molasses, contains
roughly 44 percent sugar but also contains dissolved salts and water. It
Is sold for animal feed or as a starting material for rum or other
fermentation products.
Pollutants and Sources. A number of points in the process can
give rise to water pollution.The greatest problem in areas with dirty
cane is the handling of the cane washings. In the washing process, some
sugar is lost to the wash water and organic particles are suspended in it
each of which gives rise to biological oxygen demand. In addition, ther
are large amounts of suspended dirt and dissolved inorganic solids. In
areas where irrigation is practiced, the cane wash water can be used for
irrigation. In other areas, storage in ponds followed by appropriate
treatment is needed. The solid trash, rocks, etc., are landfilled.
The mud which is removed from the vacuum filters contains about
75 percent water which has dissolved organic and inorganic material in it
To avoid problems some mills dry the mud, which can then be returned to t
fields. In other sugar mills, the filter mud is slurried and discharged
to waterways, which can present a significant water problem.
In the final stage of the multiple-effect evaporator, and in tf
vacuum pans, barometric condensers are used; that is, cooling water is
mixed directly with the steam to condense it and create a vacuum. This
allows sugar particles that are entrained in the steam to become mixed ir
the condenser water, producing a biological oxygen demand when that water
is ultimately discharged. Condenser water can amount to as much as 25
thousand liters per metric ton (6 thousand gallons per short ton) of cane
processed and can have a BODj- loading of up to 1.5 kg per metric ton (3
pounds per short ton) of cane processed. When this water is used for
irrigation, there is no significant problem. On the other hand, in areas
where irrigation is impractical, the water produces a pollution problem i
discharged into navigable waterways. Control can be obtained by
impoundment followed by biological treatment before discharge.
Alternatively, the condenser water can be used in cane washing. If the
cane wash water is collected and treated it can be recycled to the
condenser.
Minor sources of problems are the water from washing the floors
of the sugar mill which contain sugar from the spills and spatters that
continually occur in the mill as well as mud tracked in on boots. The
boiler systems can also give rise to pollutants. The water in which the
ash is slurried for removal from the boiler can cause problems as well as
the blowdown water from the boiler itself.
Control Technology. Recommended BPT, BAT and NSPS control
technologies for cane sugar processing states are discussed below.
BPT Technology for Louisiana. Improved controls and practices
reduce pollution such as the reduction of entrainment of sucrose in the
barometric condenser cooling water are recommended. The use of settling
ponds to remove solids from the wash water and biological treatment for t
W8.2-4
-------
effluent from settling ponds and all other waste streams except barometric
condenser cooler water and excess condensate are recommended.
BAT and NSPS Technology—Louisiana. Recycling of barometric
condenser cooling water and cane wash water and biological treatment of
blowdown and miscellaneous waste streams is suggested.
BPT, BAT, and NSPS Technology—Florida and Texas. The
containment of all wastewaters is required except when rainfall causes an
overflow from a facility designed to contain wastewaters.
BPT. BAT, and NSPS Technology—State of Hawaii except for Hilo
Coast. These are the same as for Florida and Texas.
BPT, BAT, and NSPS Technology—Puerto Rico. These are the same
as for Louisiana.
Costing Methodology. The Economic Analysis Document gives the
expected pollution costs for Louisiana and for Puerto Rico for the
promulgated BPT and proposed BAT and NSPS regulations. These costs were
developed through the use of several model plants. The degree of
conformance of each of the existing mills to a model plant was evaluated
and costs for upgrading each one were developed separately. Current
practices in Florida and Texas and in the portions of Hawaii other than the
Hilo Coast are such (irrigation or recycle) that there is already a full
compliance with BPT and BAT requirements. Therefore there are no costs
involved in these regions. Since the regulations for the Hilo Coast of
Hawaii are in suspense, no costs have been calculated for this region.
No limitations have been proposed for pretreatment before
discharge to municipal sewage systems. No sugar mills are now known to be
discharging to municipal sewers.
Beet Sugar Processing
Production Characteristics and Capacities. The plant size ranges
for beet sugar processing are classified according to production capacity,
small (less than 2,100 metric tons or 2,300 short tons per day), medium
(2.100-3,500 metric tons or 2,300-3,900 short tons per day), and large
(greater than 3,500 metric tons or 3,900 short tons per day).
Typical plant production is estimated to be 3,200 metric tons
(3,600 short tons) of sliced beets per day. The main products from this
industry are refined sugar, dried beet pulp (used for animal feed), and
molasses.
The beet sugar processing industry is a subcategory of the sugar
processing industry. Water is commonly used for six principal purposes:
(1) transporting (fluming) of beets to the processing operation, (2)
washing beets, (3) processing (extraction of sugar from the beets), (4)
transporting beet pulp and lime mud cake waste, (5) condensing vapors from
evaporators and crystallization pans, and (6) cooling.
W8.2-5
-------
Beets are transported into the plant by water flowing in a narn
channel (flume) that removes adhered soil. The beets are then lifted fror
the flume and spray washed. Flume water accounts for about 50 percent of
the total plant water consumption.
Process water is associated with the operations of extracting
sugar from the beets. Diffusers draw the raw juice from the beets into a
solution which contains 10-15 percent sugar. Exhausted beet pulp is late
pressed to remove moisture. This exhausted pulp water is usually recycle-
back to the diffuser.
Lime mud cake waste results when lime is added to the raw juice
and the solution is purged with carbon dioxide gas, causing calcium
carbonate to precipitate. The sludge formed removes impurities which are
suspended in the juice.
Water from barometric condensers is employed in the operation o'
pan evaporators and crystallizers in the industry. Water is used in larg
quantities. Condenser water is usually cooled by some device and recycle*
for use in the plant.
In addition to the above, about 40 percent of the plants employ
the Steffen process to recover additional sugar. In the Steffen process,
syrup remaining from the above processes is concentrated to form molasses
which is then desugared to recover the sugar. In this step, water is use
to dilute the molasses and calcium oxide is added to the solution, causin
a precipitate to form. The precipitation process produces the Steffen
filtrate and recovered sugar; the filtrate may be directly discharged as
waste or it may be mixed with beet pulp to produce by-products.
•
Areas of future growth of beet sugar production are expected to
be along the Red River between northern Minnesota and North Dakota, and i
the Columbia River Basin.
Pollutants and Sources. The major waste sources stem from the
primary production processes.These include: (1) beet transporting and
washing, (2) processing (extraction of sugar from the beets), (3)
carbonating of raw juice, and (4) Steffen processing (for those plants
involved in desugaring of molasses). Barometric condensers are also a
wastewater source. The primary wastewaters resulting from the beet sugar
processing industry are: flume water, lime mud cake from the carbonation
process, barometric condenser water, and Steffen process water used to
dilute molasses for desugarization.
The basic parameters used in establishing water effluent
guidelines to meet BPT are: BODg, total suspended solids, pH, and
temperature.
Control Technology. Current pollution control technology does
not provide a single operation that is completely applicable under all
circumstances. The major disposal methods are: reuse of wastes,
coagulation, waste retention ponds or lagooning, and irrigation.
W8.2-6
-------
BPT and BAT involve extensive recycle and reuse of wastewaters
within the processing operations with no discharge or controlled discharge
of process wastewater pollutants to navigable waters.
BAT permits no discharge of wastewaters. One method of
accomplishing this is to apply the wastewaters to the land after BPT steps
have been taken. It is possible that after sufficient concentration of
wastewaters, only salt-tolerant grasses could be grown. Farm lands may be
taken out of production and no credit is taken for the value of crops grown
on these lands. It is uncertain how long the soil can remain stable under
these conditions.
Control Costs—Sugar Processing
The combined control costs for cane sugar refining, raw sugarcane
processing, and beet sugar processing are summarized in Table W8.2.1.
W8.2-7
-------
m \o •v in en QO en in o 00 en ^o **
o ri 00 <*i o o in -« «n *o o o 03 —> os o o o o en
Cn • ..... . . •
I Cn ^^(N ^ f-H^^ CM ^Hf-* cNinin
I -
cn
• ao sfio^ooo oooasoO
CO r~
3 I -«OinoOc~ (MO<-noO
oo o
oo o
o
O
u
_: — ••
o w —
a- a: a,
c-tfw ^. J^. ^. z
zJss tnui u
3U3 Z<0! 8-MZM j c. CONM _: c. M - i a. -:
JO1-1 Zc-s-S-a,^ O 1-1 fr< EI a< a. ^ j,5-c-o.--. < <
Ow Mcna4x aenen 6-z< ^+ s-i z J
< z < z z z ^
W8.2-8
-------
Chapter W8.3 Canned and Preserved Fruits and Vegetables
Regulations
The canned and preserved fruits and vegetables processing
industry is subject to BPT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS, and BCT regulations described
in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 407, and as updated in
the Federal Register (47 FR 49175, 10/29/82).
The regulations causing significant costs are BPT and NSPS.
Point source discharge limitations are defined for the discharge of process
wastewater pollutants. Existing BCT regulations, when they exist, equal
BPT limitations for all subparts. Existing and new dischargers to POTW's
meet no special standards, but must conform to general pretreatment
standards provided in 40 CFR, Part 403. In some instances new dischargers
to POTW's must reduce incompatible pollutant levels to those designated
under NSPS standards.
Industry Characteristics
The fruits and vegetables processing industry includes processors
of canned fruits and vegetables, preserves, jams, jellies, dried and
dehydrated fruits and vegetables, frozen fruits and vegetables; fruit and
vegetable juices, and specialty items. The effluent limitations guidelines
issued by the EPA are limited to processors of apple products (except
caustic peeled and dehydrated products),'citrus products (except pectin and
pharmaceutical products), frozen and dehydrated potato products, and
specialty fruits and vegetables. The principal items in each group are as
follows:
• Apples: slices, sauce, and juice (cider)
• Citrus: juice, segments, oil, dried peel, and molasses
• Potatoes: chips, frozen products, dehydrated products, canned
hash, stew, and soup products.
• Specialty fruits and vegetables.
The manufacturing processes employed after harvesting depend on
the particular product to be manufactured. Specific processes include
receiving, storing, washing and sorting, peeling and coring, sorting,
slicing, segmenting or dicing, pressing or extracting (for juice products),
cooking, finishing, blanching (for potatoes), juice concentrating,
dehydrating, canning, freezing, can rinsing and cooling, and cleaning up.
Many processes previously performed by hand, such as peeling and coring,
have been automated. Peeling, for example, may be performed mechanically
or caustically. In the caustic process the fruit or vegetable is dipped in
a hot lye solution to loosen and soften the peel, which is then removed by
brushes and water spray.
W8.3-1
-------
The fruits and vegetables canning and freezing industry comprise
approximately 1,680 plants that are subdivided into 1,038 canned fruits ar
vegetables plants plus 642 frozen fruits, vegetables, and specialties
plants. These plants are further subdivided into canning plants, freezinc
plants, combination canning and freezing plants, and dehydrating plants.
According to the 1982 U.S. Industrial Outlook, shipments of canned and
frozen fruits and vegetables reached $13 billion in 1981, an increase of ;
percent over 1980. Approximately 70 percent of all these plants are
multiproduct producers, although an equivalent percentage confine their
operations to either fruits or vegetables.
The canning and freezing industry is characterized by a large
number of small, single-plant firms. These firms share a very small
segment of the total market and have very little influence on industry
prices and total supply. Over the past 20 years, there has been a steady
trend in the industry to fewer large plants from many smaller operations.
The four largest firms in the canning, freezing, and dehydrating industrii
account for approximately 20, 25, and 35 percent, respectively, of the
total value of industry shipments. Although a large proportion of the
plants are relatively old, the industry has generally maintained modern
technology through renovation and equipment modernization.
It is likely that the trend toward fewer plants will continue.
New large plants will probably continue to replace the production capacit.
of the small, older plants that will close.
Pollutants and Sources
Water is used extensively in all
industry, it is used as:
phases of the food processing
A cleaning agent to remove dirt and foreign material
A heat-transfer medium for heating and cooling
A solvent for removal of undesirable ingredients from the
product
A carrier for the incorporation of additives into the produc
A vehicle for transporting and hauling the product.
Although the steps used in processing the various commodities
display a general similarity, there are variations in the equipment used
and in the amount and character of the wastewaters produced. For example
caustic peeling produces a much higher pollution load than does mechanica
peeling. Similarly, water transport adds a great deal to a plant's
wastewater flow compared to dry transportation methods.
The pollutant parameters that have been designated by EPA as
being of major significance for apple, citrus, and potato processors are
BOD, suspended solids, and pH. Minor pollutant parameters include COD,
total dissolved solids, ammonia and other nitrogen forms, phosphorus, fee
coliforms, and heat.
W8.3-2
-------
Control Technologies
Control technologies applicable to wastewaters from the fruit and
vegetable processing industry consist of both in-plant (or in-process)
technologies and conventional end-of-pipe waste treatment technologies.
In-plant control methods include field washing of crops; substitution of
dry transport methods for flumes; replacing conventional hot water and
steam blanching methods by fluidized bed, microwave, hot gas, or individual
quick blanching methods; using high-pressure nozzles and automatic shutoff
valves on hoses; reusing process waters in countercurrent flow systems,
recirculating of cooling waters, etc.; and minimizing the use of water and
detergents in plant cleanup.
End-of-pipe treatment technologies used in the fruits and
vegetables processing industry generally include preliminary screening,
equalization, the use of catch basins for grease removal, sedimentation and
clarification, followed by a biological treatment system such as activated
sludge and the use of trickling filters, anaerobic lagoons, or aerated
lagoons. Where necessary, neutralization and chlorination are also
included. Other technologies that are or may be used by the industry
include solids removal by air flotation or centrifugal separation, chemical
coagulation and precipitation, biological treatment (through the use of a
rotating biological contractor), sand or diatomaceous earth filtration,
and other advanced treatment technologies. The liquid portion of cannery
wastes can be "completely" treated and discharged through percolation and
evaporation lagoons or by spray irrigation.
Because the wastes from fruit and vegetable processing plants are
primarily biological, they are compatible with municipal sewage treatment
systems. Therefore, discharge into municipal systems is also a practicable
alternative for fruit and vegetable processors.
BPT guidelines are based upon the average performances of
exemplary biological treatment systems. Thus, the technology includes
preliminary screening, primary settling (potatoes only), and biological
secondary treatment. The use of cooling towers for the recirculation of
cooling water is considered a BPT for the citrus industry. In-plant
control methods should include good housekeeping and water use practices.
No special in-plant modifications are required. Land treatment methods
such as spray irrigation are, of course, not excluded from use.
NSPS guidelines assume the use of BPT, plus additional secondary
treatment, such as more aerated lagoons and/or shallow lagoons and/or a
sand filter following secondary treatment; disinfection (usually
chlorination) is also included. Management controls over housekeeping and
water use practices are assumed to be stricter than BPT. Although no
additional in-plant controls are required, several modifications may be
economically more attractive than additional treatment facilities. These
include: recycling raw material wash water, utilizing low water-usage
peeling equipment, recirculating of cooling water, and utilizing dry
clean-up methods. Where suitable land is available, land treatment is not
only recommended from the discharge viewpoint, but will usually be more
economical than other treatment methods.
W8.3-3
-------
Costing Methodology
Model plants were used to estimate the regulatory costs in the
canned and preserved fruits and vegetables industry. These model plants
for each subcategory were derived in the Economic Analysis and the NCWQ
Report. Control costs are summarized in Table W8.3.1.
W8.3-4
-------
co en ^o va CM CD vo in o
<3t o o o o o o o u"» o o i4~i o> o o o o o
r- O !N O O O n o 01 O O -< O O P~ O O 30
oo
CO ^-— ^•^I
3 oorsiootN tnocrsoo
nl — OOI-OO^1 INO^-OOr-- CO O —i O O
_j O CO —i •• !N
01 — —i O
.a
w
UTION CONTRO;
S OF DOLLARS
PLACE (KIP)
- Z Z
52-
— _• _:
j <
CZ, — H J-
- z r
< z <
3 "i w
02 02
S- o,
Cu 02 S
Z < S
Z 6-1 6- 5- O- ^
a 02 i < 02 02
c-1 x a en 02
•n a z CM M
a
>
-
OJ
CH
O
02 04
C/3 CJ
o
-: <
"~* ^* •?•
C 3 Z
r- Z <
<
C/2
^
8-1 r"
M 5
rj
AHTS(NSPS)
RETREAT
_: a.
c-i C. ^_
as KZ
a M ii
2J £U ii
M
<
^
b
E*
03
O J
CJ 04
Z CJ
hJJ 1— 1
£« K«
0 02 3.
— X
^ —
_^
Z
<
02
02
Z
J
— &
<
S ^?
M
2
RETREAT
0.
— .
il 02
V2 02
-•• ^ i
„;
<
5
E^
•*-
o
+•
<
(— 1
a.
<
j
<
z
<
COSTS
f
<
2
z
«c
™
<
W8.3-5
-------OCR error (C:\Conversion\JobRoot\00000BW9\tiff\20011F7Y.tif): Saving image to "C:\Conversion\JobRoot\00000BW9\tiff\20011F7Y.T$F.T$F" failed.
-------
Chapter W8.4 Canned and Preserved Seafood
Regulations
The canned and preserved seafood processing industry is subject
to BPT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS, and BCT regulations described in the Code of
Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 408, and as updated in the Federal
Register (47 FR 49175, 10/29/82).
The regulations causing significant costs are BPT and NSPS.
Point source discharge limitations are defined for the discharge of process
wastewater pollutants. Existing BCT regulations equal BPT limitations for
all except the following subparts where BCT limitations exceed BPT
limitations: Y - Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Processing, Z -
Atlantic and Gulf Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster Processing, AD - Non-Alaskan
Scallop Processing, and AG - Abalone Processing. Existing and new
dischargers to POTW's meet no special standards, but must conform to
general pretreatment standards provided in 40 CFR, Part 403.
Industry Characteristics
There are approximately 1,800 seafood processors located in the
United States, including tuna processing plants located in Puerto Rico and
American Samoa. For the purpose of establishing effluent limitations guidelines,
the seafood processing industry has been divided into 33 subcategories, as
listed in Table W8.4.1. Of these, 14 are in Phase I and 19 are in Phase
II. The groupings are based upon the type of product, the degree of
mechanization, and the location or remoteness of the processing plant.
Remote Alaskan plants have been placed in a separate subcategory because
their isolated locations render most wastewater treatment alternatives
infeasible because of the high cost of overcoming engineering obstacles and
the undependability of access to transportation during extended severe sea
or weather conditions.
In general, the seafood processing industry can be characterized
as possessing many small, underutilized, old plants that in some cases
compete with efficient, low-cost foreign producers. On the other hand, the
tuna industry is dominated by five firms that operate 14 large-scale plants
which account for over 90 percent of the industry production.
Processing seafood involves variations of a common sequence of
operations: harvest, storage, receiving, preprocessing (washing, thawing,
etc.), evisceration, precooking, picking or cleaning, preservation, and
packaging. Many of the operations, such as picking, shelling, and
cleaning, have been mechanized, but much of the industry still depends on
conventional hand operations.
In general, the volume of production is dependent upon the amount
of seafood harvested, both domestic and imported. Analyses by the U.S.
W8.4-1
-------
TABLE W8.4.1 SEAFOOD PROCESSING INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIES
Phase I
(1) Farm-raised Catfish
(2) Conventional Blue Crab
(3) Mechanized Blue Crab
(4) Non-Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
(5) Remote Alaskan Crab Meat
(6) Non-Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section
(7) Remote Alaskan Whole Crab and Crab Section
(8) Dungeness and Tanner Crab Processing in the
Contigous States
(9) Non-Remote Alaskan Shrimp
(10) Remote Alaskan Shrimp
(11) Northern Shrimp in the Contiguous States
(12) Southern Non-Breaded Shrimp Processing in the
Contiguous States
(13) Breaded Shrimp Processing in the Contiguous States
(14) Tuna
Phase II
(1) Fish Meal
(2) Alaska Hand-Butchered Salmon
(3) Alaska Mechanized Salmon
(4) West Coast Hand-Butchered Salmon
(5) West Coast Mechanized Salmon
(6) Alaskan Bottom Fish
(7) Non-Alaskan Conventional Bottom Fish
(8) Non-Alaskan Mechanized Bottom Fish
(9) Hand Shucked Clam
(10) Mechanized Clam
(11) Pacific Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster
(12) Atlantic and Gulf Coast Hand-Shucked Oyster
(13) Steamed and Canned Oyster
(14) Sardine Processing
(15) Alaskan Scallop Processing
(16) Non-Alaskan Scallop Processing
(17) Alaskan Herring Fillet
(18) Non-Alaskan Herring Fillet
(19) Abalone Processing
W8.4-2
-------
National Marine Fisheries Service indicate that a 3.1 percent annual
compound growth rate can be sustained through 1985 by the extension of the
U.S. fisheries jurisdiction to 200 miles, raising additional fish by
aquaculture, and by encouraging the catch and sale of presently
underutilized fish species. A fully operational predictive model to
forecast the effect of the 200-mile limit is not yet available.
The effluent limitations guidelines issued for the seafood
processing industry by the EPA cover all methods of preservation—
fresh-pack, freezing, canning, and curing.
Pollutants and Sources
Pollution sources in the seafood processing industry include both
the fishing boats (mostly their discharged bilge water) and the processing
plants themselves. Water uses in the processing plants include: washing
the seafood, plants, and equipment; flumes for in-plant transport of
product and wastes; live holding tanks; cooling and ice making; cooking;
freezing; and brining.
The solids and effluents from all fish and shellfish operations
consist of:
• Solid portions consisting of flesh, shell, bone, cartilage,
and viscera
• Hot and cold water (fresh or seawater) solutions containing
dissolved materials (proteins and breakdown products)
t Suspended solids consisting of bone, shell, or flesh
t Foreign material carried into the plant with the raw material.
Phase I Subcategories. The major wastes from Phase I seafood
processing include blood, viscera, bits of flesh and other tissues, scales,
slime and cooking liquors. Wastewaters from processing contain heavy loads
of dissolved and suspended fats and proteins. Parameters under effluent
guidelines for meeting BPT and BCT include (I) five-day biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD,-), (2) total suspended solids, (3) oil and grease, and (4) pH
(Table W8.4.2).
Industrial Fishes. There are three primary sources of wastewater
in processing of menhaden and anchovies: (1) the bailwater used to
transport the fish from the boats, (2) the stickwater, which* separates from
the oil after the pressing operation, and (3) washwater from refining of
the fish oil. Stickwater, a mixture of dissolved and suspended proteins,
fats, oil and ash, contributes the heaviest waste!oad. In factories
equipped with a solubles plant, the stickwater and other wastewaters are
evaporated to yield protein concentrate. The barometric condensor of the
evaporator produces large volumes of low-strength wastewater. Factories
without solubles plants dispose of stickwater by barging to sea.
Bailwater, which is commonly recycled, carries a high load of BOD and
suspended solids.
W8.4-3
-------
TABLE W8.4.2. SEAFOOD INDUSTRY RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
Subcategory
Catfish (farm)
Crabs
[STue conventional)
(Slue Mech.)
(Alaska) NR/R
(Dungeness/Tanner)
Shrimp
(Alaska) NR/R
(West Coast)(a)
(Gulf, breaded)
Tuna
Fish Meal
(U solubles)
(W/0 solubles)
Sardines
Herring
rFTTTeting)
Salmon
(Tian~d-butchered)
(Mechanical )
West/Alaska (composite)
Bottom Fish
Alaska
Non Alaska-Conv.
Non Alaska-Mach.
Clams
[Conventional )
(Mechanized)
Oysters
Steamed or canned
Hand-shucked (West)
Hand-shucked (East)
Scallops
(Alaska)
(N. Alaska)
Aba lone
Flow
1/kkg
23,000
1,190
36 ,300
51,700
19,600
73,400
60 ,000
116,000
18,300
35,000
1,900
3,640
8,090
3,960
18,500
13,300
6,230
5,240
13,500
3,700
21,100
65,100
55,300
32,600
11,700
11,700
35,700
30D5
7.9
5.2
22
66
3.1
130
120
84
13
2.96
62.2
10.1
32.0
2.11
50.8
33.3
2.00
3.32
11.9
5.71
13.7
31.0
23.9
14.9
2.85
2.85
17.1
kg/kkg
TSS
9.2
0.74
12
54
2.7
210
54
93
10
0.920
34.3
2.93
22.6
1.21
20.3
13.4
1.61
1.42
8.92
13.6
5.48
29.0
34.2
13.6
0.526
0.526
3.37
O&G
Phase I
4.5
0.26
5.5
13
17
42
5.8
.___pua<:0 TT
0.562
22.8
1.99
6.11
0.153
6.49
4.21
0.084
0.348
2.48
0.141
0.444
1.13
1.55
0.665
0.158
0.158
0.897
8005
343.4
4,369.7
597.3
1,276.5
413.2
1,771.1
2,000.0
724.1
710.3
84.5
32,737
2,747
3,955
532.3
2,746
2,501
321
633.5
881.4
1,543
549.3
476.2
432.2
457.1
243.5
243.5
479.0
mg/1
TSS
400.0
621.8
326.0
1,044.4
137.7
2,361.1
900.0
801.7
546.4
26.2
18,315
304.9
2,793
305.5
1,097
1,008
258.4
270.9
660.7
3,676
259.7
445.5
- 513.4
417.2
45.0
45.0
234.5
0
195
213
r*$
231
70C
31J
16
12, OC
54f
75J
3
35(
3 I'-
ll
61
is:
3
2
1
2
2i
1
1
2
W8.4-4
-------
Finfish. The primary source of wastewater from the processing of
salmon is the wash tank operation, where eviscerated fish are cleansed of
blood, loose tissues and flesh particles. Mechanical processors produce
much heavier wasteloads than manual operations. The same is true for the
mechanical processing of bottom fish, such as whiting. Skinning and
scaling may produce high waste loads in the conventional processings of
bottom fish. For very large bottom fish, i.e., halibut, the primary
wastewater flow and wasteload may result from washing the gut cavity. In
sardine processing the principal wasteloads are contributed by the precook
stickwater and the flume to the packing tables. For the herring filleting
industry the largest percentage of flow and wasteload is produced by the
filleting machine and associated fluming, with a lesser contribution from
the bail water.
Municipal dischargers comprise a small fraction of the total
plants in the industry. Alaskan plants are in an especially difficult
position with respect to this option.
According to the EPA Development Documents, the sludge volumes
from treatment of seafood wastes, although not demonstrated on a
significant scale, are up to 10 percent of raw waste volume from dissolved
air flotation, 10 to 15 percent from activated sludge, 5 to 10 percent from
extended aeration and 2 percent from anaerobic contact processes. These
sludges have a high water content (95-98 percent) and are amenable to
conventional sludge handling except for sludge from air flotation which may
be difficult to dewater.
Waste waters from the seafoods industry contain compatible
pollutants. There is no evidence that toxic pollutants as defined in the
EPA toxic pollutant effluent standards are present in the wastewaters from
any subcategory.
Control Technologies
Control technologies applicable to the seafood processing
industry include both in-plant changes and end-of-pipe treatment. Basic
in-plant changes include:
• Minimizing the use of water by substituting dry handling for
flumes, using spring-loaded hose nozzles, etc.
• Recovering dissolved proteins by precipitation from effluent
streams, enzymatic hydrolysis, brine-acid extraction, or
through the conventional reduction process for converting
whole fish or fish waste to fish meal.
• Recovering solid portions for use as edible product or as
by-products by mechanical deboning and extruding, and by
shellfish waste utilization.
Very few end-of-pipe waste treatment systems are currently
installed in the seafood processing industry. However, the essentially
W8.4-5
-------
biodegradable nature of the wastes allows for the easy application of
conventional treatment methods. These include screening and sedimentatio
to remove suspended solids; air flotation and skimming to remove heavy
concentrations of solids, greases, oils, and dissolved organics; biologic.
treatment systems, such as activated sludge, rotating biological
contractors, trickling filters, ponds, and lagoons to remove organic
wastes; and land disposal methods where land is available.
In general, BPT guidelines call for in-plant "good housekeeping
practices, but do not assume significant equipment changes. End-of-pipe
technologies associated with BPT are represented by simple screening and
grease-trap methods, with dissolved air flotation for tuna plants and
grinders or comminutors, followed by discharge to deep water for remote
Alaskan processors where adequate flushing is available. NSPS guidelines
place much more emphasis on in-plant changes, including in-process
modifications which promote efficient water and wastewater management to
reduce water consumption, recycling some water streams, and solids or
by-product recovery where practicable. End-of-pipe technologies associat
with NSPS guidelines include more extensive use of dissolved air flotatio
for tuna processors in 1983.
Costing Methodology
Model plants were used to estimate this regulatory cost in the
canned and preserved seafood industry. These model plants for each
subcategory were derived from Development Documents and the NCWQ Report.
Control costs are summarized in Table W8.4.3.
W8.4-6
-------
CN ON ^ o o cr»--tr^'OO co fiocnoo
eft •—i f-* rsi c^
J-J
a.
13
C
CO
OJ
C
C
_.
~
oo
CO
C-"
osr^ in —* x o CN ITIONLO x
OTTXOO fn ^TONONOO rM I^IOTOO O
0300 vo
=Ha, cna: cj— encs — en
MOJ E-=- PI r-> -; i. -s — »o, a. ^
~Ow Z &« P?I ri O, ^» Or-E-S-Q.-- i> =-> S- fi. ^- < <
Ow ucna.<: cacn o-2cnc.i 03 a 3 a a -: z
J«s s-ix acncn• &• cna zo,o.>>. c-Z< =-Z r^Z~
-------
Chapter W8.5 Dairy Products Processing Industry
Regulations
Regulations which were published as of February 11, 1975 are the
basis for this chapter. Since publication BAT has been redesignated BCT,
and in 1981, BCT requirements were remanded. Therefore, only compliance
costs for BPT and NSPS regulations are presented in this chapter.
Industry Characteristics
In 1970, there were 5,241 dairy plants reported in the United
States, and by 1977, the number of plants had dropped to 3,731 plants, a 29
percent decline. The size of each plant is determined by the number of
employees required, where a small operation has 1-19 employees, a medium
one has 20-99 employees, and a large plant over 100 employees.
The dairy processing industry comprises 12 product-related
subcategories: (1) receiving stations, (2) fluid products, (3) cultured
products, (4) cottage cheese, (5) butter, (6) natural cheese, (7) ice
cream, (8) ice cream mix, (9) condensed milk, (10) dry milk, (11) condensed
whey, and (12) dry whey.
A great variety of operations are employed in the dairy products
industry. For simplification, they are considered to be a chain of
operations involving: (1) receiving and storing, (2) clarifying, (3)
separating, (4) pasteurizing, and (5) packaging.
Receiving and storing of raw materials is conducted by using bulk
carriers, pumps, and refrigerated tanks. Clarifying is the removal of
suspended matter by centrifuging. Separating is the removal of cream by
centrifuging. Pasteurizing is accomplished by passing the material through
a unit where it is rapidly heated then cooled by contact with heated and
cooled plates or tubes. Packaging involves the final handling of the
finished product prior to storage.
Pollutants and Sources
Materials are lost during direct processing of raw materials into
finished products and 'from ancillary operations. The former group consists
of milk, milk products, and nondairy ingredients (sugar, fruits, nuts,
etc.), while the latter consists of cleaners and sanitizers used in
cleaning equipment and lubricants used in certain handling equipment. All
of these contribute to the release of organic materials, which appear as
high BOD and suspended solids in the process water. Phosphorus, nitrogen,
chlorides, heat, and dairy fat can also be found.
W8.5-1
-------
The major sources of wastes in the dairy products processing
industry are the following: (1) the washing and cleaning out of product
remaining in tanks and piping which is performed routinely after every
processing cycle, (2) the spillage produced by leaks, overflow,
freezing-on, boiling-over and careless handling, (3) processing losses, (<
the wastage of spoiled products, returned products, or by-products such a:
whey, and (5) the detergents used in the washing and sanitizing solutions
The primary waste materials that are discharged to the waste
streams in practically all dairy plants include: (1) milk and milk
products received as raw materials, (2) milk products handled in the
process and end-products manufacture, (3) lubricants (primarily soap and
silicone-based) used in certain handling equipment, and (4) sanitary and
domestic sewage from toilets, washrooms, and kitchens. Other products,
such as nondairy ingredients (sugar, fruits, flavors, and fruit juices) a
milk by-products (whey and buttermilk) are potential waste contributors.
Control Technology and Costs
Dairy wastes are usually subjected to biological breakdown. Jh
standard practice for reducing the concentration of oxygen-demanding
materials in the wastewater has been to use secondary or biological
treatment consisting of: activated sludge, trickling filters, aerated
lagoons, stabilization ponds, or land disposal. Tertiary treatment (sand
filtration, carbon adsorption) is practically nonexistent at the present
time.
BPT consist of in-plant and end-of-pipe controls. In-plant
control includes improvement of plant maintenance, waste monitoring
equipment and quality control improvements.
End-of-pipe control includes biological treatment (activated
sludge, trickling filters, or aerated lagoons). If in-house controls are
not used, end-of-pipe biological treatment must be supplemented by rapid
sand'filtration. Small dairies may be able to meet BPT through land
disposal options.
Based on the Development and Economic Analysis documents, the
industry was modeled in terms of small, medium, and large plants in five
product sectors: (1) butter, (2) milk and cottage cheese, (3) processed
cheese, (4) ice cream, and (5) condensed evaporated milk. Treatment
technologies, costs, and estimates of existing compliance levels were
also obtained from the same documents. The estimated costs of compliance
are given in Table W8.5.1.
W8.5-2
-------
•o
c
u
3
•a
Q
1-4
a
O M
a. -: -2
— H* r«
a s i-^
cn
i^
z
J
3d
'J
Z
7* ^^
Z "••
a cn
IT ^^
r> X
'j\ a
a
cn
a.
cn
z
cn
c"
<
^
^ c4 &•
i- <
= 32
a
z
cn
—
in
^
u
_;
<
2
2
2
•<
,
^ M CJ
W8.5-3
-------
-------
Chapter U8.6 Feedlots Industry
Regulations
The feedlots point source category is comprised of two
subcategories for which BPT, BAT (old), NSPS and pretreatment have been
adopted. These standards are applicable only to large scale feedlot
operations.
Industry Characteristics
Feedlots is a term which applies to many different types of
facilities used to raise animals in a "high density" situation. For the
purpose of establishing effluent limitations guidelines, the term feedlots
has been defined by the following three conditions:
• There is a high concentration of animals held in a small area
for periods of time in conjunction with the production of
meat, milk, eggs, and/or breeding stock; and/or the stabling
of horses;
t There is transportation of feed from other areas to the
animals for consumption and;
• By virtue of the confinement of animals or poultry, the land
or area will neither sustain vegetation nor be available for
crop or forage production.
The effluent limitations guidelines issued to date (Phase I) by
the EPA cover feedlots for beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, chickens,
turkeys, sheep, ducks, and horses. A variety of facility types are
included within the definition of feedlots. These include: open lots,
housed lots, barns with stalls, free-stall barns, slotted-floor houses,
solid concrete floor houses, a variety of poultry houses, and wet lots
containing swimming areas for ducks.
Raw materials used in the feedlots industry are feed, water, and
in some cases, bedding. The production processes are defined by the type
of facilities employed, and consist mostly of delivering supplies to the
animals and carrying away manure and litter.
Although most of the feedlots are classified as small, for many
animals the bulk of production is accounted for by the very large
producers. Although this concentration is not so dominant in some of the
other animal groups, the trend'toward larger units of production is common
to all segments of the industry.
W8.6-1
-------
•s.
Many producers have diversified into grain production for direc
marketing and production of other livestock and poultry. Some are invo1v<
in feed grain producing, feed-manufacturing, feeder-cattle producing,
and/or meat packaging.
Ownership of commercial feedlots ranges from sole-proprietorshi
to corporate farms, including co-operatives. The feedlot operator may ow
the animals being fed or, (particularly in the case of fed-cattle) may
custom-feed animals owned by others.
Projections of production capacity through 1983 for the cattle,
dairy, and hog segments of the feedlots industry anticipate that the tren
is toward fewer numbers of production units with the very large units
continuing to increase their output volume. Similar projections are not
available for the remaining segments of the feedlots industry. However,
the growth of production of major agricultural commodities for the period
1970-85 has been estimated. The percentage changes are as follows: beef
and veal (33 percent); pork (13 percent); milk (2 percent); chicken (36
percent); turkey (44 percent); eggs (10 percent); and lamb and mutton (65
percent). In all segments of the feedlots industry, it is anticipated th
the trend toward larger feedlots will continue. No substantive growth
projections are available for the duck or horse subcategories.
Pollutants and Sources
Feedlot wastewater originates from two principal sources:
• Rainfall runoff
• Flush or washdown water used to clean animal wastes from per
stalls, milk center areas, houses; runoff from continuous
overflow watering systems or similar facilities; spillages;
runoff from duck swimming areas; runoff from washing of
animals; runoff from dust control; etc.
The amount of wastewater varies considerably, depending upon tf
way manure, bedding, etc., are stored and handled; in the outdoor feedlo'
rainfall and soil characteristics determine wastewater characteristics.
Animal Feedlot wastes generally include the following pollutan'
Bedding or litter (jf used) and animal hair or feathers
Watering- and milling-center wastes
Spilled feed
Undigested and partially digested food or feed additives
Digestive juices
Biological products of metabolism
Micro-organisms from the digestive tract
Cells and cell debris from the digestive tract
Residual soil and sand.
W8.6-2
-------
The primary discharge constituents of concern for pollution
control can be described as organic soils, nutrients, salts, and bacterial
contaminants. The following specific pollutant parameters have been
identified as being of particular importance: BOD-, COD, fecal coliform,
total suspended solids, phosphorus, ammonia and otner nitrogen forms, and
dissolved solids.
With the exception of the duck feedlot subcategory, the EPA has
concluded that animal feedlots can achieve a BPT level of waste control
which prevents the discharge of any wastes into waterways, except for
overflows due to excessive rainfall or similar unusual climatic events (a
10-year, 24-hour storm as defined by the National Weather Service). The
effluent limitations for discharges from duck feedlots have been set at 0.9
kilogram (2 pounds) of BOD5 per day for every 1,000 ducks being fed, and a
total viable coliform count less than that recommended by the National
Technical Advisory Committee for shellfish-producing waters, which is 400
fecal coliform per 100 milliliters. The effluent limitations guidelines
for all subcategories effective July 1, 1984 (BAT), and for all new sources
(NSPS) are no discharge of wastewater pollutants, except for overflows due
to rainfalls in excess of the 25-year, 24-hour storm (as defined by the
National Weather Service).
Control Technology
In-process technologies used for the control of wastewaters from
animal feedlots include: site selection, selection of production methods,
water utilization practices, feed formulation and utilization, bedding and
litter utilization, and housekeeping procedures. All of these are
important in minimizing wastewater flow and pollutants.
The various technologies available for end-of-process treatment
may be classified as either partial or complete. Partial technologies are
defined as those that produce a product or products which are neither sold
or completely utilized on the feedlot. Thus, gasification and incineration
of manure are considered partial technologies because each generates a
significant quantity of ash that must be disposed of. Lagoons, trickling
filters, and other biological systems are classified as partial
technologies because the effluent may not be suitable for discharge, and,
in all cases sludge disposal is necessary. Complete treatment technologies
produce a marketable product or a product that can be entirely reused at
the feedlot, and which has no appreciable by-products, residues, or
polluted water discharge. The dehydration and sale of manure, for example,
is a complete technology. Spreading animal wastes on land for crop
fertilization is also a complete control technology.
The 1977 BPT guidelines for all animal feedlots (except those for
ducks), the 1984 BAT, and the NSPS guidelines all assume the use of
complete control technology. The BPT guidelines are based on the
containment of all contaminated liquid runoff and the application of these
liquids, as well as the generated solid wastes, to productive cropland at a
rate which will provide moisture and nutrients that can be utilized by the
crops. Technologies applicable to BAT guidelines include some of the
W8.6-3
-------
complete technologies, such as wastelage (addition of waste products to
feed), oxidation ditch mixed liquor refeed, and the recycling of wet-lot
water for ducks, which are not yet fully available for general use. The
BPT guidelines for duck feedlots require the equivalent of primary
settling, aeration, secondary settling, and chlorination prior to
discharge.
Costing Methodology
The costs of compliance were estimated using an industry model
based on separate costing sectors for each of the regulatory subcategories
(beef, ducks, etc). Plant sizes and numbers were derived from data in the
Development and Economic Analysis Documents supplemented by other data
sources.
Comprehensive and reliable data were not available on the numbe
of feedlots that will require construction of pollution control facilities
to meet the effluent limitations guidelines. It is generally accepted th<
housed (total confinement) and pasture operations can generally meet the
guidelines without new investment or operating cost outlays.
Furthermore, open or partially open feedlots may be situated so
that they are not point-source dischargers. Finally, some feedlots have
already installed control facilities which meet the guidelines'
requirements. Control costs were developed from the cost functions of
model plants and are summarized in Table W8.6.1.
W8.6-4
-------
o
av
I
O
ao
O O —i
r- o ™ o O
r- o ™ o o
o
ai
CO
o
o
m
3>
LS/PRETRUAT
NS
x a en in
a z a, ai
^
r-
O
en
en
O
CJ
_;
-------
-------
Chapter W8.7 Meat Products Processing
Regulations
The costs discussed in this chapter are associated with the
regulations as originally promulgated. BAT regulations for the industry
are currently under review by EPA; the costs for compliance with BAT are
subject to change if the BAT regulations are modified.
Meat Packing (Phase I)
Industry Characteristics. A total of 90 percent of the
industry's production is accounted for by 15 percent of the plants.
Although the total number of plants in the Development Document
slaughterhouse and packinghouse categories is only 793, it was assumed that
these plants produce 90 percent of the output, and that locker plants (very
small meat packing plants that slaughter animals and may produce processed
meat products which are usually stored in frozen form) account for the
remaining 10 percent.
The meat processing industry comprises four subcategories:
simple slaughterhouse, complex slaughterhouse, low-processing packinghouse,
and high-processing packinghouse. The plants in this industry range from
those that carry out only one operation, such as slaughtering, to plants
that also carry out commercial meat processing.
Simple slaughterhouses have very limited by-product processing
.and usually no more than two other operations such as: rendering, paunch
and viscera handling, blood processing, or hide processing. Complex
slaughterhouses carry out extensive by-product processing with at least
three of the aforementioned operations. Low-processing packinghouses
process only animals killed at the plant; normally they process less than
the total kill. High-processing packinghouses process both animals
slaughtered at the site and additional carcasses from outside sources.
Factors serving to restrain potential growth of the American meat
packing industry include higher meat prices, removal of import quotas, and
the availability of synthetic (soybean protein) substitutes. The trend is
for any new plants to be larger and more specialized (such as large beef or
pork slaughterhouses) and to be located closer to the animal supply
(movement from urban to rural areas).
Pollutants and Sources. Wastewaters from slaughterhouses and
packinghouses contain organic matter including grease, suspended solids,
and inorganic materials such as phosphates, nitrates, and salt. These
materials enter the waste stream as blood, meat and fatty tissue, meat
extracts, paunch contents, bedding, manure, hair, dirt, curing and pickling
solutions, preservatives, and alkaline detergents.
W8.7-1
-------
Water is used in the meat processing industry to cleanse produc
and to remove unwanted material. The primary operations where wastewater
originates are: animal holding pen operations (waste from water troughs,
washdown, and liquid wastes), slaughtering (killing, blood processing,
viscera handling and offal washing, and hide processing), and clean-up.
The basic parameters used to define waste characteristics are
BOD, suspended solids, grease, and ammonia (NSPS and BAT). The total
number of municipal dischargers is 70 percent of the number of plants. T
average wastewater flows for simple slaughterhouse, complex slaughterous
low-process packinghouse, and high-process packinghouse are 1.17, 4,35,
3.41 and 4.54 million liters (0.31, 1.15, 0.90, 1.2 million gallons)
respectively per day. About 70-75 percent'of the total wastewater volume
is discharged to municipal systems.
Control Technology and Costs. Current end-of-pipe treatment fo
direct dischargers assumes that all plants have in-plant controls for
primary treatment, and a secondary treatment system employing anaerobic a
aerobic lagoons. Dissolved air flotation is used for primary treatment,
either alone or with screens; however, 30 percent of the plants use a cat
basin. Since a small percentage of the industry have more advanced
secondary treatment systems (such as activated sludge, trickling filters,
or spray irrigation) and a small percentage of meat packers have no waste
treatment beyond primary treatment, it can be assumed that the typical
plant today is characterized by primary treatment plus anaerobic and
aerobic lagoons.
Best Practicable Technology consists of end-of-pipe treatment
represented by anaerobic-plus-aerated lagoons and aerated lagoons with
efficient solid-liquid separation. Disinfection by chlorination is also
required. Land disposal, when available, may be an economical option,
especially for small plants. End-of-pipe treatment is assumed to be
preceded by in-plant controls; these are: reduction of water use through
shut-off valves, extensive dry cleaning, use of gravity catch basins, blo>
recovery, and dry dumping of paunch waste. NSPS are the same as BPT with
an additional requirement for control of ammonia.
In addition to BPT, Best Available Technology suggests chemical
additions prior to dissolved air flotation, nitrification-denitrification
(or ammonia stripping), and sand filtration following secondary treatment
Meat Products (Phase II) -
Red Meat Products
Industry Characteristics. Plants have been classified by size'
according to the production of finished product. A small processor
produces less than 2,720 kilograms (6,000 pounds) per day while a large
processor produces in excess of that amount. Large processors are furthe
divided into the following product-mix categories: meat cutter, sausage
and luncheon meat processor, ham processor, and canned meat processor.
W8.7-2
-------
Production processes for subcategories in this segment of the red
meat industry are varied but most often include: receiving and storage;
boning and sizing; cooking, preserving, and other preparing of finished
products; packaging; and finished product storing and shipping.
Pollutants and Sources. Wastewaters from meat processing plants
contain organic matter, suspended solids and inorganic materials, such as
phosphates, nitrates, nitrites, and salt. These materials enter the
wastestream as meat and fatty tissues, grease, meat juices, product spil.ls,
curing and pickling solutions, preservatives, and detergents. In order to
define waste characteristics, the following basic parameters were used to
develop guidelines for meeting BPT and BAT: five-day biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD5), total suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease, and fecal
coliforms.
The wastes from the meat products industry contain compatible
pollutants. There is no evidence that toxic pollutants as defined in
the EPA toxic pollutant effluent standards are present in the wastewaters
from any of the meat products industry subcategories.
Control Technology and Costs. Waste treatment practices in the
meat processing industry vary widely according to the age, size, and
location of plants. Many now use primary treatment (including screening
and catch basins) for waste material recovery. Where secondary wastewater
treatment is practiced, anaerobic processes are commonly employed, followed
by a trickling filter, aerated lagoon, or activated sludge process. BPT
guidelines for large plants discharging to waterways call for a major
removal of BOD,-, TSS, and grease through installation of primary treatment
(screening, equalization, dissolved air flotation) followed by secondary
biological treatment, such as activated sludge or extended aeration
combined with a facultative lagoon and disinfection. EPA assumed that BPT
investment for existing plants was limited to chlorination equipment. BAT
guidelines project a further reduction in BODg, TSS, and oil and grease by
means of filtration. In-plant controls for reduction in wastewater volumes
are also assessed. Septic tanks are considered to provide BPT and BAT for
small processors.
The Meat Packing (Phase I) and Red Meat Products (Phase II)
categories were combined for the estimation of control costs.
Meat Processing (Phase II) -
Poultry Processfng"
Industry Characteristics. The size of a model plant is
determined by the number of birds processed per day. Large plants may
process in excess of 120,000 birds in a single day.
This segment of the meat products industry has been divided into
the following subcategories: Chicken processor, Turkey processor, Fowl
processor (mature chickens, geese, and capons), Duck processor, and Further
processor (no slaughtering).
W8.7-3
-------
The production processes for poultry processing include:
receiving birds; killing; bleeding, defeathering including scalding,
picking, singeing and washing; eviscerating, including viscera removal,
giblet processing, and carcass washing; weighing, grading, packaging, and
chilling; and shipping. These steps with minor variations, are used in t
processing of chickens, turkeys, fowl, and ducks.
"Further Processing" includes these poultry plants that conduct
further processing of poultry products only, but do no on-site slaughter.
Further processing of poultry products (chickens, fowl, turkeys, or ducks
includes the following steps: receiving and storage; thawing; cut-up
operations; cooking; battering and breading; cooking; freezing and
packaging; and cold storing; or alternatively, after receiving and storag>
thawing; boning; dicing, grinding, and chopping; mixing and blending;
stuffing or canning; cooking; final product preparing; freezing and
^ v*u i i i i ty u i wui m t 11^ ) v*uw rs, t 11
packaging; and cold storing
The compound annual growth rate over the period 1973 to 1980 ha1
been estimated at between 4.9 and 5.6 percent.
Pollutants and Sources. Materials are generated through direct
processing of raw materials into finished products and from ancillary
operations. The former group consists of blood, viscera, fat, and flesh
scraps, while the latter consists of cleaners and sanitizers used in
cleaning equipment and lubricants used in certain handling equipment. Al
of these contribute to the release of organic materials, which exert a hi
BOD and elevate the oil, grease and suspended solids levels in the proces
water. Phosphorus, nitrogen, and chlorides can also be found.
The most significant single waste source in the poultry product
processing industry is blood from the walls of the blood tunnel which is
washed into sewers.
The following basic parameters were used to define waste
characteristics and to develop guidelines for meeting 8PT: BOD5, total
suspended solids, oil and grease, fecal coliforms, and pH. Poultry
industry subcategories wastes contain compatible pollutants as defined by
EPA Pretreatment Standards, hence pretreatment is not required.
Furthermore, no toxic materials as defined in the Toxic Pollutants Efflue
Standards are present in wastes from this industry.
Control Technology and Costs. Poultry wastes are usually
amenable to biological breakdown.FTew plants in various subcategories
this industry are currently meeting the BPT limitations promulgated by EP
Most plants in all subcategories either discharge to municipal treatment
systems or utilize some form of secondary biological treatment. Either a
three-lagoon system or an activated sludge system, both followed by
chlorination, are suitable alternatives for meeting BPT limitations
provided that in-plant grease and solids recovery are practiced. Spray
irrigation (land application) is practiced by a few plants. The sale of
crops grown on the irrigated acreage can help defray the costs of the lar
W8.7-4
-------
To meet BAT limitations, most plants in all subcategories will
require, in addition to the BPT requirements, in-plant water conservation
practices, dissolved air flotation with pH control and chemical
flocculation for oil and grease removal, an ammonia control process, and a
final sand filter or microstrainer.
Control costs were estimated for the Poultry Processing category
(Phase II).
Meat Products (Phase II) - Renderers
Industry Characteristics. Independent rendering resulting in
inedible products is distinguished from on-site rendering (slaughterhouse
or packinghouse) producing edible (lard) products.
Independent rendering plants range in size from very small plants
having only one to four employees and a value of shipments of about
$150,000 to large plants hiring in excess of 100 employees and having
annual sales of $12 million. Average size plants, according to EPA, employ
23 persons and have annual sales of about $1.5 million. For purposes of
pollution control costing, three plant size are used—1-9 employees, 10-49
employees, and 50 and more employees.
A single product-related subcategory has been deemed adequate to
represent the activities and the pollutants of this industry.
The production steps in independent inedible rendering are as
follows:
Raw material recovery
Crushing and grinding
Cooling and moisture removal
Liquid-solid separation
•Grease clarifying, storing, and shipping
Meal grinding and screening
Blending
Meal storing and shipping
Hide curing.
Variations in the overall rendering process occur depending on
whether batch or continuous systems are used.
Pollutants and Sources. Rendering is a process to convert animal
products, by heating, into fats, oils, and proteinaceous solids. A variety
of waste meat products including fat trimmings, meat scraps, feathers,
offal, bone, and whole carcasses are processed continuously or in batches.
The raw material is crushed, then cooked under pressure as required. Fats
and oils are allowed to drain off, and the solid material remaining is
pressed, ground, and screened to prove a protein-bone meal mixture. Tallow
and greases are separated. The large amounts of moisture released in
cooking are collected by condensation. Plants which process a large number
of dead animals may include facilities for hide curing.
W8.7-5
-------
The principal operations and processes in rendering plants wher«
wastewater originates are raw material receiving, condensing cooking
vapors, plant cleanup, and truck and barrel washing. Wastewaters from
rendering plants contain organic matter, suspended solids, and inorganic
materials, such as phosphates, nitrates, nitrites, and salt. These
materials enter the wastestream as blood, meat and fatty tissues, body
fluids, hair, dirt, manure, tallow and grease, meal products, detergents,
and hide curing solutions (where used).
The wastes from all subcategories in the meat products industry
contain compatible pollutants. There is no evidence that~toxic• pollutant:
as defined in the EPA toxic pollutant effluent standards are present in t
wastewaters from any of the meat products industry subcategories.
In order to define waste characteristics, the following basic
parameters were used to develop guidelines for meeting BPT and BAT:
five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD,-), total suspended solids (TSS),
oil and grease, pH, fecal coliform, and ammonia.
Control Technology and Costs. Wastes in the independent
rendering industry are amenable to biological treatment. Off-site
rendering plants are divided nearly evenly between those which discharge
municipal sewer systems and those which treat their wastes. Of the latte
group, half achieve no discharge of pollutants by means of spray irrigati
or ponding. The treatment technology is essentially the same as for meat
processors. BPT guidelines for plants discharging to waterways call for ,
major removal of BODr, TSS, grease, and fecal coliform bacteria through
installation of primary treatment (equalization, screening, dissolved air
flotation, and disinfection). Next is secondary biological treatment, su
as activated sludge or extended aeration combined with a facultative lago
and disinfection. BAT criteria call for further reductions in BOD,-, TSS,
and grease, to be achieved by sand filtration; ammonia control is also
mandated. In-plant controls for reduction in wastewater volume are also
assumed. New source performance standards are the same as BPT for existi
plants with the addition of ammonia limitations.
Control Costs—Meat Packing Industry
Table W8.7.1 shows combined control costs for all sectors of th
Meat Products Processing Industry.
W8.7-6
-------
o
en
I
n en in o o
o rsi ^o o o
CN ft VO
oo
en
Cn
«!•
r- ^
m o o o
^O m CO O O
03 en m
in e? ^D
o m —< o o
in oo o o o
r» o in o o r*^
o in CN o o en
*r m o
o m IN o o
CO
3
0)
in r~
rf O P> O O
CM
ON
ao r-
m o m o o
vn
en
o co o o r—
r? o co o O
=0 o m o o
f> in
en
o
CO
en
O 03 IN O O
r-
en
-D
33
en
en
O
cj
O en —
OS OS 0,
IdH
u o
z o
O Ct4 <
M O J
r" O4
3 en
•4 Z Z
J O ^
o *-*
CU J M
J <
ct M E-.
Ed S M
8-> -
< Z <
3w cj
en
z
j
•J
2;
E* M
Z EI 5-
Cd en Cu
2 1-1 m
5- X
en Cd
Cd
^
Z
pH
en
a.
en E-
z <
— u
en cc
E- E-
Z Cd
< a
- a.
6- a, •>.
< en en
ca 3 cd z
cd en en
Z 04 Cu
< en
E^ E-i
5!
u a.
en a co
9- Cd Z
en N 1-1
O M =-. E-
U J en Cu
j «; M a
z <
— Cd
en ix
i- E-
Z Cd
«e a
•— &
5^ cu ^.
< 71 en
a 3 cd z
Cd en en
Z CU Cu
en
z
5
Cu
CJ
z
M
E-1 J-
en cu
j — a
«£ X
E-i Z M
O
~t +•
0
en
Cu
en E-
z <
— Cd
en ix
E- E^
Z Cd
^ Cfi
» Cu
E-t cu ^*
< en en
03 3 Cd Z
Cd en en
z a. a.
S
O
+
_3
^
r-
>H
Cu
<
r^j
^
«e J
E-* «c
O 3
5- Z
Z
<
en
en
0
u
^
<
3
z
z
-j
<
W8.7-7
-------
-------
Chapter W8.8. Leather Tanning and Finishing Industry
Regulations
Effluent limitations and standards applicable to the leather
tanning and finishing industry were proposed in Federal Register, Vol. 44,
No. 128, July 2, 1979. As a result of comments received from the industry,
EPA reviewed the entire database and all documentation supporting the
rulemaking; it also conducted a program to acquire supplemental data during
and after the comment period. Regulations were promulgated by EPA in
Federal Register, Vol. 47, No. 226, November 23, 1982, which supercede all
previously promulgated BPT and BAT limitations and NSPS, PSES and PSNS.
Industry Characteristics
The Leather Tanning and Finishing Industry (SIC 3111) comprises
establishments primarily engaged in tanning, currying, and finishing hides
and skins into leather. It includes two types of tanneries: regular and
contract. The regular tanneries, which account for about 70 percent of the
establishments in the industry, process purchased hides for shipment (or
sale) to other industries. The contract tanneries, which are generally the
smaller plants, process raw materials owned by others on a fee basis. Both
types of tanneries generate' significant amounts of effluent and are covered
by the proposed regulations on effluent guidelines. In addition to the
tanneries, the industry also includes a small number (less than ten percent
of the industry) of converters, who buy hides and skins for processing by
others on a contract basis. These are nomially small nonmanufacturing
agencies which do not fall within the purview of the regulations.
The 1977 Census of Manufactures indicates that there were a total
of 465 establishments in the industry, 315 regular tanneries, 107 contract
tanneries, and 43 converters. EPA sponsored surveys of the industry
revealed that only 158 of the 422 tanneries (regular and contract) were
generating any significant levels of waste water. The remaining
establishments classified as tanneries were either small nonmanufacturing
agencies or small plants involved in dry-finishing, only.
The 158 tanneries are subcategorized into nine subcategories as
listed below. The'first seven were identified in the proposed regulations.
The eighth and ninth subcategories were established in the recent
regulations.
W8.8-1
-------
Number of
Subcategory , tanneries
1. Hair pulp/chrome tan/retan-wet finish 1TI
2. Hair save/chrome tan/retan-wet finish 7
3. Hair save/non-chrome tan/retan-wet finish 13
4. Retan-wet finish-sides 16
5. No beamhouse 24
6. Through-the-blue 13
7. Shearling 8
8. Pigskin 2
9. Retan-wet finish-splits 14
Total 138
Production in the industry reached a peak in 1965 with total
shipments of 33.1 million equivalent units of cattle hide. Since then,
production has been declining; although, the level has remained, relative
stable over the past five years. Shipments in 1981 amounted to 19.5
million cattle hides. The value of shipments (in current dollars) in 198
was $1.0 billion and increased to $2.2 billion in 1981.
Pollutants and Sources
There are three major groups of standard processing steps
required to manufacture leather:
1. Beamhouse processes in which hides or skins are washed and
soaked and attached hair is removed;
2. Tanyard processes in which the proteinaceous matter in the
hides or skins reacts with and is stabilized by the tanning
agent, primarily trivalent chromium; and
3. Retanning and wet finishing processes in which further tanni
is accomplished by chemical agents; color is imparted by dye
lubrication is affected by natural and synthetic fats and
oils; and related finishing steps are completed to dry the
leather, correct surface irregularities, and apply surface
coatings.
The leather making processes are highly water dependent. Large
quantities of water are used in the leather tanning and finishing industr
for the following purposes:
1. For soaking.and washing unprocessed hides -or skins;
2. As a medium for dissolving chemicals needed for the treatmen
of hides or skins;
3. As a carrier for dyes and pigments, which impart the desirec
color to the final product; and
4. For cleaning processing areas and equipment.
W8.8-2
-------
As indicated above, water is essential to leather-making and is
used in virtually all leather-making processes. Various chemical reagents,
chemicals, preservatives, biocides, coloring pigments, and solvents are
also integral to leathermaking. Characteristics of the wastewater
effluents discharged by tanneries vary depending upon the mix of production
processes at a given plant. General wastewater constituents, which
contribute to numerous problems for POTW and industrial treatment
facilities, include large pieces of scrap hide and leather and excessive
quantities of hair and other solids that clog or foul operating equipment
and cause fluctuations in wastewater flow and pH. The wastewater contains
high levels of suspended and settleable solids, biodegradable organic
matter, and significant quantities of toxic pollutants.
The most important pollutant or pollutant parameters to the
leather tanning and finishing industry are:
1. Toxic pollutants—trivalent chromium, lead, zinc, cyanide,
phenol, substituted phenols, dichlorobenzenes, maphthalene,
benzene, chloroform, ethyl benzene, and toluene;
2. Conventional pollutants—BOD, TSS, pH, and oil and grease; and
3. Non-conventional pollutants—ammonia, total kjeldahl nitrogen
(TKN), sulfide and COD.
These and other chemical constituents contribute to odors,
facility corrosion, hazardous gas generation, and problems in treatment
plant performance and disposal of sludges containing chromium and other
toxic pollutants. Table W8.8.1 lists the major pollutants generated by the
leather tanning and finishing industry and the processes which generate
them.
Control Technologies
The control technologies costed in this analysis are based on the
regulations promulgated in the Federal Register of November 23, 1982.
These regulations specify effluent limitations for BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS
for direct dischargers and PSES and PSNS for indirect dischargers.
BPT. The control technology selected for compliance with BPT
effluent limitations is extended aeration activated sludge biological
treatment, including coagulation-sedimentation with equalization.
The pollutant parameters regulated by BPT are BOD, TSS, oil and
grease, total chromium and pH.
BAT. Equals BPT.
NSPS. The control technology required for compliance with New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) is the same as that for BAT (BPT)
described above. The pollutants controlled are also the same as those for
BPT listed above.
W8.8-3
-------
CO
CO
CO
CO
0)
(J
0
s-
Q.
O>
C
.c
CO
c
•f—
»+-
^5
C
ro
en
c
•r_
c
c
-2
s-
CO
.c
4->
CO
co
T3
0)
s_
0)
c
CO
01
(/)
^J
c
ft3
2
p"^
o
Q.
s_
o
*' ,)
s:
I— 1
«'
CO
2
CO
O1
C
•*~
CO
CO
O
0
a.
i_ CO
o -u
ai
+J E
C ro
•2
o c
a. fo
4_>
S- 3
O •—
'O O
s a.
•a
fO •
4J Oj
!_ -t-
4->
0
O1
T3 rO
CO ^
CO O
3 4"^
en
CO
S- C
ro CO
J=
^— 4—J
o 01
c s=
CO
o +->
O 0
•i— ro
CQ -Q
f— i
CO
CO
•a
•^
.e
<4«
O co
CO •»-
C
t/} TO
i—4
f—
0
c
CO
a.
-a
"O C
•o -i-
c
CO •(-> 4J
••- c
co .C O O
^£ -M
*-> C -C -t->
0) -1- +J C
£ S- C CO
O 3 >, 01
to -a to «
CM cr>
CT
c
•r"
C
c
ft}
-tJ
CO
E
c s-
fHB ^J
J^ 1
O C
•«- o
CM cn
s-
r_
o
0
0
•a
CO
CO
3
CO
ia
i—
Q
g*
CO
a.
01
c
>^>
c
•1—
> CO
a •—
^'
C
• 1—
^
Q
/—
o
^J
^"
c
••- >> >>
CO r— S_
CO CO +->
CO > co
O , -i-3
O co -O
i" C C
O. CO •»••
4J
CO X O1
•i- CO C
^ *^~
+j -a c
0) C
en co to
C ' 3 -M
i- CO i-
3 S_ CO
4-J
"O CO (ti
CO "O CO
"O C r—
T3 3
0.-=
CO E 4->
i- O
3
co E O
•f- • S3
u a. o o
O CO 1- S-
•<-+-> .c _c
CQ CO O 4-J
Lf) ^H
CT
C
O1 •!-
C C
•i- C
4- rO
3
cr co
•^ E
^^ O
4^ g—
ro f~
t i t _t
en ^<
E
3
E
O
S-
.c
<— >
c: co •
•3 § E
3 <— O
IH "^ "*"
O 4->
Q. • C
>, CO
0 S- -—
••- 4J n3
X co >
O 3 •*"
4^ "^ ^
C *->
4J -f-
c ai
CO co ^^
r— -r- 4->
rtj J=
> 4-> C
CO f
i. <+-
g^ O "O
CO
CO S- 3
O CO
£ 4J CO
QJ 3 ^0
_g" ^
4J ^J Ul
wl "O
v^ (T5 C
•r* 3 3
o
£ c a.
£ T3 U
o c
S- 3 •—
-C O i—
U ci_ (O
01
.jE
c
c™
flg
4kj
CO
o**
CM
0
4-> CO
= +J
CO
Q} 1™»
J= O
4-) CO
J2
C O
•f"»
_ >»
3 T
•i^ (O
E co
O C
s-
•C CO
U •<-
+-> CO
C CO
CO CO
1—
O =
co 4^
CO ro
rs ja
01
.^
c
(T3
4->
4^
C
rO
C
co
f1mm
S
3
^
O
i.
J=.
O •
+J CO
C CO
O) 3
'fl 4->
•t- CO
s- en
1— «
o
3 '
CO
co
CO
c -
ro .
4-J
CO
fi
3
CO
CO
•a •
'»— • CO
f— ^
3
CO C
3 2
CO =
C "O
rO C
^ ro
4->
X "
CO "O
o
£ 0
o —
M-
n
-O 4J
> •!—
•r- -a
s.
CO CO
Q ro
»—4
-C
co
ro
2
C
**/
ffl
O
f— 4
a
o
CO
•
5_
*f~
(O
^
—
TD
QJ
a.
r^
3
o
•
s-
o
-a
>
f— •
o
CO
CO
•r-
-^
E
O
s-
M-
-o
>
«^-
S-
co
Q
CM
CTJ
.£E
S_
•TH*
rO
f~
c
•^
CM
,_
ro
-a
•^•»
(/I
^
Sta CJ
*f"
£ -u
0 >,
M- 'o
S-
-O T3
flj >^
> -C
•^
S» £
CO O
•a t.
'4—
CO
•«- T3
c
-C ra
o
•1— C/J
-^ f—
J* (^
u
(T3 -f-
,f £
d OJ
O £
= o
c
£ ••-
0 4->
S- ro
U. JD
CD
O>
C
4.J
rO
.•ys
on
W8.8-4
-------
to
4J
c
co
i
E
O
*— -S
13
CO
3
C
•f"
-M
C
O
0
f— «
oo •
CO
(U
r— Q.
f*i QJ
ro +->
i— to
O^
C
•^
(/I
l/>
OJ
o
o
CL.
S-
i. CO
O 4->
CO
•(-> E
C 03
ro S.
•4—* (Q
3 Q.
'o c
CL (O
4^
S- 3
O •—
ro O
S CL
f
U
3
to
I/I
(U
u
c
4-)
to
3
C/l
*f™
•f- -a
s-
CO 10
r""* (O
r"H
r";
I/I
H3
2
•o
C
(O
^
03
O
^*
Q
O
0
lO
en
ro
(^
^
13
CM
I/I
10
^j
O
CL
O
C
ra
en
S-
o
•1—
•o
c
ro
t03
o o o a>4->-O'r-rac:
i- 1- i. ••— ai m 4- i- ni o -i—
CL O. CL S- U C 03 Ol E +->
O) C >)•<-> O (— C
U U O CrOOJCroGOrOO
•>— T- -i— c +J -C ra E ^- <— J
C S. C (Q J3 0) • C
en en en 3co"OcnT3-t-
t- V- ^ C^UdraCOE
O O O -i— rOfOCOcO
C C C .* >,.— i. ro 4-
•r— T— •<— 10 4-> CL cu cn.o o
en -M co to
"O "^ "^ •»— (O ^ 3 ^D CO 4^
C C C CLM-OCf— C
ra ra H3 10 O^lroj23
C 13 "O 4J E ro O
O O O T- C CU ra r— 4-> E
•i- T- -i- c: ra +J i. aj •-- co ra
c c c c rocj-aocn
(O ro ro ra £— <— <^* CO *••""•
en en en +-> -i— co 4-> co aj > ,—
S- • i_ • i- • ^^ 1- 03 -— ^: ro
Oio oin oto co co co-t->-Mi_E
I— I — I— I— CL"Or— Ol/l
X ra X ro X (O o CO C C *4—
COO COO COO ro CO ro CO •<- O i— >,
i— -r- , -r- I— "f- 4-> .C .C (0 i-
CLS CLE Q-S -CO in tn i/i4->4J+JECo
Eco Eco EOJ en co r— i/ito-r->
O-C O^= O-C CO >» 4-J -<-OOOC
OU CJO OU > Q < O4->i — Srara
^ LO **O P^» CO *-H CM
en
c
c
en c
C ro
••- -M en
c c
c co en -r-
03 en E c 5_
en +-> c o en •»- o
c ••- s- c to 3
•i— co c j; T- ra cr
i — E c o i-
•r— JS CO O O D O3
Q_ f_1 Q^ 2Z c__1 O ' '
^- LO ^O 1 — CO •— 1 CM
CO
I/)
03
0)
i-
o3
r-*
>r.
o
W8.8-5
-------
^
,*~^
-o
0)
3
C
O
I— 1
«
CO
*
CO
0)
^J
03
1—
to
4->
C
d)
o
r ~\
9
a.
co
4-J
1/1
05
C
•^
to
to
O)
O
o
^
Q-
s-
S- 0)
o +->
"c 1
ro S-
3 Q.
'o c
Q. ro
4"J
i. 3
O i—
ra O
2: a-
•
ai
3
rO
E
•a
c
M
>,j
''O
^_
u
*
•4-*
r~
•^»
l/l
^
•o
c
rO
to
to
0)
-a
^_
0
c
1— 1
1— 1
N^
rO
o
to
TJ
^
rO
r*
(/)
03
,—i
00
1—
CO
a>
•a
u
•t—
t—
f~
rO
4^
0}
gs
O
C
ra
Ol
i_
o
c
QJ -r-
to
• ra I/I
to ai 4->
a. s_ c
ro O) CO
i- E S 3
O ~<3 3 3 4-J
(/) C -f- 'I— •!—
ro E E 4->
a> i- o o to
-a i— •»- s- s- c
•.- ••- ra -G -C O
Z O 3: 0 0 O
csj ro ^f LO <*o P""*
01
c
•r™
to
CD
r^
<4- O>
CI
"T3 *r™
c c
us 01 c
c 01 ra 01
CTI -r- C 4-> C Ol
C 00 •<- -~- C
•r- 03 S- <1J C •<-
£ -C 4. 4-> i —
S- 0) C -C CU 0
H™ O O t— 3 O£ CJ
CM ro <• in to r-.
.
O)
to
03
to C
^3 ro
•r~ 4«J
i— 3
0 f—
O
"O Q.
0)
T3 O
C -f-
O) C
a. ro
to CT
3 i-
oo o
01
t/1
O!
I/)
LO
OJ
u
0
s_
a.
to
3
O
i^
fT3
=*
w
en s_
C O)
•1- >
C (U
C tO
ro
4-> S
O
" S-
tO H—
1)
jz a>
to c
•^ *f*~
C E
•<- o
<4- U
^3 i—
C i—
rO rO
to to
O) O)
>^ ^3
T3 -i-
U
4- 0
O -r-
^
to
4-j -a
c c
O> ro
3
4-> «
•i— tO
4-> 4->
to £
C 0)
O O)
U ^
^,
I*1™
•t- 0)
2 3
^3
y^
C >•}
O •»->
•i— •*—
4.) £
rO ••-
1_ r-
O
X
O) O)
>
ra 0)
j: >
ro
f~ r-
^j
•r- >)
-C r-
2 -Q
!/) *^
4-> i-
C ro
• ro >
i — SZ
Q- •--
^
Ol
C
>t^
s_
.^
rO
.C
g^
=
1—1
a.
•
^
>^M
r—
4—
o
1/1
GJ
•r-
4->
•r"
4-1
C
rO
3
cr
0)
01
s_
tJ
r—
t^—
O
0)
(J
c
0)
to
0)
i_
a.
,
E
ro
O)
^^
t/i
a;
4-J
t/1
^
2
O
«f-»
-o
(J
ro
C
ra
c/1
T3
(—
OJ
•r—
>^
Q.
CO
^J
(/)
t/1
•r"
^
i—
CM
ai
c
•4-J
^O
GQ
C\J
•
, •
E •
ro •
0) •
i- -o
4-> 0)
tr> 3
C
co *'1™"
i > } <
to C
ro O
2 *•— ^
o
•r—
-o
•r*
U
rO
C
ro
i/l
•o
r^
^
a.
0)
4->
to
to
• r~
f^
1—
ro
01
c
• pv
,-w
-ii
o
a.
ro
W8.8-6
-------
,— -N
-o
ITJ
3 Q.
r—
i — -I-J
O C
CL 03
S- 3
o -—
fO O
S 0.
in
0) •!- T3
J= 4- .-O -C (/> C
•MO 4-> S (TJ
•M 4- rO
C C ,-!-> >iT3 O> C 1/1 S-
r— S- i- •!- in V- 0)
^ O OJ 4" ITS X CJ C
>CLCi— OJ-^-CC
•r- C 3 i— E -r- (TJ
in +•> ITJ O) r— +•>
C C -M i- l/l ITJ
0) ftS Cj l/l ^ 1"
4^ CJ C d) QJ 32 ^™ ~^
X 'r™ •*- Ol -C f— ITJ O
QJ 4~ O ^-* 4) i~»
•r- -D 1. ^ Ol
C >)•»- U •'-•'—
m •»-•»- i: c ^r
3 if> 03 Ol •!—+->
-M O C • ITJ •«-
OK C+J-i- OJ-M 2
S- O 4J S. C
03 U in r— O) O O
•M 3 J= 0 ••-
in in in S» in o. ^
^3 Wl O) O) ^ s/1 ^^ ^^
C O) ^3 ^ i™ O ^3 O
3 (J •<- C S •>- S-
OO4-O • +J 4- •»-»
r"i i. !••• (j t*^ (Q ^« y^
S Q. 3 • 3 rrs
O 1/1 i. CO H m -4-*
O Ol OJ .C ITS
C O) •*-> 3 -M "O O
O) •«- C ITS O C
"O S» 'r— 3 ^" O ITS QJ (/I
•1™ •?"• f*™ 32 O) +•* f^ ^,
4- ITS ITS -M .a -a a>
^— ^ \^ (/I (/I T" CI 2
3 C r"* ITS ^" ITS O ITS OJ
(/") 3 ITS 3 «^ C71 ITS O in
^
<— I
,
Ol
C
s_
.,—
ITS
r*
C
=>
f
OJ
-a
•r—
*^-
3
(/I
Ol
C
•^
^J
(TJ
f~l
+J
C
O)
a.
t/)
>k
f*^
•o
0)
(TJ
^»
ai
c
a; .
01 >>
m 4 r— ••
,
r— t
Ol
C
•1**
+^
(TJ
cn
ITS
•1-*
C
o
e
*c
E
O
S.
4- •
S_
^S "r™
i— (TJ
•r- ^.
i.
ITJ in
S 3
•— o
i. 01
a. o
ITJ
•a c
> a;
• 1*m ±J
s- o
a> s-
-o a.
in -Q
•T- O)
Q.
C i—
0) 3
01 a.
o
SM» Sw
-*-> O
=: T3
OJ
u >
c 'o
-------
PSES. The treatment technology for complying with PSES is
in-plant controls, including stream segregation and water conservation,
chromium recovery and reuse, segregated stream pretreatment, including fi
screening/equalization and catalytic oxidation of beamhouse wastewater; p
control and monitoring (pH and flow) at the combined sewer discharge;
coagulation-sedimentation of tanyard wastewater; and dewatering of sludge
PSES includes control capability for sulfide and chromium.
The pollutants regulated by PSES are sulfide, total chromium, a
pH.
PSNS. The treatment technology for complying with PSNS is the
same pretreatment technology as that for PSES.
Costing Methodology
Water pollution control costs to the leather tanning and
finishing industry for compliance with effluent limitations, pretreatment
standards, and new source performance standards were developed using mode
plants of different sizes for the various industry subcategories. The
models utilized to represent the industry, their respective sizes,
capacities, and mode of discharge are shown in the Appendix. The cost
equations and model plants used in the analysis were developed from data
obtained in the Development Document. Table W8.8.2 summarizes the
compliance costs for the leather tanning and finishing industry.
W8.8-8
-------
a\ ** O v£ ^ in fn co ^
O o co <*i ^o ^ v o o o in <• ~"
en cu
>
z
S(NSPS)
REAT
1- 6-
Z U
< «
M ft.
c- a, ^~
< en en
a 3 i: z
a en en
2 0, ft.
en
6-
en
C
y
~
^ j
E- <
O 3
s- z
z
TAL COSTS
PLANTS
M
a, c
< Z
U w
5- E->
j en a.
< M a
3 X
z a
z
<
en
0,
en
Z
en
^*
2*
<
,j
&H Q,
<
a 3:
a
2
E->
Ed
Ct
CH
U
as
a.
>v.
en tn
u z
en tn
a. a.
M
<£
E-
^
E->
COSTS
PLANTS
S O
z
-a H*
=*
O en
^
J X
< cd
2
z
z
en
a.
en
z
en
E»
2
<
_:
S" E- 0,
a.
-------
-------
Chapter W9. Other Industries
This group of industries contains two point source categories:
• Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
• Hospitals
The costs developed for these two categories are summarized in
Table W9. These costs and other data, assumptions, and details are
discussed in the following subsections.
W9-1
-------
vj T e
a m ^o
a
en
I
a
en
CD SI
(N p»
oo -. en
X. M
a- u
U S- b.
= < O
6* 3
O tfl
Z
• tn O
en id M
M k>4
2Sd
r* "^
M ui r
J 3
oa a z
< Z M
(M k^ ^»
P* *•« ^
•T
03
1
on
r-
on
•^
6-
u
f-
0}
M
>
Z
»* ^M
O3
1
on
r~
en
**t
03
r»
i
aa r^ m
r- v 01
o — ^4
CN r- en
(N fN
00 rt fN
03 *£ in
• • •
(N ~* V
— (N m
•-^ «• «
^ p* rn
09 o en
fN m in
en eh
(N . M
IS 6*
e- =
05 U
3 y
a <
Z £
t/5
J
&•
5- 05
M Cd
a, — >
w < z
= r o &• >-i
c-
05
O
CJ
S £
£ . M J
£ 'J 0. - <
-------
Chapter W9.1 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Regulations
Interim final 8PT regulations for the Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing Point Source Category were promulgated on November 17, 1976
(41 FR 50676; 40 CFR Part 439) for five subcategories of the industry.
These BPT regulations set monthly limitations for BODc and COD based on
percent removals for all subcategories; no daily maxifnums were established
for these two parameters. The pH was set within the range 6.0 to 9.0
standard units. Average daily TSS values for any calendar month were
established for three of the five subcategories; no TSS values were
established for the remaining two subcategories. Subpart A, which is
applicable to the fermentation operations, was amended on February 4, 1977
(42 FR 6814) to improve the language referring to separable mycelia and
solvent recovery. In addition, the amendment allowed the inclusion of
spent beers (broths) in the calculation of raw waste loads for Subpart A in
those instances where the spent beer is actually in the wastewater
treatment system. These regulations were never challenged.
Regulations expanding water pollution control requirements were
proposed for the industry on November 26, 1982 (47 FR 53584). In this
round of rulemaking, efforts were directed toward amending BPT based on a
more complete data base and instituting BCT and BAT effluent limitations,
new source performance standards (NSPS), and pretreatment standards for
existing and new sources (PSES and PSNS respectively) that will result in
reasonable further progress toward the national goal of eliminating the
discharge of "classical" and toxic pollutants. The proposed regulations,
however, do not require the installation of any particular technology.
Rather, they require achievement of effluent limitations representative of
the proper application of the recommended or equivalent technologies.
Industry Characteristics
Pharmaceutical manufacturing, using many different methods and
raw materials to create a wide range of products, is one of today's more
profitable industries. Products include medicinal and feed grades of
organic chemicals having therapeutic value, whether obtained by chemical
synthesis, fermentation, extraction from naturally occurring plant or
animal substances, or refining a technical grade product. Pharmaceutical
products, processes, and activities include:
• Biological products covered by the U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census Standard Industrial
Classifications (SIC) Code No. 2831.
• Medicinal chemicals and botanical products covered by SIC Code
No. 2833.
• Pharmaceutical products covered by SIC Code No. 2834.
W9.1-1
-------
t All fermentation, biological and natural extraction, chemica'
synthesis, and formulation products which are considered as
pharmaceutically active ingredients by the Food and Drug
Administration, but are not covered by SIC Codes Nos. 2831,
2833, or 2834. Products of these types, such as citric acid
which are not regarded as pharmaceutically active ingredient!
are included if they are manufactured by a pharmaceutical
manufacturer with processes resulting in wastewaters closely
corresponding with those from the manufacture of
pharmaceutical products.
• Cosmetic preparations covered by SIC Code No. 2844 which
function as a skin treatment. This group of preparations do>
not include products such as lipsticks and perfumes which
serve to enhance appearance or to provide a pleasing odor an<
do not provide skin care. In general, this would also exclui
deodorants, manicure preparations, and shaving preparations
which do not primarily function as a skin treatment.
• Products with multiple end uses which are attributable to
pharmaceutical manufacturing as a final pharmaceutical
product, component of a pharmaceutical formulation, or a
pharmaceutical intermediate. Products which have
non-pharmaceutical uses may also be covered entirely by this
point source category provided that they are primarily
intended for use as a pharmaceutical.
• Pharmaceutical research includes biological, microbiological
and chemical research, product development, clinical and pil<
plant activities, but excludes farms which breed, raise and/'
hold animals for research at another site. Also excluded an
ordinary feedlot or farm operations utilizing feed which
contains pharmaceutically active ingredients.
EPA has identified 464 potential pharmaceutical facilities in t
United States and its possessions. Approximately 70 percent of the plant
with significant wastewater discharges are.located east of the Mississipp
River. Older plants are located in the Northeast and Midwest while newer
facilities tend to be located in the nation's "Sun Belt." Puerto Rico
contains almost ten percent of the total-number of pharmaceutical
facilities and is developing into a major center for pharmaceutical
manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers use four major kinds' of
manufacturing activity in the production of their products: fermentation
biological and natural extraction, chemical synthesis, and formulation.
Over half of the pharmaceutical facilities surveyed (271) perform only
formulation, a smaller number (47) are involved only in chemical synthesi
and a total of 42 plants use both chemical synthesis and formulation. Th
remainder of the plants perform fermentation, biological, or natural
extraction, or a combination of activities.
W9.1-2
-------
Ten percent of the pharmaceutical facilities are direct
dischargers, 53 percent are indirect dischargers, 21 percent are zero
dischargers, and 16 percent utilize more than one mode of wastewater
discharge.
The industry was first subcategorized during the development of
the 1976 BPT guidelines into five product or activity areas based on
distinct differences in manufacturing processes, raw materials, products,
wastewater characteristics, and treatability. These subcategories were
defined as:
Subcategory A - Fermentation Products
Subcategory B - Biological and Natural Extraction Products
Subcategory C - Chemical Synthesis Products
Subcategory D - Fermentation Products
Subcategory E - Pharmaceutical Research
Fermentation is the basic method used for production of most
antibiotics and steroids. It is accomplished by preparing a seed, allowing
the seed to ferment a batch of raw materials, and then recovering the
desirable product by solvent extraction, precipitation, or ion exchange.
Biological and natural extraction involve the removal of
pharmaceutical products from natural sources such as plant roots and
leaves, animal glands, or parasitic fungi.
Chemical synthesis is used in the production of most drugs. They
are prepared in batch reactors which can be used for many processes
including heating, chilling, mixing, condensation, vacuum evaporation,
crystallization, and solvent extraction. These reaction vessels are often
constructed of stainless or glass-lined steel for corrosion resistance.
This type of construction with the appropriate auxiliary equipment enables
these vessels to be used for multiple functions. Since these reactors are
versatile, many different compounds can be produced in any one vessel.
Formulation is the process by which Pharmaceuticals are prepared
into forms useable for consumers. These forms include tablets, capsules,
liquids, and ointments. The active ingredients are mixed with filler,
formed into a useable state (dosage quantities), and packaged for
distribution.
Pharmaceutical research covers research in any of the active
ingredients areas.
EPA reevaluated the 1976 subcategorization of the industry in
light of newly acquired information to confirm the conclusions of the
previous studies and to determine the possibilities of further subdividing
or combining existing subcategories. As a result, EPA decided that no
W9.1-3
-------
additional subcategories were needed and, in fact, there was no need to
distinguish among the original subcategories. This decision was made aft*
consideration of the following points.
• Most of the industry subject to regulation is composed of
plants using more than one process. Wastewaters from all the
processes are routinely combined before treatment for
conventional and nonconventional pollutants. Additionally,
the relative volumes of wastewater from the various processes
are subject to considerable variation. Thus, since wastewate
in most plants is not normally distinguishable by process, it
is difficult to apply different limitations to different
subcategories.
t The product/process diversity within each subcategory tends 1
obscure the distinctions between subcategories. In some
cases, differences in pollutant loadings for plants within a
subcategory may be greater than for plants from different
subcategories. Subcategorization schemes along different
product/process lines were considered, but were rejected as
being too complex and not necessarily more accurate.
• Wastewater treatability at plants within each subcategory is
not characteristically related to the product/process engagec
in by each manufacturing subcategory. Conventional pollutan
loadings for BOD,- and TSS are generally amenable to reductior
by biological treatment, regardless of their subcategory
source. It has also been demonstrated that reduction to
identical pollutant levels is achievable for wastewater from
each of the different subcategories. Pollutant loadings may
vary within each subcategory and across subcategories, but
such differences may be addressed by design and operating
modifications to the biological systems. This conclusion is
evidenced by the fact that the current BPT regulation
establishes identical limitations for each subcategory
covered. The costs of treatment are a function of flow, raw
waste load, and effluent level to be achieved and not process
per se.
t The existing Subcategorization scheme is irrelevant to the
regulation of toxic pollutants for this industry. The
occurrence of toxic pollutants in a plant's wastewater is no'
dependent on its process subcategory designation(s), but on
the particular mix of individual product/processes.
t Available performance data as well as screening and
verification sampling results for toxic pollutants suggest
that the industry can be equitably regulated by a single set
of limits. Therefore, one set of limitations and guidelines
is proposed for the entire industry, excluding facilities
which only perform research.
W9.1-4
-------
Pollutants and Sources
Wastewater discharges from pharmaceutical manufacturing
facilities are not entirely related to the particular processes used. A
significant portion of the wastewater from all four general process
operations may consist of washwater from floor and equipment cleaning,
spills from bulk processing, spent raw materials, and noncontact cooling
water. Some wastewater may be generated as a result of the specific
requirements of a particular process, e.g., air scrubber wastewater from
some extraction processes.
The most commonly found pollutants or pollutant parameters in the
effluent of pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities are:
a. toxic pollutants (cyanide, benzene, methylene chloride,
toluene, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc),
b. conventional pollutants (BOD,-, TSS, and pH), and
c. the nonconventional pollutant parameter COD.
In addition to their adverse effect on water quality, aquatic
life, and human health, these and other chemical constituents contribute to
equipment corrosion, hazardous gas generation, treatment plant
malfunctions, and possible problems in disposing of sludges containing
toxic chemicals.
Following are the pollutants to be regulated by the 1983 proposed
regulations for the pharmaceutical industry.
• BPT. The conventional pollutant TSS and the toxic pollutant
cyanide will be controlled through implementation of the
revision to the BPT regulation. TSS limitations replace
existing limitations and will apply to all plants covered in
the existing BPT regulation. Cyanide limitations are new and
will apply to all plants covered in the existing BPT
regulation except for pharmaceutical research facilities.
Existing BPT limitations for BODc, COD, and pH are
unchanged.
• BAT. The nonconventional pollutant parameter COD and the
toxic pollutant cyanide will be controlled through
implementation of the proposed regulation. Toxic metal and
organic pollutants may be regulated on a case-by-case basis.
0 BCT. Pollutants controlled by BCT regulation for the
pharmaceutical industry include the conventional pollutants
BODj. and TSS. The pollutant parameter pH is specified again
as a range of 6.0 to 9.0.
• PSES and PSNS. Cyanide is controlled by PSES and PSNS
regulations.
W9.1-5
-------
Control Technologies and Costs
Status of In-place Technology
Current treatment practices in the pharmaceutical industry
include both in-plant and end-of-pipe pollution control technologies.
Approximately 72 percent of direct dischargers have some type of
end-of-pipe treatment system in place, 17 percent of direct dischargers
utilize in-plant technology, and ten percent of direct dischargers have
both end-of-pipe and in-plant control technologies in place.
The majority of those using end-of-oipe systems employ
equalization and neutralization followed directly by biological treatment
In addition, some facilities use primary treatment, physical-chemical
treatment, and other methods, e.g., polishing ponds and filtration.
The majority of plants utilizing in-plant controls rely on
solvent recovery. In addition, some plants use cyanide destruction,
chromium reduction and metals precipitation, steam stripping, and other
allied treatment techniques. Solvent recovery techniques are widely
practiced in the industry because of the economic value of reusing
solvents. Some plants, in order to make reuse possible, try to use a sma
number of different solvents. When recovered solvent mixtures are too
complex to be separated and reused, they are disposed of by incineration,
landfill ing, deep well injection and contract hauling. Wastewater
containing significant amounts of volatile organic solvents may be treate
by steam stripping. Preliminary studies indicate that steam strippers in
use by the industry may reduce such commonly used solvents as benzene, 1,
2-dichloroethane, chloroform, ethylbenzene, methylene chloride, and tolue
to a concentration level of 50 ug/1 and achieve a 55 percent reduction in
the concentration level of phenol. Cyanide is destroyed by using chemica
oxidation (alkaline chlorination or ozonation) and thermal/pressure
techniques. Cyanide destruction systems in the pharmaceutical industry c
achieve a long term average effluent concentration of 200 ug/1 total
cyanide. This performance is confirmed by the results of similar studies
in the metal finishing industry. Metals are treated by chromium reductio
and either hydroxide or sulfide precipitation with concentration levels
ranging from 100 to 500 ug/1 being achieved for various toxic metals.
Many new pharmaceutical plants are being built with in-plant
source controls which may reduce the need for additional controls further
downstream. Examples of in-plant source controls include modification of
production processes, separation of wastes as they are produced, use of
automatic pollutant detection equipment within the process, chemical or
solvent substitution, material reclamation, and water reduction or recycl
Pharmaceutical manufacturers, however, cannot practice substitution of
solvents or use of recovered chemicals as easily as other chemical
manufacturers. FDA requirements specify that any recycled chemicals or
solvents must meet the same specifications as virgin chemicals or solvent
to be used in an FDA approved drug (active ingredient) manufacturing
process. The substitution of a different solvent or chemical in an FDA
approved manufacturing process may reopen the approval process for the dr
W9.1-6
-------
involved. If contaminants are present in the recycled solvents, the
manufacturer must prove to FDA that no deleterious effects result in the
active ingredient and final product. Pharmaceutical manufacturing plants
also are required by FDA to track by lot number all chemicals used in each
process.
Cost Data
Capital and O&M costs were estimated exogenously using values
reported in the 47 FR 53584 and the recent Development Document
(EPA440/1-82/084). These costs are for BPT, BCT, BAT, PSES and NSPS and
are as follows (in 1982 dollars):
BPT
BCT
BAT
PSES
NSPS
Total
Capital costs
S 2,000,000
21,800,000
0
1,000,000
na
$24,800,000
Annualized costs
$ 723,000
8,500,000
0
379,000
na
$9,602,000
The annualized cost includes both capital related costs and
make these costs compatible with ABTRES it was necessary to
costs from the annualized estimates. This was accomplished
the detailed costs presented in the Development Document.
O&M costs. To
separate O&M
by reviewing
Equipment is assumed to be replaced in 15 years and should
represent 90 percent of the original capital costs. O&M costs are not
expected tg change significantly due to equipment replacement as reflected
in the ABTRES input file.
Costs-are summarized in Table W9.1.1.
W9.1-7
-------
o
cn
I
O O O O O
o o o o o
o
m
ooooo
o o o o o
o
o
ooooo
ooooo
CD
CO
IN
03
CO
I
cn
O O 3 O O
O O O O O
o
OJ
o o o o o -«
O O O O O m
ooooo
OOOOO m
O ("I
O —
U
CO
3
C
03
I
cn
ooooo
ooooo
09
00
ooooo
ooooo
ooooo
ooooo
cn
VO
o
o
o
o
3
CO
ooooo —
ooooo —
OOOOO 00
ooooo —
cn
(N
_a
5
ooooo
ooooo
ooooo
ooooo
o
(N
ooooo
ooooo
cn
m
31
m
cn
cn
O
u
J MM ••
O cn -M
ce a: a.
&* •«
z >J -c
O J —
CJ O
z u
O '* <
» o -
5- a,
3 cn
— z z
-5 O i-
c «
a. J .-
a: M s-i
-J S w
r- a.
< z <
2 M CJ
cn
E-
Z
M4
a.
c
z
^> h^
Z 5- 6-
cd cn o.
S >- CO
r" X
cn u
>
z
^«
cn
a,
cn 6-
z <
cn K
5- 6-
Z W
< K
N^ a«
S-i a, ^
< cn cn
a: 3 a z
cj cn cn
z a. a.
cn
cn
O cn
U 6-
_ Z
< -
r- a.
r^
cn a. cj
s- < z
cn o —
O 9«
u -: cn
< -: 3 x
5" < Z U
0 3 Z
5- Z <
<
MM
cn
a.
cn s-
z <
— Cd
cn s.
z S
« a<
&• e" S* -»
a. < ai cn
25 S3 3 M Z
a cn cn
z a. a.
cn
cn e-
5- Z
cn <
O J
O a,
r a
z
^ H«
M ^M
O cn a.
M »— • 33
4 MX
!• < M
O 3
r-i Z
Z
<
MM
cn
a.
cn s-
z <
cn —
^a -4
Z S3
< S
-: a.
c- a, ^
< w cn
a 3 a z
u cn cn
z a. a.
cn
O
cj
a.
'J
W9.1-8
-------
Chapter W9.2 Hospitals
Regulations
Only BPT regulations have been promulgated for hospitals,
although other regulations have been proposed. The costs of compliance are
based on promulgated and proposed regulations and have not been updated
since it not known when BAT and NSPS regulations will be promulgated.
Industry Characteristics
The U.S. Hospital industry includes over 7,000 hospitals
primarily engaged in providing diagnostic services, extensive medical
treatment, surgical services, and other hospital services as well as
continuous nursing services. Specific hospital types are:
• General medical and surgical hospitals
• Psychiatric hospitals
• Specialty hospitals except psychiatric hospitals; childrens
hospitals; orthopedic hospitals; chronic disease hospitals;
maternity hospitals; geriatric hospitals; eye, ear, nose, and
throat hospitals; tuberculosis hospitals.
The vast majority of hospitals are nonprofit institutions in
which expenses are recovered by charges for hospital services. Most
hospitals are located in densely populated areas and discharge into
municipal sewers. The Development Document estimated that approximately 90
percent of all hospitals discharge into municipal sewers. Table W9.2.1
presents estimated numbers of hospitals that have their own treatment
facilities.
Table W9.2.1. "Direct discharger" hospitals*
Bed Size
Category
50-99
100-199
200-299
300-399
400-499
500 or more
Total Number
of Hospitals
1,748
1,533
766
444
291
634
Estimated Number of Hospi
With Own Treatment Facili
175
153
77
44
29
63
tals
ties
*Assumption: Only 10% of all hospitals in each size category will have
their own wastewater treatment facilities.
Source: "Hospital Statistics: 1975 Edition".
W9.2-1
-------
Pollutants and Sources
The primary sources of wastewater streams from hospitals includ*
sanitary wastewaters, discharges from surgical rooms, laboratories,
laundries, X-ray departments, cafeterias, and glassware washings.
Wastewaters from hospitals can be characterized as containing BOD,;, COD,
and TSS concentrations comparable to normal domestic sewage and riadily
amenable to biological treatment.
Specific contaminants in hospital wastewater include mercury,
silver, barium, beryllium, and boron. Mercury is used in laboratories,
silver and boron result from X-ray development. Barium is used in
diagnostic work and beryllium is used in dental clinics.
Control Technology and Costs
The technology for the control and treatment of waterborne
pollutants in the hospital industry can be divided into two broad
categories: in-plant control and end-of-pipe control.
Specific in-house control practices that are applicable to the
hospital industry include: recovery of silver from spent X-ray developer
prevention of discharge of volatile solvents and toxic chemicals into
drains, and restriction of the discharge of mercury-containing compounds
into the sinks and drains.
To meet the proposed NSPS and BAT regulations, end-of-pipe
treatment technologies equivalent to biological treatment followed by mul
medi filtration are recommended.
Relatively few hospitals treat their wastewater since most
hospitals are located near urban areas. Of the hospitals that treat thei
own wastewaters, the most prevalent end-of-pipe wastewater treatment syst
is the trickling filter plant; however some hospitals used activated slud
treatment systems.
Treatment costs are summarized in Table W9.2.2.
W9.2-2
-------
o
en
I
00
Cn
00 (— en
— ^- 00 o o
— « CD (N O O
r- as r-
00 CO o o
en
o
03
on
oo
en
m
vo
en
i—i
03
Q.
tn
o
CO
I
en
I—
en
o o ^> o o
O O ~« O O -H
CM CN
^ en co
m ^r en o o
o T —< o o
(*•> rN en
—< en o o
-H 00
3
OJ
r- o o
en —4 o o o
r-
o
^* O O fO
in en
*r oo en o O
o T r— o o
tn ^ o o
-^ in
oo —i
en —i
IN
en
en
r-
oo —i
-i oo
en
o o <•> o o
o o <•"> o o
—1 rf (N O O
O O3 *B O O
—I <•>
m
^r
in
i o o
i o o
en
O
u
J — ••
o w —
as as Oa
z J S
0 J —
0 O
a u
z tj
O ft. <
M O J
r- Oi
3£z
J O M
O M
a. J J
J <
as >-< E-
Cd Z M
E- 04
< z <
SM U
en
EH
Z
J
O<
C5
'-> — .
Z SH E-
U en 04
S M 03
EH X
en td
u
>
z
h-l
^^
en
04
en SH
z <
" Cd
en os
EH EH
Z Cd
< *
»J 04
^ Od ~^V
< en tn
33 3 U Z
a en en
j
< en
HH Z
04 <
< -J
(J 0.
en Q C3
5- Cd Z
en N 1-1
O M EH EH
U J en o.
J < IH 03
-------
-------
Chapter W1Q. Nonpolnt Sources
During the 1979 oversight hearings on the Clean Water Act,
Congress concluded that: "the attainment of a goal of 'fishable'
swimmable' waters is highly dependent on the degree to which nonpoint
pollution can be controlled...". However, controlling nonpoint sources,
primarily agricultural runoff, urban runoff, silvicultural runoff, and mine
drainage is extremely difficult, both technically and politically.
Technically, controlling pollutants carried from the surface of the land
into waterways by rain and snowmelt requires careful consideration of such
site-specific factors as soil type, crop type, slope, and proximity to
water body. Politically, an effective control program must consider how
implementation will be achieved; through regulation, technical assistance
education, or cost-sharing.
The need to tailor both control techniques and implementation
strategies to the particular needs of specific sites makes the use of a
nationally uniform technology based standard, such as those mandated by
Congress to control pollution emitted from point sources, (i.e. industrial
and municipal discharge pipes) impossible. Instead, in 1977 Congress
mandated that each state develop and implement a plan for achieving state
water quality goals. State water quality plans were supposed to provide
states with a vehicle for addressing the nonpoint source problem on a
site-specific basis. However during the formulation of these plans states
discovered a serious lack of information concerning the effectiveness of
the various control options. Due to this lack of information, and a lack
of incentives and financial resources, very few states have actually
implemented their water quality plans. As a result nonpoint source
pollution was identified as the most serious cause of water quality
problems in six out of ten EPA Regions (1983 Environmental Management
Reports).
The lack of verifiable cause-and-effect information, and the
necessity for control programs to be individually designed, also makes it
difficult to estimate the national cost of controlling nonpoint source
pollution. Nevertheless, a variety of governmental agencies and private
organizations have attempted to provide national cost estimates. This
chapter provides an overview of these estimates. Although it is the best
available information, in many cases-the data are unverified-and further
work remains to be done. Thus, this report should be viewed as
illustrating the range of costs for implementing a variety of control
strategies—not as projected estimates of actual investments. A single
estimate of non-point source control costs will not be presented.
The benefits associated with each cost estimate also vary. The
lower level, less expensive control options will achieve state water
quality goals either to a limited extent in the near term or fully over a
greater length of time. The higher level, more expensive options are
designed to fully comply with water quality goals in a shorter time frame.
W10-1
-------
However, the lower level options are expected to achieve greater reductio
in pollutant loads per dollar spent and will result in improved water
quality, if not meeting the standards in all cases.
The following sections present and compare the costs of differe
options for controlling water pollution from agricultural, silvicultural,
and urban nonpoint sources. This chapter also contains a section
discussing the cost of administrating and implementing a nonpoint source
program. All costs are in 1981 dollars.
Agricultural Control Costs
Runoff from agricultural lands is the largest and most pervasiv
contributor to the nonpoint pollution problem. Over half of the total
man-made sediment load results from agricultural activities. Agricultura
activities also contribute significant amounts of nitrates, phosphorus,
various pesticides, and salts. Most techniques for controlling
agricultural runoff require the farmer to alter current management
practices.- For example, the most commonly used erosion control practice
'best management practice1 (BMP) is conservation tillage; a technique
whereby the farmer reduces land disturbances by reducing the amount of
plowing and discing. Other techniques, such as building a detention basi
to catch runoff, require the farmer to make structural changes. Structur
techniques are usually extremely expensive while nonstructural techniques
may even increase farm profits.
In 1980 the U.S. Department of Agriculture completed a Soil anc
Water Resources Conservation Act (RCA) Appraisal. Based on the results c
this study it is possible to estimate the cost of controlling agriculture
pollution in three different ways. The first is to install all the
practices necessary to prevent soil erosion. The second is to modify the
erosion control program to focus on water quality problems. The third is
to install only nonstructural control techniques.
It is also possible to estimate the cost of implementing a
national conservation tillage program. This would be the least expensive
manner of controlling agricultural pollution short of leaving fields in
uncultivated, unforaged pasture. The national conservation tillage
estimate is based on a demonstration program recently completed in the
western basin of Lake Erie.
1980 Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act Appraisal
According to the 1980 Soil and Water RCA appraisal, a nationwic
program to control agricultural nonpoint source pollution would cost aboi
$7.3 billion over ten years (see Table W10.1). All water quality probler
resulting from agricultural nonpoint sources would be well controlled by
this option. This estimate includes the application of both structural c
nonstructural control practices to control erosion throughout the nation.
Cost-sharing and educational and technical assistance would be utilized t
ensure BMP implementation.
W10-2
-------
Table W10.1
Cost of 10 year program to control agricultural NFS pollution
(RCA projections in billions of 5)
Program Segment Billions of 1981 dollars
Problem Identification*
Planning*
Research*
Technology Transfer*
Application of Controls (BMPs)
Enforcement
Total Federal & State Costs 7.3
Annual Cost .73t
* Federal support programs.
t Costs are not amortized for this estimate or any of the options.
1980 RCA Appraisal Modified to Focus on Water Quality
The $7.3 billion RCA erosion control projection can be modified
by focusing implementation on only those areas needing controls to improve
water quality, as opposed to controlling all erosion problems. This would
reduce the cost for application of controls to approximately $5.8 billion
over the ten year life of the program. Application would be ensured
through a program of cost-sharing. Identification of the critical areas
requiring nonpoint source controls to protect water quality is based on a
1980 evaluation of the 105 agricultural producing areas completed by
Resources for the Future (RFF)(See Figure 1).
The procedures and estimates used by USDA for the RCA appraisal
and the delineation of critical areas were combined to arrive at the
modified estimate below (See Table W10.2). These figures are based on
observed field values for the cost per critical acre to control selected
pollutants. Sediment control figures are based on the expenditure required
to reduce sediment reaching streams to .2 tons/acre.
As sediment is controlled, so is a portion of the toxics and
nutrients which are attached to soil particles. To compensate for this
overlap factor, the costs for nutrient and toxics control are reduced by
50%.
W10-3
-------
FIGURE 1
Critical areas where potential for degraded water
quality is high due to agricultural NFS pollutants
* Source: USDA. "1980 RCA Appraisal Part II."
W10-4
-------
Table W10.2. Annual costs to control agricultural NFS pollutants
Pollutant
Sediment
Nutrients
Toxics
Organic
wastes
Critical areas
70 million acres
10 mil lion acres
85 million acres
1 ,550 systems/yr
Annual control
cost
$4.50/acre
$4.50/acre
$5.40/acre
$9k/system
Total
Overlap
factors
N/A
50%
50%
N/A
Annual
Total annual
cost ($000,000)
1981 dollars
5315
23
230
14
Cost $582
1980 RCA Appraisal Modified to Only Nonstructural Techniques
The second way to modify the RCA appraisal erosion control cost
is to limit cost-sharing of management practices to nonstructural control
measures. Structural control techniques, for example terracing, are
expensive and appear to be less cost-effective than nonstructural control
measures. This modification would reduce the cost for application of
controls to approximately $2.7 billion over the ten year life of the
program. However, this type of reduction would also limit the program's
effectiveness.
National Conservation Tillage Program Estimate
In 1973 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers implemented a program to
provide educational and technical assistance in conservation tillage for
farmers in the western basin of Lake Erie. This demonstration program is
the basis for the development of the Conservation Tillage Program estimates
in Table W10.3. These estimates are based on applying the costs identified
in this project to the critical areas identified in the RFF study.
The demonstration project also found that implementation of an
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)(Column F) program is recommended for 45
percent of the critical areas. Costs for an IPM program involving
educational and technical assistance to farmers were estimated by reviewing
similar cost data. Also, nutrient management was found to be essential for
controlling NFS pollution from 50 percent of the critical areas. Costs for
a nutrient program similar to the IPM program were estimated nationally in
Column G.
State Program Management Costs
The FY 1979 EPA Water Quality Management Needs Survey projected
state needs for implementing an agricultural NFS control program. This
W10-5
-------
8.,=
— u
^— VI
U f
o!
o S
u -^
•w O
v> CM
O
S'S
• o
O -u
4, —
-3 V -^.S—
^ cu S o ^o
. *J aj in *• o
cn c -• »«•—
cu
cn u
— cn —
— «T O
C V»<**0
o oa
o —•
u c >—
«• f
aa vn
V VO
«*
O r-
vn o
oo
o
VO
oa
rs.
0
CM
—
m
"
r~ cn
~ in
m
VO
~-
r-s
O
eg
in
—
S
r^
VO
«•¥
in
CM
CM
m rs.
O «r
CM t*>
m
in
a
CM
O
vn vo
CM cn
is. m
CM
en
m
cn
00
cn
cn
cn
c *•<
•5 D
O
U
•o—»
c u
a 10
o
— c
O.-W O
o u —
T *T 03
O ^ vo
j m CM v
*
CM r-^
CM O
•^
— <
33
en
in
m
in
CO
CM
in
VO
m
CM
o
0
in
i in
t CNJ
v
ci
^
CM
en
m
oo
in
r-
vo
•—
a
o
CM
CM
!•»
CM
T
O
^~
CNJ
CM
o
) in
in r-
T r.
» » r
CM
>, — «
0 vo
CO
00
PS. CM
00 ^
03
§
cn i—
00 CM
CM
CM
u a. _
a a. o
Z <£ 00
a.
c
cu
— -
cu o
a z
C -i-
= u
c
c
«£
H10-6
-------
needs survey estimated that $95* million, over a four year period, or $24
million annually (non-amortized), would be necessary to identify problems,
and develop and administer a nonpoint source program. This would fund
state programs ranging in size from $6,683 to $6.1 million annually. The
average annual program cost is $387,585 and utilizes eleven staff years.
The program size and corresponding management costs are based on the
magnitude of the NFS problem identified in each state.
Comparison of Total Agricultural Program Costs
Total annual NFS control costs are estimated to range from
approximately $58 million for a relatively low-level conservation till-age
educational program to $734 million for a comprehensive cost-sharing
program that includes program management, technical assistance, training,
education, and cost-sharing for BMPs (See Table W10.4).
Table W10.4. Total annual control costs for agricultural NFS
(Costs in millions of 1981 dollars)
State program
Control options management cost* Control costs Total costs
Option 1 - RCA Control
Program Estimate
Option 2 - RCA Control
$24
24
$734
581
$758
605
Costs Modified to Focus
More on Water Quality
Option 3 - RCA Control 24 266 290
Program Estimate for
Nonstructural BMPs
Option 4 - National 24 58 82
Conservation Tillage
Program
* The State Program Management Cost does not take into consideration the
varying control levels of the estimated programs (i.e., higher levels of
control will require higher levels of state program management). Added
management costs are included in some of the higher level control cost
options. Comprehensive evaluation of management costs is beyond the scope
of this assessment.
W10-7
-------
Silvicultural Sources
Forty states have identified silvicultural NFS pollution as a
significant or potential problem (see Figure 2). Most of these states
employ a voluntary approach to encourage the use of best management
practices. The remainder use a regulatory approach; applying existing
water quality regulations to forest lands. Resource requirements for the:
types of programs are modest, usually consisting of the addition of a watf
quality specialist to the State Forester's staff and increasing training
materials and resources.
There are two distinct components of a silvicultural nonpoint
source control program; program management and application of best
management practices. These costs will be discussed individually and the
combined to indicate total program costs.
Program management Costs
The administrative costs associated with the 'start-up1 of a
silvicultural control program, either voluntary or regulatory, will be
significantly higher than costs in subsequent years. Administrative cost
will decrease as voluntary programs are developed and carried out, and as
staff members are hired and trained. Conversely, regulatory programs wil
have higher costs for enforcement, staff, and equipment. These costs are
generally fixed and continuing.
Table W10.5 shows program costs for two levels of effort for th
35 voluntary (and quasi-regulatory) program states. Level 2 provides for
an enhanced program that would result in additional work such as BMP
evaluation and more rapid implementation.
Cost of Applying Controls
Most water quality problems occur when steep- slopes and fragile
soils are disturbed for timber harvesting or road building. Every year
approximately 4 million acres of harvest area are so disturbed that some
application of 8MP--either land treatment or management techniques is
required. Those areas needing controls are defined as critical areas.
The cost of applying controls ranges from $2.25 per acre for
low-level treatment to a high of $12.60 per acre. These costs are for
activities such as seeding unused road beds or constructing water barrier
on skid trails and roads. The high-level treatment also includes operati
and maintenance costs associated with structural control measures.
Table W10.6 identifies the major timber harvesting regions in t
nation, their annual harvest areas, critical acreages within the harvests
the percentage of high and low-cost BMPs in use, and the total cost for
their application.
W10-8
-------
Figure 2
TYPES OF STATE NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROL
PROGRAMS FOR SIIVICULTURAL ACTIVITIES
Hawaii
REGULATORY OR
QUASI-REGULATORY
VOLUNTARY OR
STATE/FEDERAL AGREEMENT
MO PROGRAM
REGULATORY
Alaska
Ca 1 i f o rn i a
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
QUASI-REGULATORY
Hawaii
Maine
Nevada
New Hampshire
Pennsylvania
Massachusetts
Reference:
CONTROL APPROACH
VOLUNTARY
Alabama
Ari zona
Arkansas
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia '
IIlinois
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Montana
New Jersey
"Nonpoint Source (NPS) Water Pollution Control
(Draft), C-19-83, prepared by US EPA Office of
Operations, Water Planning Division.
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyomi ng
Needs and Costs'
Water Program
W10-9
-------
Table W10.5. Costs of administering voluntary and regulatory
programs for controlling silvicultural NPS pollution
(in millions of 1981 dollars)
Program costs for Program costs for Total national
Year voluntary states regulatory states program cost
Level 1 Level 2
1st $ 1.58 $ 3.78
2nd 1.11 3.33
to 1.11 3.33
20th 1.11 3.33
20 Yr. Total Costs 22.67 67.05
10 Yr. Total Costs 11.34 33.53
Average Annual
Costs $ 1.13 $ 3.35
$ 4.68
4.68
4.68
4.68
93.60
46.80
$4.68
Level 1 Level
$ 6.26 $ 8.'
5.79 8.
5.79 8.
5.79 8..
116.21 160.
58.11 80.
$ 5.81 $ 8.
NOTE: Both levels include the costs of developing an educational and
information training program. For each of the 35 voluntary states
level 1 accounts for one man year per state, and level 2, for thre
man years per state.
W10-10
-------
c
•M
rO
0)
i»
+J
<4_
o
to
-i-i
o
0
-a
re— ^
t/5
(Si S.
ro ro
1. r—
ro O
•—
S- -r-
*o ^
-C-—
S_
OJ
l*"i
E
«r"
I—
O
3
OJ
r^
O
1—
r—
•3 to
o o
h— O
C
O -P to
i— i ro O
S
i ro O
<2J U
i.
•^^
4_J
C
2 OJ
0 S
rO
S-.
^J
^
ro (/)
O ro
•r- OJ
-i-J S.
•r- ro
i.
^_j
1/1
r^J ro
> 0)
S_ 1-
jtj ro
^
O
Ol
a;
ce
^O »-l OO CM
O r-t rH *3-
I— < r-l
Lf3 LO r-( CTl
«?r CM CM o
cn i-^ «-I ^r
(y^ (y^ <>*) (y^
^ B^ 3^ >%
0 LD 0 0
vo CM co cn
ro co to co
r-H CO 0 0
r-* CO
*&• *r> V> *r>
^ ^ ^% ^Q
O U1 O O
»a- p*. CM r-«
o u
ra U ra
rO
i f^ ^\J t ^
CM OO r^ CO
• • • •
t-H CM
U O
i*O ^J ^
(O
^n r*"*
O^ ^O CSJ Cft
• • • •
i— »
c
•r~ +*J
ra i/l
•U ro
C O
•^ 4^ J ^J
(/) (/I O
fO 'O ^^^ ^J
O) O) -1-
JC J= >, <+-
4-J -r«J _y* **•"
S- 3 U U
O O O ro
2
to
I i
I/I
0
CJ
4->
c
O)
S-
t—
p_
ro
3
C
C
o
1—
W10-11
-------
Total Cost for Controlling Silvlcultural NPS Pollution
The estimated cost of controlling silvicultural NPS pollution i
approximately $33.5 - to S35.7 million annually for the 10-year program.
This includes the annual cost of administering voluntary, quasi-depending
on the level of support as well as the annual cost of applying control
measures ($27.2 million) on the 4 million acres of land disturbed by
silvicultural operations.
Costs of Controlling Water Pollution from
Urban Storm-Water and Construction
Storm-water runoff from built-up urban areas and erosion from
urban construction sites are significant nonpoint sources of pollution.
According to the Aquatic Life Survey, (EPA, 1982) urban storm-water affec
about 20% of the river miles across the nation, and construction about 3%
The problems associated with sedimentation from construction sites are
visible, and the control methodologies are well understood and proven. I
contrast there has been some confusion over the exact nature and extent o
water quality problems caused by urban stormwater and the effectiveness o
available control measures. The next two sections examine these threats
water quality and the costs of controlling them.
Controlling Runoff of Urban Storm Water
In light of the unknowns associated with urban runoff, EPA
initiated its Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) to improve available
information on sources of urban sedimentation and their effects on water
quality. The NURP funded monitoring projects at 28 sites throughout the
nation. Preliminary results indicate that water quality problems arisinc
from urban storm-water runoff, and the control measures to prevent or
alleviate such problems, are heavily site-specific and therefore must be
approached from that perspective (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
"Draft Final Report of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program: Volume I."
(1982).
A wide range of technologies exists for controlling urban runof
They can be as simple as straw bales to catch sediments in runoff or as
complex as physical and chemical treatment and chlorination. All can be
effective depending on circumstances. However, based on the NURP findinc
it would be difficult to justify a national program to construct separate
treatment plants for storm sewer discharges.
In developing and redeveloping areas, the quality of urban rune
can be controlled easily for a moderate cost. Developments can be desigr
to decrease runoff by using natural drainage systems, greenways,
infiltration trenches, and porous pavement to increase infiltration.
Detention basins have been found to be one of the more cost-effective
practices for the long-term control of urban runoff. This conclusion is
based on actual monitoring over several years of the performance of eleve
detention basins by NURP. Reductions of up to 95 percent of most
conventional pollutants were obtained in these detention basins.
W10-12
-------
The NURP projects also demonstrated that the type of receiving
water body is significant in determining costs. For example, urban runoff
causes the biggest problems in quiescent water bodies, such as lakes.
Lakes are natural sinks that collect and store pollutants. In contrast,
urban runoff is less of a problem in large rivers with moving water or in
the oceans where dilution is great. It follows that less controls are
needed to protect rivers and oceans than lakes.
The level of control necessary is also dependent on the desired
benefit from improving quality: aesthetics, fish and wildlife, and/or
recreation.
The level of control, and consequently the cost of control, is
highly dependent on the effectiveness of the detention basin. One of the
critical factors in the effectiveness of detention basins is the ratio
between the area of drained urban surface to the detention basin's volume.
Generally, the greater the volume relative to the drained urban surface,
the greater the basin's efficiency in removing pollutants. Based on this
finding, a method was developed in the NURP study to determine the level of
control by the basin's volume. Specifically, detention basin costs were
estimated for achieving a 40 percent reduction for aesthetics, 85 percent
reduction for fish and wildlife, and 95 percent reduction for recreation.
Based on the above assumptions, Table W10.7 and W10.8 summarize the cost
estimates for urban runoff control. Table W10.9 breaks down the cost of
treatment based on water body type.
Table W10.7. Option 1 - Total cost of controlling storm sewer discharges
from all urban areas (13.2 million acres)*
(in millions of 1981 dollars)
Beneficial use Capital Annual 0 & M Costs*
Aesthetics $1,141. S 46.
Fish and Wildlife 3,623. 145.
Recreation 11,498. 460.
*Annual 0 & M is 4 percent of capita] costs.
W10-13
-------
Table W10.8. Total capital costs of controlling storm sewer discharges
by receiving water body type (in millions of 1981 dollars)
Beneficial Use Streams <10' Rivers >10' Lakes Estuaries Oceans Tot;
Aesthetics
Fish and Wildlife
Recreation
(includes
disinfection)
$233.
933.
3,273.
$ 318.
1,399.
4,549.
$357.
357.
402.
$ 233.
933.
3,273.
SO
0
0
$ 1,1'
3,5;
11,4!
Since lakes and estuaries are particularly affected by urban runoff, the
above estimates could be modified to emphasize control of urban runoff to
such surface waters.
Table W10.9.
Total cost for controlling urban stormwater runoff
(in 1981 dollars)
Cost
Option 1 - Total Cost of Controlling
Separate Storm Sewer
Discharges from All Urban Areas
Option 2 - Total Cost of Controlling
Separate Storm Sewer Discharges
to Lakes and Estuaries
State Level Program Management
Annual Costs
Local Level Program Management
Annual Costs
$ 1,141. million (Aesthetics)
$ 3,623. million (Fish & Wildli
$11,498. million (Recreation)
$ 590. million (Aesthetics)
$ 1,290. million (Fish & Wildli
$ 3,669. million (Recreation)
$4-$13.2 million
$22.5 million
Urban Runoff Program Management Costs
To oversee the types of storm-water quality controls discussed
above, states would initially need extensive resources. EPA's 1980 Needs
Assessment projected a cost of $13.2 million (in 1981 dollars) for FY 19£
The costs of managing such a program would decrease after a state passes
legislation requiring storm-water quality controls or after major urban
areas adopted local ordinances.
W10-14
-------
Total Costs for UrbanRunoff Control
Table W10.9 summarizes the total cost for controlling urban
stormwater runoff. The program management costs are estimated as annual
costs while the cost of controlling urban runoff is based on total urban
control needs.
Controlling Runoff From Urban Construction
Every year approximately 1.5 million acres of land are disturbed
for constructing houses, factories, and other facilities. Although this
figure is relatively small, the sediment loadings from construction sites
are higher than those from most land uses. Erosion rates of 30-200
tons/year/acre—or 10-20 times that of cropland—are reported in the
literature. Consequently, even small amounts of construction may
significantly affect local water quality.
Sediment is the primary pollutant of concern from construction
sites. In addition, such materials as pesticides, cleaning solvents,
concrete compounds, asphalt, salts, and petroleum products are frequently
washed from building sites and carried to surface waters.
Technical and institutional solutions to construction erosion
problems are relatively straight-forward and well-understood. Many states
have technical manuals explaining how to control erosion from construction
sites. Technical measures include such vegetative or mechanical practices
as seeding and mulching, straw bale barriers, diversion ditches, and
sediment basins installed on site. Institutional laws and ordinances are
necessary because such measures are rarely carried out unless required by
law.
Regulatory programs to control construction runoff have been
increasing gradually in the United States since 1967, when Montgomery
County, Maryland, instituted the first mandatory control program. About
fifteen states, the District of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands have
developed effective regulatory programs. These regulatory programs
typically require local jurisdictions (counties, towns, cities, and
villages) to adopt and enforce local construction erosion ordinances that
meet minimum standards. Several of the state programs predate the Clean
Water Act and are funded largely from state and local revenues and permit
fees.
Cost Estimate for Construction Control Program Management Costs
The estimated program costs for controlling construction erosion
include the program costs of managing the program and applying the needed
controls at the state and local levels.
Cost estimates for state and local program management are based
on the State of Maryland's program for controlling sediment. We choose
Maryland because its program is good and data on manpower was readily
available.
W10-15
-------
In estimating the program management cost we made the following
assumptions:
t The number of staff required in Maryland is the basis for
staff estimates in other states. However, local inspection
personnel were increased by 20 percent, as an evaluation of
Maryland's program indicated that inspection was weak.
• Salaries were estimated at $18,000 for plan reviewers, $15,3
for inspectors, and $9,000 for secretaries, with 35 percent
overhead.
• The populations of States were used to correlate Maryland's
program with those needed for other states.
• Construction erosion control regulatory programs can be part
self-sustaining; program management at the local level shoul
be recovered through construction permit fees.
Given the above assumptions, the number of state and local
program management staff were estimated for each state (see Table W10.10)
A total of $14,499,000 was estimated for state program management staff c
$93,152,700 for local program management staff, totalling $107,651,700 pe
year. Dividing that total by the approximately 1.5 million acres of lane
used annually for construction yields an annual program cost of $72 per
acre. Because a large percentage of the local program costs can be
recovered through construction permit fees, there is no need for any type
of cost sharing. However, state program costs are not similarly
recoverable.
Industry's Costs for Applying Controls
The cost for controlling erosion has been estimated by DOW
Chemical Company at $2,374 per acre. Thus, the annual estimated cost to
the construction industry to control erosion from all of the disturbed
construction sites across the nation is $3,561 million per year. These
costs are typically included in construction prices and are generally not
cost shared by federal, state or local governments.
Table W10.ll summarizes, the total annual costs for constructor
erosion control. The total of $3,669 million includes the annual cost fc
administering construction erosion control programs at both the state anc
local levels and the cost to the private sector for applying control
measures.
W10-16
-------
Table W10.10. Annual state and local program management costs for
NSPS construction regulatory programs
State
MARYLAND*
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
11.
42.
13.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
A1 abama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgi a
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyomi ng
Total
State Program Management
(including state project plan
reviewers, program management,
secretaries)
Person
years ' Costs
3
7
1
5
4
33
5
6
1
1
12
10
2
14
10
6
4
7
3
2
3
10
12
3
5
9
2
3
2
2
9
3
22
11
1
13
6
5
15
2
6
]_
7
IB
3
1
10
8
4
9
1
362
S 320
304
36
205
165
1,205
205
229
36
36
484
417
72
531
417
229
165
304
320
72
320
417
484
320
205
364
72
109
72
72
364
109
393
446
36
550
229
205
503
72
229
36
304
721
109
36
417
320
165
364
36
S14.499
,400
,200
,000
,200
,600
,100
,200
,500
,000
,000
,200
,600
,000
,400
,600
,500
,600
,200
,400
,000
,400
,600
,200
,400
,200
,500
,000
,300
,000
,000
,500
,300
,700
,400
,000
,300
,500
,200
,900
,000
,500
,000
,200
,300
,300
,000
,600
,400
,500
,500
,000
,000
Local 3rogram Management
(including plan reviewers,
inspectors, and secretaries)
Person
years Costs
97
39
9
62
52
365
66
71
14
15
150
125
21
176
126
67
54
34
96
25
97
131
143
93
57
113
18
36
18
21
113
30
271
135
15
166
69
SO
183
22
71
16
105
220
34
12
122
95
44
108
11
4,393
$2
1
1
1
7
1
1
3
2
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
1
2
2
S
z
3
1
r
3
i
2
4
2
2
2
S93
,052,000
,392,700
194,400
,322,100
,112,400
,718,400
,405,300
,512,000
239 ,300
313,200
,176,100
,559,500
452,700
,723,300
,672,100
,417,500
,150,200
,782,000
,045,700
547,200
,052,000
,791,800
,018,600
,984,500
,226,700
,393,100
386,100
711,000
386 , 100
452,700
,401,200
532,700
,724,900
,359,300
313,200
,520,300
,472,400
,280,700
,369,100
460,300
,517,400
335,700
,233,300
,660,200
711,000
248,400
,501,900
,000,700
948,600
,239,600
228,500
,152,700
Program developed from this state.
W10-17
-------
Table W10.ll. Total annual cost for controlling construction NPS
pollution costs (in millions of 1981 dollars)
Types of Cost
State Program Management Costs $ 14.5
Local Program Management Costs 93.2
Costs to Industry for Applying Controls 3,561.3
Total Annual Cost $3,669.0
W10-18
-------